[meteorite-list] R: help me in understand analysis
From: Adam Hupe <raremeteorites_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:00:18 -0700
It is up to dealers to prove what they are selling is legitimate, not
collectors/buyers after the transaction. Why should a buyer have to ask
for provenance and the chain of custody directly to the person named in
a Meteoritical Bulletin? It is up to dealers to provide this information
up front. Who in their right mind would pay top dollar for untested and
unclassified stones being put on the market as planetary pieces?
If a dealer is too lazy to follow protocol then why should he/she be
rewarded? There is no value added by simply reselling untested stones
that are accompanied with stolen nomenclature and Meteortical Bulletin
Professionals see it as there is no such thing as an unclassified lunar.
It is either lunar or it is not. There is no gray area. That is like
somebody placing quartz (Herkimer Diamonds) on the market and trying to
sell them as an unclassified natural diamonds. There are over 167,000
loose diamonds being offered on eBay. Guess how many are real? Most
educated prospective buyers will not consider a stone without GIA
certification. Buyers learned the hard way when spending thousands of
dollars for worthless paste.
I see terrestrial breccias being offered up as lunar material on a
consistent bases thus the acid test. If it fizzes or you cannot get a
direct chain of custody to the classifying laboratory, you may consider
asking for an immediate refund. Save your hard earned money. There is
something to be learned from other markets where buyers have been stiffed.
On 10/9/2017 2:55 AM, Graham Ensor wrote:
> I'm afraid it works the other way round too Adam...you would have to
> have a piece analysed by an expert to say what you are saying rather
> than just look at the pieces to see and conclude what they are. Every
> single piece of my lunar has been to the leading lab specializing in
> meteorites in the UK and been recorded, weighed and analysed to show it
> is lunar. I have the write up and science write up submitted for
> classification if you wish to see it. It is likely part of this new
> bigger find this year and matches the other material around that I see
> for what that is worth.
> Which reputable dealers are you accusing of selling the lunar material
> you think is not lunar by just looking at it? I'm sure you should pass
> that information on to help the community.
> On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:33 AM, Adam Hupe via Meteorite-list
> <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> <mailto:meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>> wrote:
> A lot of the garbage being sold as lunar meteorites by so-called
> reputable dealers will not even pass the fizz test.
> Collectors are being fleeced out of thousands of dollars by
> terrestrial limestone breccias, some of which can be found in the
> Atlas Mountains near an impact structure. I would avoid or ask for a
> refund on any material that fizzes on a cut surface! I remember
> seeing the same crustless, caliche-rich material offered up at the
> Tucson Gem and Mineral show several years ago for $50.00/gram. Now
> it is being offered on eBay and other venues due to a somewhat
> similar appearance to genuine Lunar meteorites. I do not know if
> refunds were given to those who purchase this terrestrial material
> in the past or not.
> This is but one example of why all stones suspected as being
> planetary should be formally tested and classified.
> If in doubt, throw it out or demand a refund.
> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral
> <https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral> and the Archives at
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> <mailto:Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Received on Mon 09 Oct 2017 01:00:18 PM PDT