From: Galactic Stone & Ironworks <meteoritemike_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 09:53:24 -0400
So, does anyone know exactly who made this stuff? If not, do we have
a general idea?
Can anyone speak authoritatively on the origin of this material?
Several veterans have claimed it was an intentional fraud, but nobody
has explained exactly where/when this material showed up on the
market, represented by whom, and what follow-up(s) were made to track
down the source. Was law-enforcement contacted? And were the
scammers publicly shamed/exposed for their crime?
If we don't know exactly who made it, then can we really say
(definitively) whether it was created as an intentional fraud or not?
How do we know Shiro is not some accidental slag that a scammer found
and then decided to fraudulently offer the material as a meteorite?
I'm trying to defend a fake, just trying to better understand the
story behind the material and what drives people to take such
passionate stances against it. I can almost hear the vitriol dripping
from Adam and Doug's statements about Shiro - I respect both of their
opinions and I am now very curious about this material and what makes
them so riled up about it. Do we know for certain it was
intentionally created solely for fraudulent purposes? Or were the
fraudsters merely being opportunistic when they chanced across Shiro?
PS - all sales of pallasitic engine blocks are hereby suspended until
further notice. ;)
-- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Meteorites & Amber (Michael Gilmer) Website - http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook - http://tinyurl.com/42h79my News Feed - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone EOM - http://www.encyclopedia-of-meteorites.com/collection.aspx?id=1564 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On 8/21/11, Linton Rohr <lintonius at earthlink.net> wrote: > Greetings listoids. > Doug, I believe you've introduced an important distinction, upon which I've > been intending on opining. Like you said, "a meteorwrong by most > definitions is *natural* material than can be confused with an authentic > meteorite out in the field." Shirokovsky, on the other hand, was a > deliberate fake. A man-made concoction for the sole purpose of fraud. (Based > on what I've read here.) I can understand the interest in a legitimate > meteorwrong - I bought a piece of Mendota myself - but, in my opinion, > Shirokovsky does not deserve to be in that category. I would be no more > likely to purchase a sample, than to intentionally purchase counterfeit > currency. It has about the same worth. > But while I have to agree with Adam's point of view on this, I can somewhat > understand the opposing views. Respect them, anyway. Interestingly though, > most all of those in favor of collecting it, already have it in their > collections. A case of "sour grapes", in reverse? ;^) > Just my two cents. Actual value may vary. > Linton > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "MexicoDoug" <mexicodoug at aim.com> > To: <raremeteorites at yahoo.com>; <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> > Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 6:51 PM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Shirokovsky > > >> Adam wrote: >> >> "I see Shirokovsky as being off topic" >> >> I agree and would keep my mouth shut iof I thought it were an innocent >> scam that was over and reparations made. >> >> Since I agree with Adam as such this will be my only post, since what is >> on topic, interestingly, is clarifying that it is not a >> eteorwrong*.. - a meteorwrong by most definitions is natural material >> than can be confused with an authentic meteorite out in the field. This >> is not that case, this is the case of the apple colored moldavites faked >> on eBay. This is a *PSEUDOMETEORITE* and that term is doing it a favor, >> and we should IMO all be very clear about that for the mutual benefit of >> all of our collections and future material that could enter them. >> >> Shirokovsky may elicit the Pavlovian Dogs salivation in collectors that >> haven't been soiled by it. You know - save that salivation for the real >> stuff, Shirokovsky isn't even in the category of a blow-up meteorite doll. >> >> There is nothing technologically interesting about Shirokovsky, the matrix >> >> is nothing better than you can find in a cheap faux bead shop, and why >> people think it would have an etch pattern is beyond me. The only reason >> to have it is because when you drive by an accident on the highway and see >> >> an accident with blood and guts, you have to stop and cause everyone else >> a traffic jam as you gawk. And then you have to tell everyone else, yes, >> look I have a piece of that corpse on the road, look at me! >> >> I wouldn't feel this way at all if the story were all closed and those who >> >> have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars (yes, the amount is correct) >> were ok and the crooks in jail. But the collective memory seems to mean >> nothing even if we can learn from our past. Everything would be cool in >> the collectible category if there were a fixed amount of Shirokovsky out >> there. >> >> It is not all accounted for and it gives someone else the idea of >> manufacturing other meteorites; why, instead of getting locked up for >> stealing from several collectors and causing all kinds of business >> heartache beyond the active imagination of many listmembers, the message >> is clear. Make a Shitpkovsky fake, if you get caught, be nowhere to be >> found and burn the people who trusted you, cause a great deal of >> pollutuion that everyone else has to clean up (the equivalent of the Exxon >> >> Valdez, and we all cleaned it up), and then appear 10 years later selling >> more of it like war memorabilia from the dark side and getting people to >> actually argue it is a good thing to have in collections. >> >> Huuumpt. I still remember being at a function 3 years ago where the big >> meteorite dealer insisted to an ignorant crowd that his many Shirokovsky >> pseudometeorites. He sold them for $25/g and many just three years ago >> painted me as someone who didn't know since he was the expert (ha). >> >> Here's what the serious problem is: the material was all controlled before >> >> by the dealer terrorists and collector rapists. If you bought a piece of >> this suckerite from one of the original good faith dealers, you did a fine >> >> thing to help bail them out and had the cute thing to discuss it in a >> charitable show and tell. But - Now assigning a collection value to new >> material all you are doing is having money chase the masses that were >> never cut. And as we all know, when money chases, money gets. And - >> guess where this new material is coming from? >> >> Kindest wishes >> Doug >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Adam Hupe <raremeteorites at yahoo.com> >> To: Adam <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> >> Sent: Fri, Aug 19, 2011 5:38 pm >> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Shirokovsky >> >> >> I guess collecting artifacts has made me leery about fakes. Get caught >> with one >> fake artifact and it will put your entire collection in question. It is >> best to >> get artifacts papered and destroy any that have been "killed" by an >> independent >> authenticator. I see Shirokovsky as being off topic since it is not a >> meteorite >> and is was only produced in order to defraud honest collectors out of >> their hard >> earned money. >> If you want a piece of a recycled old Ford motor block in your collection, >> >> that >> is your business. To me, it is garbage and so are the people who produced >> it! >> >> Adam >> > > ______________________________________________ > 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 Sun 21 Aug 2011 09:53:24 AM PDT