My argument is that clarification of the magnetic properties of meteorites is a great idea and in agreement with you. My problem with your posts is simply not to start saying that meteorites are usually not magnetic, when in fact most are magnetic. Your points are addressed below with your statements.-DD En un mensaje con fecha 01/06/2005 12:40:24 PM Mexico Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribe:
>Dear Doug; >Try telling that nit-picky scientific story Dave, with all due respect, the explanation was for you, and it looks like I tried telling it to you and it got the message across perfectly fine. You're doing the nit-picking of the great article that appeared in the paper, so don't call the kettle black (or whatever the appropriate English idiom is here), please consider that the nit-picker is foremost your post. >to those that carry a paper clip on a string and actively use that simple >tool to distinguish magnetic meteorites in the field......BAH!!! That is hogwash, plain and simple as far as I can see. This evokes imagery of a Macedonian flank of paperclip on a string "amateurs" combing the landscape with their modified meteorite divining rods to me. Most people know that iron is magnetic, so you have it the other way around. On the other hand if you stop improperly nit-picking the definition of magnetic and just say "meteorites attract magnets", "meteorites are magnetic" but, "meteorites aren't magnets", I think your campaign will succeed better... This strategy you have will have you look at every shorthand definition and refurbish it. Why stick with magnetic. When we say fusion crust I bet plenty of people think of a pizza pie (with spinach topping so it is magnetic), by that logic. Well maybe someone ought ought to tell the amateurs that the nit-picky definition of a fusion crust so they don't bring amylase as a field testing reagent. >Guess I deal with too many amateur field hunters and not enough >acadamians like yourself. I am not an acadamnation so please don't play psychologist / politician and unfairly type my personality based on certain posts - I assure you they are only one aspect of my personality and I am capable of relating as well as you without manipulating on-topic arguments as I feel you do this one. Now that you have manipulated me on the defensive (by saying that "I" am an "acadamian", nearly a dirty word) with that worthless and very loaded comment, perhaps I should mention that I haven't seen a classroom in a decade or two. I spend most of my time dealing (mason, electrician, checking) with poorly constructed buildings by Mexican standards, that are falling apart. The list provides me a wondrous escape to mull about what I really love with like minded people and wish I could do 25 hours a day. I read and try to assimilate as much as I can. I try to stick to the subject matter and not start studying the people, though it can get hard at times. I have attempted to provide content to the list and would appreciate the both the explicit as well a covert personal attacks when I am on my best behavior not provolking the bad side of me that doesn't need much to join in. >Para-nuttic, >Dave F. I enjoy your posts, jokes, we have one disagreement here, and that doesn't influence the rest. And don't forget, didn't you say recently that the way to get a great geology academic background was to read the Audubon Field Guide to Rocks and Miinerals. Don't your recall the quotes I provided on the last round where that guide that you give accolades to clearly considers paramagnetic rocks like hematite and non-magnetized magnetite as magnetic...and we know they aren't magnets. Ferro-nuttically, Doug ______________________________________________ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
