My apologies to all on the List, I neglected to send my reply in "plain text", so you don't have the benefit of knowing what Jason is replying to. Here is reprint of that missing post:
On Thursday, January 23, 2014 12:48 AM, Robert Verish <[email protected]> wrote: I started to write a reply but then I realized that I was just repeating what I wrote earlier. So, I'll just reprint it here: >> But, to directly answer your question, I would have to refer you to my >> latest Meteorite-Times article: >> http://meteorite-recovery.tripod.com/2014/jan14.htm >> for my description of how a cluster of obviously-paired fragments found at >> SBW had such a variation in "looks", >> that it prompted me to sample a number of them and to actually have two of >> those fragments classified. >> For your convenience, I'll show them here: >> >> Pinto Mountains -- (L6 S3 W1 Fa23.8+/-0.3% n=16; low-Ca pyroxene Fs20.3Wo1.5 n=17)-- 1955 stone >> San Bernardino Wash -- (L5 S2 W3 Fa24.6+/-0.6% (n=7) -- (UCLA type-specimen) >> -- 2010 stone >> San Bernardino Wash -- (L5 S1 W3 Fa24.0+/-0.2% (n=24) >> -- 2012A fragment >> San Bernardino Wash -- (L5 S2 W1 Fa23.8+/-0.4% (n=14) >> -- 2012B fragment > > > >'Nuff said. > >Bob V. > > > > ______________________________________________ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
