[meteorite-list] Another eBay Correction - Fossil NWA 2828

2007-01-06 Thread Greg Hupe
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

2007-01-06 Thread Mark
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

2007-01-06 Thread David Weir
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

2007-01-06 Thread Greg Hupe
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