[meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)

From: Rob Wesel <nakhladog_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat May 6 08:01:28 2006
Message-ID: <004a01c67104$cb432160$59681618_at_robewcufk0z2s3>

Just to briefly elaborate Frederick

A new number with NomCom is considered paired not "likely paired". Paired is
a scientific fact, likely paired is an opinion.

This applies to Morocco and adjacent countries alone, other hot zones like
Burkina Faso, Gold Basin, Dhofar and Franconia move right through never seen
by a scientist. This is more science based than authenticity based, it is an
attempt to piece together a record so one day a team may decide to try and
put the NWA demographics into a scientific order.

Rob Wesel
http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com
------------------
We are the music makers...
and we are the dreamers of the dreams.
Willy Wonka, 1971



----- Original Message -----
From: "Meteoriteshow" <meteoriteshow_at_free.fr>
To: "Adam Hupe" <raremeteorites_at_comcast.net>;
<meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 2:53 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)


> Dear Adam and All,
>
> I mostly agree with you Adam but would place this concern in another way.
>
> NWAs do not have any coordinate of the place where they were found and
> even when studied by scientists, another piece of the same
> meteorite can only be "likely paired" but this expression should be used
> ONLY by a "qualified Nom Com approved facility" and not by
> dealers themselves. As a matter of fact, analyses of a meteorite can
> provide results that are quite similar to another meteorite's
> study but without coordinates one can never be 100% sure that both are
> paired.
>
> When I say that I "mostly" agree with you Adam, I mean that I do not place
> this problem on a pure commercial point of view but
> simply on the Nom Com's rules point of view. When a NWA is registered with
> a number, it is as you say linked to a TKW and one cannot
> add by him/herself some weight to this TKW. As I said, even scientists
> cannot most of the time, as they cannot prove when more mass
> comes that it is paired to a previously classified NWA. Therefore the rule
> is -as you mentioned Adam- to provide another NWA number
> to the new mass, eventually stating that it is "likeley paired" to another
> NWA when analyse tends to say so.
>
> The only case when additional masses can be added to a previously
> classified meteorite is when the place of find is very well known,
> like Brenham for instance. Steve Arnold is hunting on the Brenham
> strewnfield and his wonderful finds are definitely additional
> masses to Brenham meteorite. Both analyses and place of find prove this
> fact.
>
> Therefore I do not consider that a classification is the "commercial
> property" of someone who asked and eventually paid for it, but
> there are rules that were made by the Meteoritical Society and every
> meteorite hunter or dealer MUST follow those rules.
>
> Just my 2 cents!
> Kind regards,
>
> Frederic Beroud
> http://www.meteoriteshow.com
> IMCA member # 2491 (http://www.imca.cc/)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Adam Hupe" <raremeteorites_at_comcast.net>
> To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 8:41 PM
> Subject: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
>
>
>> Dear List Members,
>>
>> Here are some of my thoughts on Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI).
>>
>> I feel this subject needs to be breached again as a few have not caught
>> on
>> to how destructive and lowly this practice is.
>>
>> Saying something is "likely paired" is the same as saying "I am too cheap
>> or
>> lazy to have my material studied by a qualified Nom Com approved
>> facility."
>>
>> Using notes provided for official meteorites to describe unofficial
>> material
>> is the same as stealing as far as I am concerned. Why should dealers who
>> spend upwards of thousands per month having their material officially
>> classified and getting their very own nomenclature allow others to
>> violate
>> this information? I know ebay will enforce number borrowing issues as
>> they
>> have been trained that although nobody owns these numbers they are
>> treated
>> the same as serial numbers. These serial numbers only apply to a certain
>> amount of material and to borrow them is fraudulent. Some more news;
>> ebay
>> treats all product descriptions as proprietary data and will shut down
>> auctions immediately if descriptions are borrowed and then reported.
>>
>> Even if somebody who deals meteorites is 99% sure their material is
>> paired
>> to somebody else's they should still follow the correct protocol, have
>> their
>> material made official and receive their very own number. The only
>> meteorites excluded by this rule are from rare falls as stated by the
>> Meteoritical Society. NWA 869 is an exception in that multiple type
>> specimens from multiple dealers were submitted so all that contributed
>> can
>> share this number, a rare case. The I.M.C.A. stated that they stand
>> behind
>> the Meteoritical Society rules and so should members who belong to this
>> organization that stands for "Authenticity" above all else. How can a
>> dealer claim his material is authentic when no qualified laboratory has
>> even
>> looked at it?
>>
>> Collectors are entitled to official material or at the very least
>> provisional if the rules are being adhered to. The rules have been
>> stiffened up considerably on provisional numbers because only after a
>> type
>> specimen has been submitted to a Nom Com approved depository and studied
>> will a provisional number be assigned. The market has moved a long way
>> in
>> the last year and a half with more than 95% compliance to these rules.
>> It
>> makes good sense 20 years down the road when others take over these
>> collections or they are passed down to family members that they can say
>> with
>> confidence what they have. Terms like a Moroccan stating "these are
>> that"
>> or a dealer saying, "likely paired" or "in my opinion" won't fly because
>> unstudied material has very little scientific or intrinsic value in my
>> opinion. A few years ago, many unknowingly violated these rules because
>> they were unclear. I was partially guilty of the same thing a few years
>> back but have since reapplied and received new numbers for anything we
>> brought out and noted this in my descriptions. The rules have been clear
>> for the last two years and to continually violate them will only serve to
>> undermine collector confidence.
>>
>> Enough from me,
>> Regards,
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>> Adam Hupe
>> The Hupe Collection
>> Team LunarRock
>> IMCA 2185
>> raremeteorites_at_comcast.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Sat 06 May 2006 08:01:22 AM PDT