"Doug, not to be blunt, but this entire conversation is an 'Extremely',
'Old', 'Archaic', "Fossil" of a subject that it is almost boring to
most of
us..."
Hi Greg,
Thanks Greg for that thought and precisely for that reason if you want
a classification changed it is strange to mix a dead horse with what
you would like to be another live one a.k.a. removing the 'aubrite'
classification.
I do think it is strange that these classification corrections haven't
been made (as you can see in my post) and Drs. Bunch and Irving have
made believers out of me; one can only respect the resources they
dedicated to elucidating the variations of this crapped up old pile of
earth rocks that is almost boring to a few of us that were meteorites
at one time and are just weathered ghosts of what they once were.
What is your reply to this 2011 EL6 poster? Is it 'acceptable' to you
since aubrite is removed? Or must more blood be drawn from the stone
;-) I don't mean to be blunt either and please accept my apology which
I offer in advance if there are ruffled feathers somewhere due to this
classification.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/metsoc2011/pdf/5298.pdf
But everyone who was on the list certainly heard about that
classification problem ... and likely from you ... and likely more than
once ... and why give more airtime to it (could it be this is a
discussion group and not a solution group?), because only a few care:
that's your "dead horse" and other discussion ending logic. I
respectfully disagree and I think attitude has a lot to do with the
present problem (this is not directed at anyone specific, and most
definitely NOT the scientists – they get kudos). A simple email to the
editor at this point should be what is needed; no one likes getting
yelled at to do something, I'm sure no one is happy to change it now.
Any other air time is likely to only result in character assassination,
“Get it right!” to Met Soc editors, do they get paid to listen to
that?; so to be clear, what's the point of it on the list other than
entertainment value or public humiliation?
The nomenclature of fossil/paleo/ancient is entirely another issue.
But by shoving the fossil/paleo issue forward when marketing this
material, for some rusted out relicts, well, let's just say that by
tying two dead horses together, neither does the other any favors.
This continues to be a marketing representation every time someone buys
this material, and we must be vigilant to keep ideas about finding
fossil life in meteorites divorced from our observations given past
'problems' and media distortion.
On eBay, the majority of these are currently marketed as fossil
aubrites. The one that says EL3 says it has many metal flecks in it
(does that make sense? Wow if so, kind of makes me wonder if it really
isn’t just a highly weathered meteorite, like other cheapo rusted-out
meteorites, that happened to get in some old lakebed.)
I mean, let’s see the stages of a meteorite:
fresh fall $$$; fresh find $$; weathered find $; highly weathered find
¢¢; tons of barely recognizable relict ¢/$ ?
Maybe, if that is what the customer likes. But there are hundreds of
new list members that would be interested in the relict definition (and
why the meteoritical society chose that) and hundreds more that worry
about the classification. General material is always cycled on the
list and that allows newer members to participate rather than be told
what is right and see how these things evolve. You really shouldn't be
speaking for "most of us" on my fossil hot button. For every
mouthpiece on the list there are 50 more folks that have no strong
opinion or find it all interesting.
Respectfully yours, as always, facts … are optional but you are welcome
to kindly add them;
But only I will read my paleo horse his last rights especially when the
smart money is on him! ;-)
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Hupé <[email protected]>
To: Meteorite-list <[email protected]>
Sent: Sat, Dec 3, 2011 1:00 am
Subject: [meteorite-list] "Al Hagg".. Get it Right.. Finally!
Hi Doug and All,
Doug, not to be blunt, but this entire conversation is an 'Extremely',
'Old', 'Archaic', "Fossil" of a subject that it is almost boring to
most of
us... Unless you really understand 'et al'...
The bottom line is, money or not, get the facts corrected before more
collectors continue to buy 'misinformed' Aubrites.. Bottom Line!!!
This is one of those ongoing subjects that one needs to understand
before
they step in their own mud...!
Best Regards,
Greg
====================
Greg Hupé
The Hupé Collection
[email protected]
www.LunarRock.com
NaturesVault (eBay)
IMCA 3163
====================
Click here for my current eBay auctions:
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault
-----Original Message-----
From: MexicoDoug
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 11:15 PM
To: [email protected] ;
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] NAwhat'sME (was...Are these meteorites???)
"http://www4.nau.edu/meteorite/Meteorite/Al_Haggounia.html";
Wow, what a great and insightful page to these stones. Maske one want
to get on a plane and go digging themselves. Does the list have an
opionion of this already or is it one of those things that fell between
the sofa cushions and never got cleaned up?
What is the status of the proposed reclassification in the Bulletin as
an EL3? If it hasn't been done yet can anyone post an opposing view to
keep the aubrite or other classifications alive?
Maybe it hasn't been done because this relict meteorite is being called
a "fossil"? I've heard of fossil living people but fossil meteorites -
please let's not go there! Seems like there is more than one change
being proposed on this page. Best IMO - one thing at a time, leave
that battle for another time.
IMO:
The use of the word 'fossil' for dug up minerals according to this
dictionary is obsolete:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fossil
...but beyond that for any it is extremely confusing to the commercial
side of this especially to innocent buyers and hopefully the IMCA and
other alike groups can regulate this if it sounds reasonable; since it
is generally used to describe for living organisms or structures left
by them, and therefore has associated with it an air of ancient life to
the new collector, and there is no need to evoke this term any more
than 'aubrite' if in fact that doesn't fit. As for 'paleo', it sounds
like a $2 word for $0.06 per gram meteorite as well.
Relict is a perfect term and even has precedence as it has been used
throughout the Chicxulub studies to describe the tektites which in a
similar fasion have been incorporated into sediment.
So after reading the excellent and painstaking work by Drs. Ted Bunch
and A. Irving, one has to wonder where Conan the Barbarian is just to
come in and say:
They are relicts and they are EL3's, further use of any other mentioned
terms is immediately hereby suspended until noticed by the axe-wielding
squad ;-), or an opposing view makes its stand in a peer-reviewed
article.
Kindest wishes
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: JoshuaTreeMuseum <[email protected]>
To: meteorite-list <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, Dec 2, 2011 10:19 pm
Subject: [meteorite-list] Are these meteorites???
More than 20 pairings?:
The Al Haggounia "Fossil or Paleo" Meteorite Problem:
http://www4.nau.edu/meteorite/Meteorite/Al_Haggounia.html
Phil Whitmer
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
