Ha, ha,
Mark, do not feel honored, she talks about me too. ;-)
I'm sure, on other social meteorite platforms things are very busy, busy, and
great for business.
For some not in the groove, but here, it would be great for anyone to throw
up anything meteorite
and we'll see where the meteorites fall. I sometime reply in an unusual
manner--------------
and then just blame it on Anne.
JL
> On 03/23/2024 10:09 PM EDT Mark Lyon <mark.lyon.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> She could be talking about me. I was being very disrespectful.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2024, 7:00 PM John Lutzon via Meteorite-list
> <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > Hello Anne,
> >
> > In most cases, I Agree. In this case, both parties were respectful but had
> > different views of
> > several implications of information divulgence. I enjoyed their points and
> > the results.
> >
> > Meteorite related aspects and meteorite discussions on a Meteorite-List,
> > Brilliant!!
> > John Lutzon
> >
> > > On 03/23/2024 2:19 PM EDT Anne Black via Meteorite-list
> > <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey Everybody,
> > >
> > > When you have a disagreement with somebody, did you ever consider
> > resolving it PRIVATELY?
> > >
> > >
> > > Anne Black
> > > IMPACTIKA.com
> > > impact...@aol.com
> > >
> > >
> > > On Friday, March 22, 2024 at 08:27:09 PM MDT, Mendy Ouzillou via
> > Meteorite-list <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I’m not getting in the middle of these discussions. I will simply make
> > the following 3 statements + 1 opinion:
> > > 1. Here is Mohamed’s exact statement: “Hi all members liste , I have a
> > nice carbonaceous Nwa 15758 CK6 paired ,if anyone interested please
> > contacte me.” Notice that he used the word “paired” making no claim it was
> > part of the TKW of NWA 15758.
> > > 2. This discussion about “pairing” has been going on for forever. The
> > Global Meteorite Association has a policy to guide transparency:
> > https://gmeta.org/standards/descriptive-terms/pair-pairings. Mohamed could
> > have use better terminology to clarify the type of pairing, but I
> > personally did not see his description as problematic and applauded his
> > transparency.
> > > 3. On a related note, when a north African (or any seller) offers
> > material for sale that is unclassified, there is NO issue with doing so.
> > They are under no obligation to get material classified before trying to
> > sell. As long as both parties are transparent, and they agree to the terms
> > of the transaction, there is no injury to either party.
> > >
> > > My opinion is that our community is sufficiently large that we cannot
> > know every seller, much less their intent. Most of us do repeat business
> > with sellers we trust, but that in no way means that all other sellers have
> > ill intent. Like anything transaction in life – caveat emptor.
> > >
> > > My regards to the community,
> > >
> > > Mendy
> > >
> > > From:Meteorite-list <meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com> On
> > Behalf OfMark Lyon via Meteorite-list
> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2024 9:50 PM
> > > To: humboldt bay jay <humboldtbay...@gmail.com>
> > > Cc: Meteorite-list <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15
> > >
> > > Jason Humboldt,
> > >
> > > You just have to learn to tune out Jason utas. He has been doing this
> > for years. He isnt going to change. You should have seen some of the
> > messages he sent me before i blocked him. The first time I met him he went
> > in my display room in tucson and started complaining about me selling taza
> > (nwa 859) because it was his dad's classification. Then he claimed he was
> > just using it as an example because he thought he overheard me attacking
> > dustin Dickens (a friend of mine) for pairing meteorites. More recently, he
> > made damaging accusations about omolon specimens actually being brahin. Not
> > caring how it affected a Russian group who had just spent months travelling
> > and collecting the materials. He always thinks he is right, and he very
> > seldom is. For the record, you did not attack a Moroccan seller. You
> > politely told him not to use your classification, which was probably a
> > single person classification with low total known weight. Anyone with
> > common sense can see that this is different from huge finds like hah346 and
> > jikhara 001 and erg chech and whatever else he complained about. I didn't
> > read his whole message because I have heard it all before. Collectors want
> > to know they are getting these, and not another meteorite. People are not
> > using these names to be dishonest but to accurately describe what they are
> > selling. It would be doing the community a disservice not to use these
> > names.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024, 9:04 AM humboldt bay jay via Meteorite-list
> > <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > > I appreciate the immense amount of time I anticipated you would spend
> > on your reply.
> > > >
> > > > Thinking extensively about this, I wondered why you tried to shame me
> > as a hypocrite, even when you have witness to me striving for best
> > practices. Having autism I often struggle to understand people's intention.
> > Many times I have gone wrong assuming the worst in people's actions. So one
> > of my strategies is to try to think of the best possible intention that
> > someone could have. I admit sometimes it is difficult with your approach
> > (and attempt to shame me) but since your critique was not sound I came to
> > reason that you saw an injustice that I perpetrated against Benzaki Mohamed
> > and you felt the need to "punch the bully in his face". A fierce sense of
> > justice that sometimes leads me to act foolish is also part of my condition
> > so I was able to have sympathy with this realization. Now that you have
> > responded I can more clearly see your intention. So here is my considered
> > response.
> > > >
> > > > To the community: I am happy to assist with meteoritics in any way
> > that I can. If you have material that you feel might be paired with mine I
> > am happy to look at any information and give my honest response. It would
> > be unethical and dirty feeling to do otherwise. I have not made it to where
> > I am in life by acting in short term interests. Relationships are life long.
> > > >
> > > > To Benzaki Mohamed: I am sorry if I shamed you. I am often blunt and
> > act quickly. Jason's best point is that I should have reached out to you in
> > private first. If you send me images or any supporting information I am
> > happy to give you my honest opinion. You would then have my full support
> > marketing the material as paired if it checks out.
> > > >
> > > > To Jason: I forgive you. I know what it is like to have conflict with
> > the world.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Jason
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 5:50PM Jason Utas <meteorite...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > Hello Jason,
> > > > >
> > > > > As long as material is described accurately, I don't care what you
> > do. I only butted in here because it annoyed me to see you attacking a
> > Moroccan seller who is probably selling accurately paired material, while
> > you’re openly doing the same thing with other meteorites. Glass house +
> > throwing stones, not cool.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm saying that it should be fine for you to buy and sell HaH 346
> > and Jikharra 001 as those meteorites as long as you've accurately IDd them.
> > But not if you're going to tell other people they can't do the same thing.
> > That's the rub.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your points -
> > > > >
> > > > > 1 & 4) Why does it matter where you got your HaH 346? It didn't
> > matter to you where Benzaki got his NWA 15758.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your posts didn't address the origin of Benzaki Mohamed's CK in any
> > way, or whether or not his material is paired with NWA 15758. Based on
> > everything you've shared here, you don't know or care about whether or not
> > Benzaki's material is paired with yours. Your concern is "your NWA number"
> > and protecting that investment. I can empathize with that, but your #1 and
> > #4 bullet points don't agree with your actions:
> > > > >
> > > > > Did you ask Benzaki where his material had come from before you sent
> > that public complaint? No. Did you confirm that it came from a different
> > finder, the same place, or a different place? No. When it came to
> > 'protecting your NWA number,' none of that mattered. Sure, the onus is on
> > him to show it's paired, but you didn't give him a chance.
> > > > >
> > > > > You were preemptively trying to avoid any possible / probable
> > pairings to 'protect your investment.' I understand your motivations, and
> > think many dealers would take your side, but it's ethically questionable,
> > at best. TKWs affect meteorite values, and if you're aware of significant
> > pairings, (main) masses, etc., and you hide that information from your
> > customers, that's dishonest. Sure, new things can turn up, but what if a
> > dealer sold you a "main mass," and you later found out that they were aware
> > of a larger specimen all along?Would you care? Would you be annoyed? What
> > would you think?
> > > > >
> > > > > ...Is what you're doing here any different?
> > > > >
> > > > > You asked me what I would do. I sold some NWA 15364 (nakhlite) a
> > while back. When describing it, I said: "Northwest Africa 15364 is one
> > member of a large pairing group including, but not limited to: Hassi
> > Messaoud 001, Bir Moghrein 002, Qued Mya 005, NWA 13368, NWA 13669, NWA
> > 13764, NWA 13786, NWA 14369, NWA 14962, and NWA 15200. The published total
> > known weight of these finds is approximately 4.3 kilograms. It is probable
> > that additional pairings will be approved in the future." That was ~as
> > accurate as I could describe the meteorite's pairings and TKW, to the best
> > of my ability. I spent a bit of time looking at the analytical data for
> > each of them in the Bulletin, finding photos of each of them, and trying to
> > make sure I got it right. I guess I could have omitted mentioning the
> > pairings, to make my pieces seem more rare? Would that be honest? I'd say
> > no. But a few dealers are definitely doing that with some of those
> > pairings...
> > > > >
> > > > > It hurts collectors. Last week, I saw someone comment on a Facebook
> > post, excited because he'd purchased multiple pieces of the above
> > nakhlites. He thought he'd bought pieces of different meteorites, not
> > pieces of paired stones. He seemed disappointed to learn otherwise. It's
> > great for the sellers, not so good for collectors. And it's not a new
> > issue. The first similar instance I remember was in an ancient met-list
> > thread back in the early 2000s, when someone tried to sell a meteorite
> > paired with NWA 869. NWA...900ish, if I recall... It's probably been 15
> > years. Hmmm...
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com/2004/nov/0989.html
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com/2004/nov/1120.html
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com/2004/nov/0961.html
> > > > >
> > > > > My email doesn't go back that far, had to find it on Google. NWA 900
> > is another 869 pairing, but the problem was NWA 904.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've never really sat down and thought about it, but a significant
> > part of the NWA market is based on dealers pleading or feigning ignorance
> > about pairings and TKWs to collectors. It's ~accepted conduct, and it’s
> > totally unethical. Dean Bessey called it out back in 2004, and nothing's
> > changed.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2 & 5) We're talking about scientific descriptions of rocks. Little
> > rocks are rocks. Big rocks are rocks. Size doesn't matter.
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately, larger finds and falls are widely distributed, tend
> > to get less scrutiny, and get mislabeled often. Those three big meteorites
> > you're using as examples are some of the biggest problems, because they're
> > such large finds. Sure, it can be fun: I couldn't tell you the number of
> > interesting things I've pulled out of lots of "NWA 869" over the years. And
> > you should keep an eye out for the fresh L3s in shipments of HaH 346. Many
> > of them still have skid-marks, and there's nothing quite like a W0 type-3.
> > If you're on Facebook, you've probably seen the multi-kg lots of a totally
> > new brecciated eucrite being offered as Jikharra in the past week or so, at
> > Jikharra prices. But the mistakes aren't always unintentional, and they
> > don't always favor the customer. And it's no one's responsibility to catch
> > them, so...it just happens. Boatloads of random, unclassified meteorites
> > are sold as NWA 869, HaH 346, Taza, Ziz, etc. Every big DCA meteorite. Ever
> > since Agoudal was discovered, ~fresh pieces keep coming up as Taza, at
> > inflated prices. A ~300 gram lot sold on eBay just a few weeks ago. There
> > are some on eBay right now. Both of those irons are pretty big finds. A
> > fake Tissint even turned up in a Heritage Auction a year or so ago. "But
> > it's a big find" = not a good argument for arbitrary pairing.
> > > > >
> > > > > The issue is accuracy, and material getting misrepresented, and I
> > don't have a good answer. The Meteoritical Society has its official pairing
> > guidelines here, Section 4.2:
> > > > > https://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/docs/nc-guidelines.htm
> > > > >
> > > > > The rules say that you need proof of pairing. Proof. Either
> > fragments physically fit together, or you have in situ photos -- or you
> > shouldn’t assume rocks are paired. That would theoretically ensure that no
> > mistakes are made. And when scientists are in charge of things, like in
> > Antarctica, that's what happens. Everything gets analyzed.
> > > > >
> > > > > No meteorite dealers follow the guidelines. 0.Historically, our
> > community has assumed that a dealer who got a meteorite analyzed could
> > reliably "self-pair" other meteorites to that specimen. The reasoning was
> > that a lab had analyzed a sample, and the dealer could directly compare the
> > analyzed specimen to others, so there was little room for error. It "helps
> > to ensure authenticity." But, in reality, this practice gave dealers a
> > carte-blanche to "pair" any meteorites that looked grossly similar. As long
> > as you got one rock classified, no one would question anything you called
> > paired. It's great. It can be really convenient if you get something
> > analyzed and more of it turns up later. But...it also opens the door for
> > problems.
> > > > >
> > > > > From a practical standpoint: we're never going to get air-tight
> > documentation for most finds, large or small. And it would be ~impossible,
> > and a huge waste of resources, to analyze every specimen of something like
> > NWA 869. Or even NWA 15758. It doesn't work. In the end, everyone does
> > their own thing, both collectors and scientists trust dealers to pair
> > things correctly, and most things wind up being correctly identified. Many
> > don't, though. It ultimately comes down to the given dealer, their
> > experience, their judgement, and their honesty. And no one is perfect, and
> > dishonest people exist, so material will be mislabeled. It is inevitable.
> > > > >
> > > > > You and I are both familiar with how NWA meteorites are bought and
> > sold: single finds are often divided and sold on by any number of sellers
> > and resellers. ~Identical lots of the same find turn up simultaneously with
> > multiple dealers, often with a few odd meteorites mixed in. That's
> > completely normal, and NWA sellers are frequently aware of others who are
> > also offering the same material. The way you responded to Benzaki Mohamed
> > denied all of that, and was demeaning.
> > > > >
> > > > > There's no good reason to assume Benzaki's material either is or
> > isn't NWA 15758 until you see it for yourself. He's a pretty well-known
> > dealer; I'd want to see the stones for myself, but, without knowing any
> > other details, I'd be inclined to think he was right about the pairing.
> > Kind of like how you're saying it would be okay to trust Benzaki if he was
> > selling a lot of a larger find like Jikharra 001. And like how everyone
> > trusts you to ensure that all of the fragments you're selling as NWA 15758
> > are paired, even though probably just one piece was analyzed. ...And how
> > everyone would trust you if you bought Benzaki's new lot and said it, too,
> > was paired with NWA 15758...
> > > > >
> > > > > Everyone is relying on your experience, your judgement, and your
> > integrity, to determine whether or not those fragments are all paired. Yet
> > you're telling Benzaki, or his supplier, or maybe even the actual finder of
> > NWA 15758, that they can't do the same thing, in this one case. Not because
> > they're unfamiliar with the find, not because they don't have the same
> > amount of experience as you, not because they're dishonest -- but "because
> > of the resources you invested into getting the meteorite classified."
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't agree with that.
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess you're also arguing that NWA 15758 is different because it's
> > "just 1 kg." But...is it? I haven't reached out to Benzaki to check out
> > this new lot, but it sure sounds like that might not be true.
> > > > > 3) I don't see a difference between labeling a specimen as "someone
> > else's" approved DCA number versus selling a specimen like that. Either
> > way, you're assigning an identity to a meteorite. It's the same thing in
> > the long run, especially if you're posting the photos publicly. If you
> > think one is wrong, then the other should be, too. I don't have an issue
> > with folks doing that as long as there's no doubt that the ID is correct,
> > but I'm also not the one attacking someone else for doing it. Case in
> > point: I agree that your large eucrite looks to be paired with Jikharra
> > 001. But, if you're going to play that card, and post it as "likely paired"
> > on your website, it should be fine for Benzaki to say the same thing about
> > his CK / NWA 15758 if he believes it. Right? If not, you're holding Benzaki
> > to a higher standard than yourself.
> > > > >
> > > > > By now, you've had some time to look into this. Did you ask for
> > photos of Benzaki's CK? Did you figure out if his lot is from the same area
> > as yours? From the same finder? Do they look like the same material? Do you
> > think they're paired? What is the real TKW of NWA 15758? Is it just the ~1
> > kg in the Bulletin? How much more is out there? None? Just this one lot?
> > More?
> > > > >
> > > > > You asked me what I would do. If it were my meteorite, I'd want to
> > know. And I wouldn't want to hide that information from potential buyers. I
> > don't think that would be honest.
> > > > >
> > > > > If it turned out that Benzaki was right about the pairing, you
> > attacked him for correctly labeling a meteorite. I'd say you should
> > probably apologize to him.
> > > > > Sorry this got so long.
> > > > > Jason
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 8:03PM humboldt bay jay
> > <humboldtbay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I am sending this again as I realized I only replied to you and
> > not the list as well. This turns out good for me because it offers a chance
> > to better compose my thoughts. I was running errands when I sent the first
> > email. To begin again:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jason,
> > > > > > I see what you are saying, and it is a reasonable point but I
> > disagree. These are the reasons:
> > > > > > 1. I can elaborate that "since you never contacted me" means I
> > would have been happy to provide assistance and the name if the vendor
> > would have done so with some images of supporting information such as
> > sourcing from the same finder.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. There is a clear difference between multi ton finds that have
> > ample documentation and a kilo find that has had little publicity. Even
> > then I agree that best practices are to communicate leading me to
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. Point out that you were part of one of my conversations about
> > this in regard to the likely Jikharra specimen you are referencing. You
> > stated that "The Jikharra’s obviously that." You are also well aware that I
> > am not selling any of the obviously Jikharra until my own classification is
> > approved because you were part of the discussion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4. You don't actually know where I sourced my material because you
> > did not ask. For example the metbul mentioned many kilograms traded as
> > Ghadamis that was not in Marcin's possession. Since I bought and traded
> > Ghadamis before the name HaH 346 was approved, how do you think I should
> > have handled the situation differently?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 5. In regards to nwa 869 the following quote is from themetbul"At
> > least 2 metric tons of material comprising thousands of individuals has
> > been sold under the name NWA 869 in the market places of Morocco and around
> > the world." along with the appropriate caveats due to its abundance-
> > "Scientists are advised to confirm the classification of any specimens they
> > obtain before publishing results under this name." So again I do not feel
> > you are making an apples to apples comparison with your critique of my
> > logic.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We all obviously respect your encyclopedic understanding of
> > meteorites so perhaps you can share with us your framework for best
> > practices in these situations.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > Jason
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 1:21PM Jason Utas <meteorite...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > Hello Jason,
> > > > > > > To be consistent, you should remove the HaH 346 and NWA 869
> > specimens you have listed for sale on your website. Those classifications
> > were submitted by other dealers; your stones are unclassified individuals
> > from DCAs with no evidence of their find locations, etc.
> > > > > > > On your "featured" page, you also have a specimen listed as a
> > "likely Jakharra 001 Pairing." Similar issues aside, relying on that
> > standard, it should be okay for Benzaki Mohamed to call his specimens
> > "likely NWA 15758 pairings."
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 7:09AM humboldt bay jay via
> > Meteorite-list <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Thank you Benzaki Mohamed for swiftly reaching out to me. I
> > appreciate your attention to this matter. All is good.
> > > > > > > > Best regards to everyone,
> > > > > > > > Jason Whitcomb
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 10:29PM
> > <meteorite-list-requ...@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Send Meteorite-list mailing list submissions to
> > > > > > > > > meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > > > > > > > > meteorite-list-requ...@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > > > > > > > > meteorite-list-ow...@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
> > specific
> > > > > > > > > than "Re: Contents of Meteorite-list digest..."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Today's Topics:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. Meteorite Picture of the Day (p...@tucsonmeteorites.com)
> > > > > > > > > 2. Re: Very sad news (Ruben Garcia)
> > > > > > > > > 3. Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 14 (humboldt
> > bay jay)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Message: 1
> > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 00:35:54 -0700
> > > > > > > > > From: <p...@tucsonmeteorites.com>
> > > > > > > > > To: <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
> > > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Picture of the Day
> > > > > > > > > Message-ID:
> > <b9fa8d09888b415e9bf201cb08e98...@secureserver.net>
> > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thursday, Mar 14 2024 Meteorite Picture of the Day: HAH 346
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Contributed by: J?r?me de Creymer
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.tucsonmeteorites.com/mpodmain.asp?DD=03/14/2024
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Message: 2
> > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 16:17:06 -0700
> > > > > > > > > From: Ruben Garcia <rrg85...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > To: bernd.pa...@paulinet.de
> > > > > > > > > Cc: Meteorite Mailing List
> > <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Very sad news
> > > > > > > > > Message-ID:
> > > > > > > > >
> > <CAGSP0MWZt2RtT_w=jxhjti60uojwdgvdoreuf4jfjd7paim...@mail.gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi Bernd,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I've know John for a very long time. This is very sad
> > indeed. Thank you for
> > > > > > > > > posting this.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ruben Garcia
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 4:03?PM bernd.pauli--- via
> > Meteorite-list <
> > > > > > > > > meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Dear List,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It is my sad duty to inform you that John Blennert has
> > passed away :-(
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > John, rest in peace!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Bernd
> > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > > URL:
> > <https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240313/55acab68/attachment-0001.htm>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Message: 3
> > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:53:43 -0700
> > > > > > > > > From: humboldt bay jay <humboldtbay...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol
> > 261, Issue 14
> > > > > > > > > Message-ID:
> > > > > > > > >
> > <caat9en4eebof8m_4p5anuoo9wo9+_qqv1e9-1mbjdnj6yvh...@mail.gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Benzaki Mohamed,
> > > > > > > > > Since you have never reached out to me about my
> > classification, Nwa 15758
> > > > > > > > > CK6, I politely request that you do not use this name. I
> > invested time and
> > > > > > > > > resources into having it analyzed and if you wish to sell
> > your material as
> > > > > > > > > a named meteorite I suggest you do the same. Thank you in
> > advance.
> > > > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 10:29?PM <
> > > > > > > > > meteorite-list-requ...@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Send Meteorite-list mailing list submissions to
> > > > > > > > > > meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > > > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > > > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help'
> > to
> > > > > > > > > > meteorite-list-requ...@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > > > > > > > > > meteorite-list-ow...@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
> > specific
> > > > > > > > > > than "Re: Contents of Meteorite-list digest..."
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Today's Topics:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 1. Meteorite Picture of the Day (p...@tucsonmeteorites.com)
> > > > > > > > > > 2. Meteorite carbon (Benzaki Mohamed)
> > > > > > > > > > 3. Very sad news (bernd.pa...@paulinet.de)
> > > > > > > > > > 4. Claims of Extrasolar Spherules from Pacific Ocean Site
> > CNEOS
> > > > > > > > > > 2014-01-08 Disputed (Paul)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Message: 1
> > > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 00:35:54 -0700
> > > > > > > > > > From: <p...@tucsonmeteorites.com>
> > > > > > > > > > To: <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Picture of the Day
> > > > > > > > > > Message-ID:
> > <e402350c7fb04bc489e974c560d88...@secureserver.net>
> > > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, Mar 13 2024 Meteorite Picture of the Day: Hamlet
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Contributed by: Anne Black
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.tucsonmeteorites.com/mpodmain.asp?DD=03/13/2024
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Message: 2
> > > > > > > > > > Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 22:16:15 +0000
> > > > > > > > > > From: Benzaki Mohamed <kemkemexpedit...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite carbon
> > > > > > > > > > Message-ID:
> > > > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > > >
> > cagzkz4-7hufr2n7mzy4hapufexcssju66gn+v9ajuxjkt8t...@mail.gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi all members liste , I have a nice carbonaceous Nwa
> > 15758 CK6 paired ,if
> > > > > > > > > > anyone interested please contacte me.
> > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > > > URL: <
> > > > > > > > > >
> > https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240311/7131a467/attachment-0001.htm
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Message: 3
> > > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:48:20 +0100 (CET)
> > > > > > > > > > From: bernd.pa...@paulinet.de
> > > > > > > > > > To: "meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com"
> > > > > > > > > > <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Very sad news
> > > > > > > > > > Message-ID: <825781290.98647.1710366500...@www.ud-mail.de>
> > > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Dear List,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It is my sad duty to inform you that John Blennert has
> > passed away :-(
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > John, rest in peace!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Bernd
> > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > > > URL: <
> > > > > > > > > >
> > https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240313/b5109823/attachment-0001.htm
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Message: 4
> > > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:16:00 -0500
> > > > > > > > > > From: Paul <etchpl...@att.net>
> > > > > > > > > > To: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Claims of Extrasolar Spherules
> > from Pacific
> > > > > > > > > > Ocean Site CNEOS 2014-01-08 Disputed
> > > > > > > > > > Message-ID: <088038b3-ec22-4815-b8fc-d187f665a...@att.net>
> > > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Recently, a preprint has been posted to the arXiv site that
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > disputes proposal that Be,La,U-rich spherules recovered
> > form
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Pacific Ocean Site CNEOS 2014-01-0 are from an extrasolar
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > origin. Instead, they argued to be microtektites of
> > terrestrial
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > lateritic sandstone.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The preprint is:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Desch, S., 2024. Be, La, U-rich spherules as
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > microtektites of terrestrial laterites: What goes \\
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > up must come down. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.05161.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.05161
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2403/2403.05161.pdf
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The proposed extrasolar spherules are discussed in:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Loeb, A., Adamson, T., Bergstrom, S., Cloete, R.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Cohen, S., Conrad, K., Domine, L., Fu, H., Hoskinson,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > C., Hyung, E., Jacobsen, S., Kelly, M., Kohn, J., Lard,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > E., Lam, S., Laukien, F., Lem, J., McCallum, R.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Millsap, R., Parendo, C., Petaev, M., Peddeti, C.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Pugh, K., Samuha, S., Sasselov, D., Schlereth, M.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Siler, J.J., Siraj, A., Smith, P.M., Tagle, R., Taylor,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > J., Weed, R., Wright, A., and Wynn, J. 2023.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Discovery of Spherules of likely extrasolar composition
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > in the Pacific Ocean site of the CNEOS 2014-01-08
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > (IM1) bolide. arXiv preprint 2308.15623
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.15623
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.15623.pdf
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Loeb, A., Adamson, T., Bergstrom, S., Cloete, R.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Cohen, S., Conrad, K., Domine, L., Fu, H.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hoskinson, C., Hyung, E., Jacobsen, S., Kelly, M.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kohn, J., Lard, E., Laukien, F., Lem, J., McCallum, R.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Millsap, R., Parendo, C., Petaev, M., Peddeti, C.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Pugh, K., Samuha, S., Sasselov, D., Schlereth, M.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Siler, J.J., Siraj, A., Smith, P.M., Tagle, R., Taylor, J.,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Weed, R., Wright, A., and Wynn, J. 2024. Recovery
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > and classification of spherules from the Pacific Ocean
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > site of the CNEOS 2014 January 8 (IM1) bolide.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society 8: 39.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2515-5172/ad2370/meta
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Related paper, reprint and press release:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Desch, S., and Jackson, A., 2023. Critique of arXiv
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > submission 2308.15623, "Discovery of Spherules of
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Likely Extrasolar Composition in the Pacific Ocean
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Site of the CNEOS 2014-01-08 (IM1) Bolide", by A.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Loeb et al arXiv:2311.07699
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.07699
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.07699.pdf
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 'Alien' spherules dredged from the Pacific are probably
> > just
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > industrial pollution, new studies suggest. LiveScience,
> > Nov. 16, 2023
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > https://www.livescience.com/space/extraterrestrial-life/alien-spherules-dredged-from-the-pacific-are-probably-just-industrial-pollution-new-studies-suggest
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Gallardo, P.A., 2023. Anthropogenic Coal Ash as a
> > Contaminant
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > in a Micro-meteoritic Underwater Search. Research Notes of
> > the
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > AAS, 7(10), p.220.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > http://ispcjournal.org/journals/2024/32/PhC_vol_32_Lomas.pdf
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Yours,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Paul H.
> > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > > > URL: <
> > > > > > > > > >
> > https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240313/4f81045c/attachment-0001.htm
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Digest Footer
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > End of Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 14
> > > > > > > > > > ***********************************************
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > > URL:
> > <https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240313/5e27a1cd/attachment-0001.htm>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Digest Footer
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > End of Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15
> > > > > > > > > ***********************************************
> > > > > > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > > > > > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > ______________________________________________
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
