Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. Not only is Darryl an early skeptic, but also Mike Farmer immediately posted an objection. A lot of experienced collectors/hunters felt the same. So what is this really and where did it come from? There is an old saying which may relate profoundly to the sneaky little devil: A stone thrown is the devil's. I'm glad this object is off topic now. Francis Graham You snooze, you lose. Get messages ASAP with AutoCheck in the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_html.html __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
I thought the woodchipper theory applied to the NJO as well? I agree that it does not appear to have features of an object that made a trip through out atmosphere (fusion crust, albation, orientation etc.) Take care, Elias -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tue, 15 May 2007 12:49 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Hi, Tracy, List No, that was the Illinois pseudo-meteorite: the BO, or Bloomington Object, not the NJO! The BO fell on March 5, 2007; the woodchipper was mentioned in print on March 9, 2007, and in a few days its career as a meteorite was over. Things take longer in New Jersey. The NJO fell or was dropped on January 3, 2007, so it's had over a five month career as a meteorite and got to do a gig at a University Museum. But it's a has-been now. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: tracy latimer To: Darryl Pitt ; Meteorite List Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 1:25 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Hadn't the Occam's Razor explanation of this object been that it was part of a tub grinder ejected during operations while grinding up some dead trees several hundred yards away? They showed one of these babies in operation on the Discovery Channel several weeks ago, and I could easily believe one of the chipper blades broke loose and flew on the appropriate trajectory (it looks like the Sarlacc from Star Wars, with layers of rotating teeth). It seems to me part of research should be asking the guys who were using the tub grinder Hey, did you lose any of the blades out of this thing on such-and-such a date? If so, do you know where the piece went? Also, checking to see if the composition of the meteorite was comparable with a tub grinder blade. Tracy Latimer To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 06:26:42 -0400 Subject: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG It has finally been determined by experts that the NJO is not a meteorite. In Friday's AP story, Rutgers University geologist Jerry Delaney was quoted as saying,I was wrong. Sneaky little devil. The second sentiment is not even remotely accurate. As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. The only sneaky little devils are the folks at Rutgers University. Stories are released on Friday nights so the story will miss the news cycle. It's for stories that would cause embarrassment; it's for those moments where you hope the story disappears. This is just so deplorable---and it's not an isolated instance of how an institution with something to gain---and the media---work. But for scientists to be so sloppy in THEIR work is just sodisappointing. As I wrote to the list several months ago: While [this] may ultimately be among the most unusual freshly fallen meteorites known to exist, such an assessment cannot and should not ever have been made by simply passing it around for a casual analysis and singing kumbaya. Here is the latest storyin case you missed it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070511/ap_on_sc/fallen_object Depth of Field Management 1501 Broadway Suite 1304 New York, New York 10036 212.302.9200 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
Hi, In the Illinois case, the (sharp) reporter for the Bloomington Pantograph discovered that a big woodchipper was operating in the neighborhood (well, about 1000 feet away) at the time, verified by the actual woodchippers, which makes it the almost-certain source of what analysed out as a man-made object. In the New Jersey case, it's now been proved what was only highly suspicioned then: that it's a man-made object, too. But as far as I've heard, no one has identified any specific potential source. The Big Chipper sounds good to me, though. The assertion that it's space junk is always possible, but I personally doubt it. Space craft are designed to minimize weight by all means possible, including the distribution of stress and the avoidance of massive strong points. In a word, space craft are rarely made out of big solid chunks of stainless steel. This chunk is irregular, so it would have to be an ablated remnant of a much larger chunk, yet it shows no particular surficial evidence of ablation (none to my eye, but I've only seen bad photos). A purely terrestrial source is almost certain, but there are no specifically suspicious sources like the (running) Bloomington woodchipper. Sterling K. Webb -- - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 8:12 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG I thought the woodchipper theory applied to the NJO as well? I agree that it does not appear to have features of an object that made a trip through out atmosphere (fusion crust, albation, orientation etc.) Take care, Elias -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tue, 15 May 2007 12:49 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Hi, Tracy, List No, that was the Illinois pseudo-meteorite: the BO, or Bloomington Object, not the NJO! The BO fell on March 5, 2007; the woodchipper was mentioned in print on March 9, 2007, and in a few days its career as a meteorite was over. Things take longer in New Jersey. The NJO fell or was dropped on January 3, 2007, so it's had over a five month career as a meteorite and got to do a gig at a University Museum. But it's a has-been now. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: tracy latimer To: Darryl Pitt ; Meteorite List Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 1:25 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Hadn't the Occam's Razor explanation of this object been that it was part of a tub grinder ejected during operations while grinding up some dead trees several hundred yards away? They showed one of these babies in operation on the Discovery Channel several weeks ago, and I could easily believe one of the chipper blades broke loose and flew on the appropriate trajectory (it looks like the Sarlacc from Star Wars, with layers of rotating teeth). It seems to me part of research should be asking the guys who were using the tub grinder Hey, did you lose any of the blades out of this thing on such-and-such a date? If so, do you know where the piece went? Also, checking to see if the composition of the meteorite was comparable with a tub grinder blade. Tracy Latimer To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 06:26:42 -0400 Subject: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG It has finally been determined by experts that the NJO is not a meteorite. In Friday's AP story, Rutgers University geologist Jerry Delaney was quoted as saying,I was wrong. Sneaky little devil. The second sentiment is not even remotely accurate. As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. The only sneaky little devils are the folks at Rutgers University. Stories are released on Friday nights so the story will miss the news cycle. It's for stories that would cause embarrassment; it's for those moments where you hope the story disappears. This is just so deplorable---and it's not an isolated instance of how an institution with something to gain---and the media---work. But for scientists to be so sloppy in THEIR work is just sodisappointing. As I wrote to the list several months ago: While [this] may ultimately be among the most unusual freshly fallen meteorites known to exist, such an assessment cannot
Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
In my opinion which I have held from the beginning is that the NJO is probably something that got stuck to an aircraft wheel and dropped off when the landing gear was retracted during flight. It looked pretty scrapped up like something that had been run over several times and is weathered, something that a fresh piece of space-junk would never show. Looks like the owners of this piece of rubbish won't be getting a bloody nickel, let alone the $100,00.00 they may have hoped for. In any case, it is a worthless piece of trash! Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
Hadn't the Occam's Razor explanation of this object been that it was part of a tub grinder ejected during operations while grinding up some dead trees several hundred yards away? They showed one of these babies in operation on the Discovery Channel several weeks ago, and I could easily believe one of the chipper blades broke loose and flew on the appropriate trajectory (it looks like the Sarlacc from Star Wars, with layers of rotating teeth). It seems to me part of research should be asking the guys who were using the tub grinder Hey, did you lose any of the blades out of this thing on such-and-such a date? If so, do you know where the piece went? Also, checking to see if the composition of the meteorite was comparable with a tub grinder blade.Tracy LatimerTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sat, 12 May 2007 06:26:42 -0400Subject: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONGIt has finally been determined by experts that the NJO is not a meteorite. In Friday's AP story, Rutgers University geologist Jerry Delaney was quoted as saying,I was wrong. Sneaky little devil.The second sentiment is not even remotely accurate. As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. The only sneaky little devils are the folks at Rutgers University. Stories are released on Friday nights so the story will miss the news cycle. It's for stories that would cause embarrassment; it's for those moments where you hope the story disappears.This is just so deplorable---and it's not an isolated instance of how an institution with something to gain---and the media---work. But for scientists to be so sloppy in THEIR work is just sodisappointing. As I wrote to the list several months ago: While [this] may ultimately be among the most unusual freshly fallen meteorites known to exist, such an assessment cannot and should not ever have been made by simply passing it around for a casual analysis and singing kumbaya.Here is the latest storyin case you missed it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070511/ap_on_sc/fallen_object Depth of Field Management1501 Broadway Suite 1304New York, New York 10036212.302.9200Just Released / THE BAD PLUS - PROGComing 5/22/07 / MICHAEL BRECKER - PILGRIMAGE _ Create the ultimate e-mail address book. Import your contacts to Windows Live Hotmail. www.windowslive-hotmail.com/learnmore/managemail2.html?locale=en-usocid=TXT_TAGLM_HMWL_reten_impcont_0507__ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
Hi, Tracy, List No, that was the Illinois pseudo-meteorite: the BO, or Bloomington Object, not the NJO! The BO fell on March 5, 2007; the woodchipper was mentioned in print on March 9, 2007, and in a few days its career as a meteorite was over. Things take longer in New Jersey. The NJO fell or was dropped on January 3, 2007, so it's had over a five month career as a meteorite and got to do a gig at a University Museum. But it's a has-been now. Sterling K. Webb --- - Original Message - From: tracy latimer To: Darryl Pitt ; Meteorite List Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 1:25 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Hadn't the Occam's Razor explanation of this object been that it was part of a tub grinder ejected during operations while grinding up some dead trees several hundred yards away? They showed one of these babies in operation on the Discovery Channel several weeks ago, and I could easily believe one of the chipper blades broke loose and flew on the appropriate trajectory (it looks like the Sarlacc from Star Wars, with layers of rotating teeth). It seems to me part of research should be asking the guys who were using the tub grinder Hey, did you lose any of the blades out of this thing on such-and-such a date? If so, do you know where the piece went? Also, checking to see if the composition of the meteorite was comparable with a tub grinder blade. Tracy Latimer To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 06:26:42 -0400 Subject: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG It has finally been determined by experts that the NJO is not a meteorite. In Friday's AP story, Rutgers University geologist Jerry Delaney was quoted as saying,I was wrong. Sneaky little devil. The second sentiment is not even remotely accurate. As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. The only sneaky little devils are the folks at Rutgers University. Stories are released on Friday nights so the story will miss the news cycle. It's for stories that would cause embarrassment; it's for those moments where you hope the story disappears. This is just so deplorable---and it's not an isolated instance of how an institution with something to gain---and the media---work. But for scientists to be so sloppy in THEIR work is just sodisappointing. As I wrote to the list several months ago: While [this] may ultimately be among the most unusual freshly fallen meteorites known to exist, such an assessment cannot and should not ever have been made by simply passing it around for a casual analysis and singing kumbaya. Here is the latest storyin case you missed it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070511/ap_on_sc/fallen_object Depth of Field Management 1501 Broadway Suite 1304 New York, New York 10036 212.302.9200 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
Not to keep flogging this dead horse, but I also am skeptical about these guys continuing to identify the source of the object without any evidence to support! What makes them so convinced that it actually came from space? Is there an indication of ablation? There would have to be, right? It sure doesn't look like there is. They may be eating crow again... Cheers, Pete From: Darryl Pitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 06:26:42 -0400 It has finally been determined by experts that the NJO is not a meteorite. In Friday's AP story, Rutgers University geologist Jerry Delaney was quoted as saying,I was wrong. Sneaky little devil. The second sentiment is not even remotely accurate. As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. The only sneaky little devils are the folks at Rutgers University. Stories are released on Friday nights so the story will miss the news cycle. It's for stories that would cause embarrassment; it's for those moments where you hope the story disappears. This is just so deplorable---and it's not an isolated instance of how an institution with something to gain---and the media---work. But for scientists to be so sloppy in THEIR work is just sodisappointing. As I wrote to the list several months ago: While [this] may ultimately be among the most unusual freshly fallen meteorites known to exist, such an assessment cannot and should not ever have been made by simply passing it around for a casual analysis and singing kumbaya. Here is the latest storyin case you missed it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070511/ap_on_sc/fallen_object Depth of Field Management 1501 Broadway Suite 1304 New York, New York 10036 212.302.9200 Just Released / THE BAD PLUS - PROG Coming 5/22/07 / MICHAEL BRECKER - PILGRIMAGE __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Windows Live Hotmail. Even hotter than before. Get a better look now. www.newhotmail.ca?icid=WLHMENCA148 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
This incident is a sad bit of commentary on the relationship of the commercial meteorite community to scientists and, perhaps, on the state of science in general. I was able to warn Dr. Delaney early-on that the object was not a freshly fallen meteorite and to forward some of the correspondence from this list to him. He chose not to heed the warningwhich of course is his choice to make. Those of us who are lucky enough to have hundreds or thousands of meteorites pass through our hands possess a store of knowledge that has real value to academics that haven¹t had this experience. Our knowledge is, for the most part, available for the askingor sometimes even without asking. The better course for the scientist is to recognize when they need help and to resist the notion of a divide between science and the commercial world. In my experience, this is what the best scientists do. Eric Twelker http://www.meteoritemarket.com Not to keep flogging this dead horse, but I also am skeptical about these guys continuing to identify the source of the object without any evidence to support! What makes them so convinced that it actually came from space? Is there an indication of ablation? There would have to be, right? It sure doesn't look like there is. They may be eating crow again... Cheers, Pete From: Darryl Pitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 06:26:42 -0400 It has finally been determined by experts that the NJO is not a meteorite. In Friday's AP story, Rutgers University geologist Jerry Delaney was quoted as saying,I was wrong. Sneaky little devil. The second sentiment is not even remotely accurate. As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. The only sneaky little devils are the folks at Rutgers University. Stories are released on Friday nights so the story will miss the news cycle. It's for stories that would cause embarrassment; it's for those moments where you hope the story disappears. This is just so deplorable---and it's not an isolated instance of how an institution with something to gain---and the media---work. But for scientists to be so sloppy in THEIR work is just sodisappointing. As I wrote to the list several months ago: While [this] may ultimately be among the most unusual freshly fallen meteorites known to exist, such an assessment cannot and should not ever have been made by simply passing it around for a casual analysis and singing kumbaya. Here is the latest storyin case you missed it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070511/ap_on_sc/fallen_object Depth of Field Management 1501 Broadway Suite 1304 New York, New York 10036 212.302.9200 Just Released / THE BAD PLUS - PROG Coming 5/22/07 / MICHAEL BRECKER - PILGRIMAGE __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Windows Live Hotmail. Even hotter than before. Get a better look now. www.newhotmail.ca?icid=WLHMENCA148 __ 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] SNEAKY LITTLE DEVILS NJO CONFIRMED METEORWRONG
It has finally been determined by experts that the NJO is not a meteorite. In Friday's AP story, Rutgers University geologist Jerry Delaney was quoted as saying,I was wrong. Sneaky little devil. The second sentiment is not even remotely accurate. As I mentioned to the list in January, there was absolutely nothing about the NJO which resembled a new meteorite. I advised the Newark Star Ledger, The New York Times and AP in writing that the NJO was not a meteorite. I contacted the museum at Rutgers prior to their exhibition of the object---which generated the largest attendance on a single day---that this was not a meteorite. The only sneaky little devils are the folks at Rutgers University. Stories are released on Friday nights so the story will miss the news cycle. It's for stories that would cause embarrassment; it's for those moments where you hope the story disappears. This is just so deplorable---and it's not an isolated instance of how an institution with something to gain---and the media---work. But for scientists to be so sloppy in THEIR work is just sodisappointing. As I wrote to the list several months ago: While [this] may ultimately be among the most unusual freshly fallen meteorites known to exist, such an assessment cannot and should not ever have been made by simply passing it around for a casual analysis and singing kumbaya. Here is the latest storyin case you missed it. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070511/ap_on_sc/fallen_object Depth of Field Management 1501 Broadway Suite 1304 New York, New York 10036 212.302.9200 Just Released / THE BAD PLUS - PROG Coming 5/22/07 / MICHAEL BRECKER - PILGRIMAGE __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
