so what are they calling portales?
i will be gradually switching over to yahoo mail (it has 100 FREE megs of storage). please cc to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: Robert Woolard [EMAIL PROTECTED]CC: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.comSubject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley
Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the list for
asking;
I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary
chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It
would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own group instead
of
ihave one that is 70% etched metal- i think i'm gonna break off the stone part and just call it and iron octahedrite and get rid of the guess work.
i will be gradually switching over to yahoo mail (it has 100 FREE megs of storage). please cc to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: "Tom Knudson" [EMAIL
: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the list for
asking;
I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary
chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new classification? It
would seem to me
I was the lazy editor of the MetBull when PV fell, so I can tell you the story.
Basically, two scientists were in communication with the NomCom during the
classification, Dave Kring and Alan Rubin. There were two schools of
thought on what to call it, and these were not really that far
apart.
peregrineflier
- Original Message -
From: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Tom ,
I
PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hi Bob,
I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for
reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed
:11 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the
list for
asking;
I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary
chondrite because they were to lazy to make up a new
classification?
It
would
- Original Message -
From: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Tom,
The word 'lazy
:39 PM
To: Bob Holmes; Robert Woolard; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Hi Bob,
The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine.
I know, sorry if I made it sound like you said it. I wanted to know if
it
was laziness or what
17, 2005 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Maybe Tom could use the tip of reading more books and papers and asking
a few less questions that are not really up to speed with the issues.
Dave
Bob Holmes wrote:
Tom,
The word 'lazy' came from your
PROTECTED]
To: Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Tom Knudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Woolard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Maybe Tom could use the tip of reading
Tom,
I agree with Bob. Ask anyone who anxiously waited for the official
classification of Portales Valley to be released, and you will find that
with few exceptions, every one was shaking their heads in disbelief when
the announcement was made. I seriously doubt that anyone spoke negatively
Hola Tom,
No one said you are stupid (except your own post)! You are ruffling some
feathers because your comments seem to be too insensitive. Scientists -
which can include even you and me - normally have no problem being questioned
(well, sort of...), that is typically how progress is
If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about the
original classification?
Things are reclassified all the time. Mount Egerton was originally classified
as a mesosiderite, it is now an aubrite. Yilmia was an EL5 and is now an EL6.
There are lots of other examples. As
Great post Doug,
Geeze, learning from othersinteresting concept!
Dave F.
(who is not proud tom, and is not a blogger participant ever) and would
like to see Mr. Tom get some help somewhere before he turns into a
paranoid schizophrenic!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hola Tom,
No one said you are
Knudson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bob Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED];
JKGwilliam [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
Great post Doug,
Geeze, learning from othersinteresting concept!
Dave F.
(who is not proud tom
Hello Robert and all,
I've always considered PV a round peg in a square hole. I mean that even a
quick glance at PV is enough to know it doesn't make sense to lump it in with
the run-of-the-mill ordinary chondrite. So this change in heart by the
classification gods is really good news.
I had a nice evening chat with Dr. Ruzicka a while back, this paper is the
completion of a very long endeavor. He is very erudite and enthusiastic on
the subject and I am glad to see the finished work. Portales Valley deserves
it.
Rob Wesel
http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com
--
19 matches
Mail list logo
