Nelson, Everything I stated is accurate except calling NWA 1836, NWA 1838, a simple mistake which I gladly own up to. We turned over the lab results of meteorites we studied for Habibi when you acquired the stones and we were not compensated for doing so. I would say this is classifying your stones for free. Anyway, Why are you using the NWA 1877 and NWA 1110 designations on your web site?
All the best, Adam ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 6:19 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Congratulations Adam! > Dear List and Adam, I see nothing in the abstract that says I am incorrect. > I stated that I paid to have the said meteorites classified and that at the > time of their classifying I had the main masses. We all know that this can > and does usually change. Congrats on your piece of 1817, although I'm not > clear on how you don't require your own classification number. As for 1827, > all others are pairings so that is correct. As far as the abstract goes it > says nothing at all about 1836, which you incorrectly called 1838. Actually, > I only announced that I paid for these, because in one of your posts you > (falsely)stated you paid for over a dozen of mine. I still don't know how > that could happen, since all the over 50 I've paid to classify I got > directly billed and paid. Curious, could it be you might have erred? At any > rate I appreciate your vehement efforts to keep us all on track. You're > quite a guy! Thanks Nels > > > ______________________________________________ > Meteorite-list mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list ______________________________________________ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
