[meteorite-list] Fw: NWA 869

From: Richard Montgomery <rickmont_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 19:46:54 -0700
Message-ID: <2D64DE6278154BE7B4B842FB7E841C0E_at_bosoheadPC>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Montgomery" <rickmont at earthlink.net>
To: "'Meteorite-list List'" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>;
"Meteorites USA" <eric at meteoritesusa.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] NWA 869


> When do we turn to the scientific community with our squabbles?
>
> Always!
>
> (Sikhotes are off the table, because we all recognize them..we're not
> sending them in for validation...nor Milly's or Camel Dongas...nor
> "wrongs" that end up being off the table because we also recognize them.
>
> The new ataxite is perhaps off the table of debate-to-meteoritic origin
> with eye-ball shreibersite and other inclusive exclusive evidence...yet...
>
> When there is a skewed curve of understanding, from the neophyte's wonder
> to the eventual and necessary eventual O-isotope analysis when a more
> sophisticated analysis is warrented, and that we are all on a different
> planes of understanding, defference to the science is crucial.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Meteorites USA" <eric at meteoritesusa.com>
> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 5:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] NWA 869
>
>
> Hi List,
>
> I think this is a matter of people being way to "anal"ytical... ;) or
> literal. Splitting hairs is one thing, shaving your head is quite
> another. I agree with Martin's point, If you hunt the Gold Basin
> strewnfield and find a meteorite you know it's "most likely" a Gold
> Basin meteorite right? Uh... yeah. But...
>
> I see the contention here, but this is more about logic and probability
> here than classification. Not every single stone from a meteorite fall
> need be classified for it to be a meteorite from that fall. Ash Creek,
> Whetstone, & our beloved WI meteorite (classification done but not
> released) are all meteorites that people have sold as being from their
> respective meteorite falls.
>
> If that makes these self pairings then so be it. Are you going to count
> every other meteorite as self paired and start classifying every single
> stone?
>
> No... That would be silly...!
>
> Regards,
> Eric
>
>
>
> On 6/23/2010 4:33 PM, Martin Altmann wrote:
>> Folks, please stay realistic.
>>
>> That what Greg and Mike mentioned with NWA 869 applies too to any
>> Glorieta,
>> Sikhote-Alin, Juancheng, Pultusk, Gao-Guenie, Nuevo Mercurio, Allende,
>> Camel
>> Donga, Stannern and and and and..
>>
>> Or let's take better an all-American example.
>>
>> The Holbrook hunter goes in the Holbrook strewnfield, he hunts for
>> Holbrooks
>> for decades, he knows how they're looking like.
>> He finds a stone. It looks, feels, smells, sounds, tastes like Holbrook
>> (because it is a Holbrook).
>>
>> To fulfil the standard claimed in the 869er case,
>> the finder would have to let make thin sections, microprobing, isotopes
>> ect.
>> by an expert scientist ect.
>>
>> to be allowed to call his Holbrook "Holbrook".
>>
>> Theoretically possible.
>>
>> Unfortunately Melanie would have then to pay for her little Holbrook-pea
>> not
>> anymore 50$ but 1000$, cause the verification is so costly.
>>
>> Makes not much sense.
>>
>> I rather trust in the experience of the Holbrook hunter.
>>
>> Best!
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
>> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von Greg
>> Catterton
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. Juni 2010 00:39
>> An: Meteorite List; Melanie Matthews
>> Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] NWA 869
>>
>> NWA 869 meteorites are very nice meteorites and there is nothing wrong
>> with
>> buying or selling them if you like them. That said, they are often sold
>> as
>> NWA 869 when many should be sold as "Likely paired with NWA 869" as the
>> established Nomcom rules state, and has been repeated on here many times.
>> This does not happen however and its sold as 869.
>>
>> There have been several times when people have raised attention to sales
>> of
>> paired martians and other meteorites that are not clearly identified as
>> pairings, yet no mention is made for common and less costly samples like
>> NWA
>> 869 and they themselves sell it as such. Due to price (in my opinion) it
>> is
>> allowed to fly under the radar and nobody gets upset when NWA 869 paired
>> material is sold as NWA 869 while the samples have not been tested to
>> confirm it.
>>
>> This surely happens with many others, yet NWA 869 is the most common and
>> is
>> used as an example. There is tons of it, usually at less then .50 per
>> gram.
>> What should be done in a perfect world, several samples out of a batch of
>> stones that are all likely 869 should be thin sectioned and tested. The
>> results compared with 869 and then pairing claimed.
>> The problem is, Who wants to do that for a .50 per gram meteorite? What
>> lab
>> will pair NWA 869 material? Its a tough bumpy road that has many issues
>> that
>> lead to the ultimate conclusion... most likely 75% or more of NWA 869 can
>> not/should not be called NWA 869 as per NomCom rules for official
>> meteorites.
>>
>> While I stated I would not buy or sell in 869 material, that is only my
>> opinion and my choice as a collector/dealer and does not reflect or speak
>> for anyone else but is simply my personal feelings about the double
>> standards being put into place.
>>
>> I will say for the record to make sure everyone understands and does not
>> think I am taking shots at the meteorite - Its nice material, I do have a
>> sample in my collection and I see nothing wrong with those that sell,
>> own,
>> or collect it. Personally, I think its a fine meteorite, but I also do
>> like
>> others and tell people it is thought to be paired with NWA 869 when I
>> show
>> them my sample.
>>
>>
>> Greg Catterton
>> www.wanderingstarmeteorites.com
>> IMCA member 4682
>> On Ebay: http://stores.shop.ebay.com/wanderingstarmeteorites
>> On Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WanderingStarMeteorites
>>
>>
>> --- On Wed, 6/23/10, Melanie Matthews<miss_meteorite at yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From: Melanie Matthews<miss_meteorite at yahoo.ca>
>>> Subject: [meteorite-list] NWA 869
>>> To: "Meteorite List"<meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>>> Date: Wednesday, June 23, 2010, 6:09 PM
>>> Hey listees.
>>>
>>> What is the problem with buying and selling NWA 869? or
>>> have i misunderstood something?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> -----------
>>> Melanie
>>> IMCA: 2975
>>> eBay: metmel2775
>>> Known on SkyRock Cafe as SpaceCollector09
>>>
>>> Unclassified meteorites are like a box of chocolates... you
>>> never know what you're gonna get!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> Visit the Archives at
>>>
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>>
>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> Visit the Archives at
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> Visit the Archives at
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>>
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Wed 23 Jun 2010 10:46:54 PM PDT