[meteorite-list] Another eBay Correction - Fossil NWA 2828
Hi Mark, Dean and List, Boy, I should have started from scratch when I re-loaded my previously unsold eBay auctions of NWA 2828 Fossil EL3 meteorite. I've already corrected the TKW of 2828 and referenced pairings. Now I notice I overlooked changing Paleo to Fossil. Back to the revise button... Chalk it up to too much going on and too many changes! I hope I did not sound forward when pointing out ...my previous email with reference to the NWA 2828 abstract... If so, I apologize for any perceived aggression, it was not meant that way. Best regards, Greg Greg Hupe The Hupe Collection NaturesVault (eBay) [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.LunarRock.com IMCA 3163 - Original Message - From: Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dean bessey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: meteoritelist Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 8:55 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] PALEO MeteoriteWas Very Rare NWA2828 Hi Dean and List Dean, I do agree. Paleo-anything has an anthropomorphic connotation about it. Relic has a manmade feel to it. Fossil denotes something once extent, now dead and what we have are it's mineralized bones and traces. Prius means before, maybe that would be less of a problem. Mark Ferguson - Original Message - From: dean bessey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 8:41 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] PALEO MeteoriteWas Very Rare NWA2828 --- Matt Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How long does it take to be considered paleo? All the means is old. Please shed some light on this for me... Matt Morgan I dont think that Paleo is a proper way to describe them as these meteorites are not paleolithic. Paleolithic is an era starting just before mesolithic (13,000 or somewhere around that years ago - I cant remember exactly) going back to the dawn of man which is around 2.5 million years ago. Well there is dispute when the first man showed up but it certainly wasnt 110 million years ago like the Lake murrey paleo meteorite which is a Cretaceous meteorite - not a paleolithic one. Relic, which has also been used is a much better word to describe these meteorites. Cheers DEAN www.meteoriteshop.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Another eBay Correction - Fossil NWA 2828
Hi Greg I know fossil comes from to dig or something on that order, and it's a ready choice given the popular knowledge of the word. But, in this case scientists shouldn't be overly concerned how the general public understands it, what with other terms they use to describe meteorites and rocks in general, what's one more term? There's no hard feelings about it on my part. And it sure isn't your fault. I'm just pointing out the obvious. If it's an accepted term or adopted as the case may be, you sure can use it until a change comes along. I sure don't mean to cause you any extra work either. You can never tell, they might come up with one of those humorous sounding terms like bleb. Mark Mark - Original Message - From: Greg Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Another eBay Correction - Fossil NWA 2828 Hi Mark, Dean and List, Boy, I should have started from scratch when I re-loaded my previously unsold eBay auctions of NWA 2828 Fossil EL3 meteorite. I've already corrected the TKW of 2828 and referenced pairings. Now I notice I overlooked changing Paleo to Fossil. Back to the revise button... Chalk it up to too much going on and too many changes! I hope I did not sound forward when pointing out ...my previous email with reference to the NWA 2828 abstract... If so, I apologize for any perceived aggression, it was not meant that way. Best regards, Greg Greg Hupe The Hupe Collection NaturesVault (eBay) [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.LunarRock.com IMCA 3163 - Original Message - From: Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dean bessey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: meteoritelist Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 8:55 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] PALEO MeteoriteWas Very Rare NWA2828 Hi Dean and List Dean, I do agree. Paleo-anything has an anthropomorphic connotation about it. Relic has a manmade feel to it. Fossil denotes something once extent, now dead and what we have are it's mineralized bones and traces. Prius means before, maybe that would be less of a problem. Mark Ferguson - Original Message - From: dean bessey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 8:41 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] PALEO MeteoriteWas Very Rare NWA2828 --- Matt Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How long does it take to be considered paleo? All the means is old. Please shed some light on this for me... Matt Morgan I dont think that Paleo is a proper way to describe them as these meteorites are not paleolithic. Paleolithic is an era starting just before mesolithic (13,000 or somewhere around that years ago - I cant remember exactly) going back to the dawn of man which is around 2.5 million years ago. Well there is dispute when the first man showed up but it certainly wasnt 110 million years ago like the Lake murrey paleo meteorite which is a Cretaceous meteorite - not a paleolithic one. Relic, which has also been used is a much better word to describe these meteorites. Cheers DEAN www.meteoriteshop.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Another eBay Correction - Fossil NWA 2828
Greg Hupe wrote: Hi Mark, Dean and List, Boy, I should have started from scratch when I re-loaded my previously unsold eBay auctions of NWA 2828 Fossil EL3 meteorite. I've already corrected the TKW of 2828 and referenced pairings. Now I notice I overlooked changing Paleo to Fossil. Back to the revise button... Yea, fossil may be accurate or maybe not, but why not use the broader terminology as designated by NomCom in their latest revision in which this new category is proposed? Read it here in section 1.2(c) Relict meteorites: http://www.meteoriticalsociety.org/bulletin/nc-guidelines.htm#s12c This section is copied here for your convenience: c) Special provisions are made in these Guidelines for highly altered materials that may have a meteoritic origin, designated relict meteorites, which are dominantly (95%) composed of secondary minerals formed on the body on which the object was found. Examples of such material may include some types of meteorite shale, fossil meteorites, and fusion crust. David __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Another eBay Correction - Fossil NWA 2828
Hi David, Mark and List, I think the general thought and consensus for Fossil on NWA 2828 and pairings was due to the information that some of this material (mostly blue coloring) was dug up from under a layer of other differently altered material (mostly brown material). I am not a scientist, nor have I ever proclaimed to be, but this makes sense and does open the door for other classified meteorites prior to the term Fossil-Meteorite being used. I do not think Relic-Meteorite applies because it confuses the thought of Relic Chondrules/Ghost Chondrules or lack of chondrules in existing, classified meteorites. Considering terrestrial influences did not change the chondrule/non-chondrule structure of these meteorites, I feel it confuses things. Relict chondrules is an approved term that, I understand, does not apply to the overall classification name of any said meteorite. Terrestrial alteration determined the overall current naming status of these (NWA 2828, etc.), not what happened during their extraterrestrial birth, life, bombardment from other bodies and eventual voyage here, which made for such a complicated classification process of this meteorite. As I write this, I can see how quickly it becomes confusing to determine what to say, think about and write what should be determined. Pretty fun to chew through all of these thoughts and possibilities. Blame it on science, it changes all the time with new discoveries and comparison to existing classifications. I believe new Groups and Sub-Groups will be happening more often with the discovery of new meteorites and future space exploration of planets such as Mars and beyond. A lot of the Ungrouped, Anomalous and other Pigeon-Holed meteorites will have a correct and proper classification sooner than we think. Very cool in my book! Just think, a few decades ago we used to have to rely on new meteorite falls to set a new Group or Sub-Groups, but now, we have the technology to send rovers and spacecraft to sniff out the soil, gases and other scientific means to make these discoveries to compare to man's meteorite finds, whether it be by a fall or find. Best regards, Greg Greg Hupe The Hupe Collection NaturesVault (eBay) [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.LunarRock.com IMCA 3163 - Original Message - From: David Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Greg Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 10:10 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Another eBay Correction - Fossil NWA 2828 Greg Hupe wrote: Hi Mark, Dean and List, Boy, I should have started from scratch when I re-loaded my previously unsold eBay auctions of NWA 2828 Fossil EL3 meteorite. I've already corrected the TKW of 2828 and referenced pairings. Now I notice I overlooked changing Paleo to Fossil. Back to the revise button... Yea, fossil may be accurate or maybe not, but why not use the broader terminology as designated by NomCom in their latest revision in which this new category is proposed? Read it here in section 1.2(c) Relict meteorites: http://www.meteoriticalsociety.org/bulletin/nc-guidelines.htm#s12c This section is copied here for your convenience: c) Special provisions are made in these Guidelines for highly altered materials that may have a meteoritic origin, designated relict meteorites, which are dominantly (95%) composed of secondary minerals formed on the body on which the object was found. Examples of such material may include some types of meteorite shale, fossil meteorites, and fusion crust. David __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
