Rob Wesel http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com ------------------ We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of the dreams. Willy Wonka, 1971
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Weir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Rob Wesel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Meteorite List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] AD - A FEW DANDYS
Hi Rob,
I don't mean to sound like I'm picking on you or your nice ungrouped primitive achondrite, but I don't see NWA 2653 listed in the new MetBull Preview. In keeping with the conventions which Jeff has taught us just recently, perhaps your stone would be better listed as "provisional" or something similar, rather than using the term "official classification". It is not official until it's published in the Bulletin. Just my thoughts.
David
Rob Wesel wrote:Hi David
The NAU website listed 1839 as a pairing, I will look and see now if it should be removed from the description. It sounds like it should come the publishing of MetBull #89 if the classification holds. That is easy enough to do.
I agree with your assessment that the two classifications are mutually exclusive which is why I have it listed at the top of my page as a PUA. One can not deny, however, the fact that CV has come up as a POSSIBILITY given that O-isotopes plot on the CV mixing line. I agree, it is one or the other and for now the official classification is PUA with the very enigmatic isotope data. I don't claim it to be, though I mention the possibility several times, a CV7. It is in my opinion doubtful that any scientist will take an official position to that end, but science continues on it and perhaps one day the isotope data will be further hypothesized.
Does my description talk in circles, yes, but the scientists that studied this and made the classification made the CV caveat.
______________________________________________ Meteorite-list mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
