Re: [meteorite-list] Ebay seller AZPotpourri
Dear All; So what ever happened to the IMCA and Ebay thing where the two were on the same page so this fraudulent seller could be banned from ebay for commiting such a noticable fraudulent auction? Did anything ever become of the idea??? Dave F. mjwy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello List, The IMCA Board received emails throughout the day pointing out the questionable Ebay auctions by AZpotpourri, Here is one of them: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=6626773556 Our ever diligent Ken Newton contacted the seller and pointed out some obvious errors and problems with those auctions, not the least being the name Harvey Nininger Meteorite Collection. The seller responded quickly that he had already received several emails and had decided to cancel the auctions rather than look like a fraud. Later this evening Ken contacted him again pointing out the problem with his ME page still advertising the said Collection, and a shadowy Organization. Again he responded quickly, rewrote his ME page and thanked Ken. I believe this is a Ebay seller who has learned an important lesson today: Don't mess with the Meteorite Community!!! Thank you for being part of it. Anne M. Black www.IMPACTIKA.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] President, I.M.C.A. Inc. www.IMCA.cc __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
AW: [meteorite-list] RE: Doing the rounds -Part I
Hi Sterling, I feared, that with my bad english, I would have to write an long reply, let's try. It is NOT NOT TRUE! First of all, perhaps to clarify, I was speaking about the times roughly beginning at 800 A.D., when here in Europe the broad mass of text-witnesses starts to appear. And there you have simply the result, that all texts speak from the Earth as a ball and that the late-antique Fathers, where not taught nor had any reception at all. Please take your Cosmas Indicopleustes, which was taken by the philologists of modern times as main witness for a flat Earth! Here we have the problem, that Latin was the languague of traffic and science and we simply have no Latin translation of Cosmas. The text you mentioned was unknown in medieaval times. It was recovered by Bernard de Montfaucon in the 18th century, who cared for the first translation from Greek to Latin. And we have no single text-witness for Cosmas from the mentioned period. Nor can we find any remarkable reception of Firmianus Lactantius (ca. 300 A.D.) another flat-worldler. Of course there were some flat-Earthener among the times of fathers, but that image of the world was thought as an ideological supersession from the pagan antique image of the world and had only a little influence to the following centuries, and in those times from 800 on, practically all cosmographic, encyclopaedic and even non-Latin simple texts, have a round earth. And the institution of writing and education were the church. A second cause for that rumour of a flat-Earth, was the complete misunderstanding in modern times of the Antipodes-issue, a discussion held from Augustinus' times on over the whole mediaeval aerea. The terra icognita. And here wasn't the discussion about, whether possible antipodes on the other side of a flat world would fall down as the modern philologist speculated, but the issue was, whether they could be reached at all. And Augustinus', a Father of immense authority for catholic church in mediaeval times, argumentation was, that this could be not possible, as, according to the world view of his times, the regions around the equator couldn't be crossed, as they were thought to be to hot, because of the high altitudes of Sun there. Thus possible antipodes couldn't be evangelized, as it was the mandate given in the bible, consequently, sorry Norbert, there can't be any antipodes. You find this fear of the equator regions still much later, with the navigation along Africa's coast. Take Cabo de Nao (Cape No), approx. the latitude of the Canary Isles or even more to the South Cape Bojador (Cape of Fear), which was thought to be insurmountable. Btw. Augustinus spoke from the shape of Earth as moles globosa (a globe-shaped mass). The first text, who wrongly told, that Augustinus has a flat disk, was published by Johannes Dryander in 1563, but the reason, why still today that legend of a mediaeval disk is still alive, is that it was claimed in the very popular collection of legends of Saints, the Acta Sanctorum, which were published in, as far I know, 1643. And this work was the water of the mills of the reconnaissance, who declared the mediaeval time to a dark epoch. The main reason for the flat-Earth-legend was the modern - with modern I mean always 16th-19th century, as in 20th century history of science and philology unanimously have no doubts anymore that in mediaeval times a ball-shaped Earth was common sense - the main reason was the misreading of the mediaeval Rota-maps, he wheel-shaped world maps. Let's take for example the Map of Heresford (ca. 1300): http://academics.vmi.edu/gen_ed/map.jpg or the unfortunately in WWII burned Ebstorf map: http://kuerzer.de/Ebstorf (ca. 1300). or those Beatus-maps from 8th. century on: http://kuerzer.de/Osmo Those maps never were thought to represent the entire and physical world, they display a PART of the world, the known inhabited world, the diaspora. They are a sector of the world. Btw, if you put a circle on a globe with Jerusalem as center as those maps have, those maps fits quite well. To indicate, that it's a part of the globe, those maps are circular, not because it was thought to be a disk. There exist also other maps for other purposes, which are rectangular (for instance those Noachids`maps, who show the distribution of the tribes originated from Noah's sons). Please note the important detail on the maps, that outward all around is painted water. This helps a lot to understand those maps, if one knows, that it was then a highly discussed question, how much of the globe was covered by water. Only Francis Bacon, based on the 4th book Esdra (or Esra, 1st century), took a ratio water:land of 1:6. Ptolemy (quoting Aristoteles) had sometimes 5:1 and 3:1 - his work was translated twice, once from Greek, once from Arabic into Latin (from Gehard of Cremona, 1114-1187) and was accessible in Europe and in use at the universities from the second half of the 12th. century. The Islamic savants, who
RE: [meteorite-list] Fireball reported over Tucson
Well Mr Afonso, I have recovered (along with parters or found myself) now 6 Lunar meteorites now out of 42 known, so I am pretty good at it. One is already classified in the lab, and will be announced any minute. The other is already on it's way to the lab, but if you knew anything about meteorites, you would know that Lunar material is pretty simple to recognize. Thanks for your comments on my Ourique recovery. I could not answer you as I was busy in the desert for two weeks, finding over 65 new meteorites. I saved over 3 kilograms of the Ourique from rotting in the ground MONTHS after the fall. Too bad the outstanding scientists of Portugal left so many pieces laying on the ground in plain view to be rained upon for month. It must have been a weathering study. I suppose you were too busy to drive a few kilometers to go down yourself and take care of business? It is funny how you cry and whine, like a little child who really messed up and just refuses to admit it. No go crawl back under that rock you have been hiding under for the last few years and let the real men do the meteorite hunting. Science now has 2 more RARE moon meteorites to study, and it is thanks to people like me. How many meteorites have you donated to Science? I can't wait till the next fall in Portugal, beautiful country, and with the exception of yourself, very nice people. I will go and save that meteorite from being lost forever as well. Michael Farmer -Original Message- From: Armando Afonso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 1:59 AM To: Michael Farmer Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Fireball reported over Tucson How did you identified it as lunar? By sight? Have you any kind of formal training on this subjects, or you are simply a curious? AA - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'metlist' meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 6:21 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Fireball reported over Tucson I just saw on the 10:00 pm news that a large fireball was seen over Tucson descending behind the Rincon Mountains to the east of the city. Anyone know of any other reports? Mike Farmer PS: I have just returned from a meteorite hunting trip, and have a brand new Lunar (actually two) to report. News out soon, but one of our very own list members has found TWO new moon rocks in the last 40 days while searching for meteorites with me! __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] ad Hello everyone I have out of touch for a while. Sale
Hello everyone I have moved to Northern California, I think I figured out how to get this e-mail through to the list. (I hope) This is my new e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] I sent a message to everyone in my address book, but many of them did not go through. So I hope I will get back in touch with some of you here. On a recent trip to Glorieta I found a new 4 kilo Glorieta pallasite / siderite. The reason I use both terms is that it is an oriented (forgive me if I used the wrong term) nose cone. My guess is it came off the main mass shortly before impact with earth. But it is also a pallasite, my guess is maybe a kilo of it has (visible) olivine's in it. I hope to post some pictures to photobucket soon when I do I will post a link. Thanks -- Mike Miller Po Box 314 Gerber Ca 96035 meteoritefinder.com 530-385-1281 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] sale ad. Darwin glass
Hello List. My first ad ever. I posted it here not do much to spruik the ebay auction ,rather ,so the list knows who is behind it.(dont let that stop anybody mind :-) ). Regards from Oz Peter Dippl http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=6627490963rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMESE%3AITrd=1 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] sale ad. Darwin glass
Hello List. My first ad ever. I posted it here not do much to spruik the ebay auction ,rather ,so the list knows who is behind it.(dont let that stop anybody mind :-) ). Regards from Oz Peter Dippl http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=6627490963rd=1sspagename=STRK%3AMESE%3AITrd=1 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] PA Bolide of July 23rd 2001
In a message dated 5/4/2006 10:45:01 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I went back East and interviewed eye-witnesses andtriangulated their sightings. I narrowed-down JimRichardson's original results to an area in Central PAsomewhere south of Coudersport and west of Wellsboro. This is the most dense forest in the entire state andis actually known as the "Grand Canyon of PA". Most unfortunate drop zone.No meteorites were ever recovered.Bob V. Bob; I worked on this bolide sighting for a while when it was brought up a few years ago and narrowed the search area down to an area about 5 miles south of Austin. A lot of unknowns here and eyewitness accounts are invaluable when trying to home in on it. If we traveled to the area right after the fall, the information gathered from the locals would have been fresh in their minds. Nailing down the last close encounter is the key. It saves weeks off the hiking time. I should know. Kris Henkel __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Re: possible impact crater -- Nicaragua, Chad, Algeria
Hello Sterling, All, I do realize that the'craters' that I found were not, indeed,holes in the ground. However, the 'craters' that I found, would notbe depressions as you described.Each consists of features well over~15-20km across, the diameter necessary to create a complex crater, and would therefore consist of a central upliftwith a series ofconcentric (raised) ridges. In order to view mine correctly, try zooming out to forty miles or so and having a look from up there. A much larger circular feature can be seen about the central uplift of my favorite candidate. (Visible at21 17' 10.89N 19 20'35.61E )This would be the area around the uplift that was shocked andmelted to some degree and also somewhat displaced. The other consists of a large uplift and a single upraised ring about it, making it appear very similar to the large impact feature recently discovered near the Egypt-Libya border. The features that you describe -- a hole in the ground with a raised rim --apply only to simple craters (which cannot, in most cases, at least here onEarth, exceed the limit of approximately 15-20km in diameter).Stefan's feature, measuring in at approximatelynine miles across, appears to be a rather large example (if it is actually a meteorite crater) of a simple crater. Here's an informative site that you might want to read, as it has some rather good information on the subject. http://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/slidesets/impacts.html also, try this: http://www.solarviews.com/eng/tercrate.htm Regards, Jason On 5/3/06, Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Stefan, List I think you got a crater there! The most impressive viewis to set your altitude around 30 or 40 miles up, orient yourself to the NE of the crater, looking to the SW, then tilt the viewuntil your eye level is at about 4 miles up, and zoom in slightly.Wow! That is a classic crater. That view alone is convincing...almost. It needs to be seriously investigated. Google Earth's view can be deceptive. I always trace therim and cavity of what appears to be a crater and read offthe altitudes to see it actually has a crater's geometric shape. Parts of the Nicaraguan crater's rim are half a kilometer ormore above the floor. Jason Utas' candidate in Chad is an example of thedeceptiveness of visual features. Knowing the shape of acrater, we interpret the dark areas in the floor of what looks like a crater as depressed and the bright featuresas central uplift and rim, but the dark features are actuallyas high or higher than the bright ones. When you tilt the viewyou see that the whole feature is elevated, like a squashed mountain. Oddly, it seems to be set in a square embayment.Very strange. It doesn't look entirely volcanic but it doesn'tlook much like a crater, either.Kevin Forbes' Algerian feature is essentially flat and consists of concentric rings of contrasting materials. Its appearancereminds me a lot of the much larger Richat Dome in Mauritania,whose crater or not status has been argued over for a long time.Currently, we don't think the Richat is a crater, but a domed, layered structure sliced off flat to reveal its layers. His lessprobable structure looks more like a crater in the tilted view,but it is too battered to tell much. The Sahara is not kind,even to rocks... Sterling K. Webb Original Message -From: Stefan Brandes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Meteorite-list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 1:21 PMSubject: [meteorite-list] meteorite-list] possible impact crater Hi list, has anybody heard about an impact crater in Nicaragua at coordinates : 13°21' N / 85° 57' W It´s about 12km in diameter and the town of Las Praderas lies directly in the center. It´s very good to see in Google Earth. As far as I know it´s definitely no volcano. Any ideas? Thanks Stefan __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.comhttp://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Mars Exploration Rover Update - May 4, 2006
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/status.html#opportunity OPPORTUNITY UPDATE: 'Victoria' in View - sol 804-810, May 04, 2006: Opportunity executed a three-sol examination of Brookville outcrop with tools on the robotic arm. This work included microscopic imaging, a brushing, 16 total hours of integrated data gathering with the Moessbauer spectrometer, and an overnight integration with the alpha particle X-ray spectrometer. Then Opportunity stowed its arm and drove 107 meters (351 feet) in three sols, reaching a point estimated to be 1,279 meters (less than eight-tenths of a mile) from Victoria Crater. The team believes the rim of the crater is becoming visible in a vertically stretched image looking south. Sol-by-sol summaries: Sol 804 (April 28, 2006): This was the first sol of robotic arm work on Brookville. The rover took microscopic images, then brushed the target and followed with an afternoon data collection by the Moessbauer spectrometer. The rover observed a target called Great Bend with the miniature thermal emission spectrometer during the afternoon communication-relay session with NASA's Mars Odyssey orbiter. Sol 805: Opportunity did morning atmospheric science and positioned the alpha particle X-ray spectrometer. The rover used that spectrometer on Brookville until taking morning images of Gila Bend using 13 filters of the panoramic camera. Sol 806: On the final sol of arm work on Brookville, Opportunity changed tools to the Moessbauer spectrometer and completed an afternoon integration. At 7:00 p.m. local solar time, the team stopped the integration and Opportunity did a mini-deep sleep. Sol 807: The panoramic camera took 13-filter images of the arm's brushing target. Then Opportunity drove for 30 minutes. After driving, the rover observed the surroundings from its new position with the navigation camera and looked in the drive direction with the panoramic camera. Sol 808: Opportunity drove for an hour and 10 minutes in the compass direction of 150 degrees (south southeast), then took images from its new location. During the afternoon, the rover made observations with the thermal emission spectrometer and used the panoramic camera to check atmospheric clarity. It used the deep-sleep mode overnight. Sol 809: Opportunity took another 1-hour-and-10-minute drive followed by imaging and atmospheric science during the Odyssey pass. Sol 810 (May 5, 2006): The rover was directed to take rear-looking images with the navigation camera during the morning of sol 810 as part of plan uplinked on sol 809. The plan for uplink on sol 810 includes a 15-meter (50-foot) approach to a target for using the robotic arm's tools to inspect ripple banding during the weekend, plus post-drive imaging with the navigation camera and panoramic camera. As of sol 809 (May 4, 2006) Opportunity has driven 7,575.51 meters (4.71 miles). __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Cassini Flies by Titan, Sees More Craters
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/media/cassinif-20060503.html Cassini Flies by Titan, Sees More Craters May 3, 2006 Saturn's moon Titan continued to surprise scientists during a flyby that took Cassini into regions previously unexplored by radar. Two very noticeable circular features, possible impact craters or calderas, appear in the latest radar images taken during the flyby on April 30, 2006. [impact crater or a cryovolcanic caldera ] Image right: This circular feature might be an impact crater or a cryovolcanic caldera. Image credit: NASA/JPL + Full image and caption http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/pia08425.html + Browse version of image http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/media/cassinif-20060503.html/images/content/148033main_pia08425-browse.jpg The flyby targeted Xanadu, one of the most prominent features on Titan, visible even from telescopes on Earth. The origin of Xanadu is still unknown, but the radar images reveal details previously unseen, such as numerous curvy features that may indicate fluid flows. Scientists speculate that two prominent circular features are probably impact craters but they don't rule out the possibility that they might be calderas or volcanoes. Sand dunes, discovered in previous flybys, continue to crisscross Titan's surface. Communication from the spacecraft was temporarily interrupted for nearly five hours during the data playback following the flyby. The most important science data from the flyby were protected by a contingency plan put in place in advance of the flyby. The flight team believes the outage was likely due to a galactic cosmic-ray hit on a power switch in the spacecraft communications subsystem. The anomaly resulted in the loss of some science data. However, the spacecraft is now performing normally. This was the 14th Titan flyby for Cassini, with nine more remaining this year. The next will be May 20, 2006. During the nominal four-year mission Cassini will perform 45 Titan flybys. The Cassini-Huygens mission is a cooperative project of NASA, the European Space Agency and the Italian Space Agency. JPL, a division of Caltech, manages the mission for NASA's Science Mission Directorate. The Cassini orbiter was designed, developed and assembled at JPL. For images and more information, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/cassini and http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov . Media contact: Carolina Martinez/JPL (818) 354-9382 __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Mars Odyssey THEMIS Images: May 1-5, 2006
MARS ODYSSEY THEMIS IMAGES May 1-5, 2006 o Windstreaks (Released 01 May 2006) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20060501a o Crater Slide (Released 02 May 2006) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20060502a o Ares Vallis (Released 03 May 2006) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20060503a o Clouds (Released 04 May 2006) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20060504a o Dune Field (Released 05 May 2006) http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20060505a All of the THEMIS images are archived here: http://themis.asu.edu/latest.html NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory manages the 2001 Mars Odyssey mission for NASA's Office of Space Science, Washington, D.C. The Thermal Emission Imaging System (THEMIS) was developed by Arizona State University, Tempe, in co.oration with Raytheon Santa Barbara Remote Sensing. The THEMIS investigation is led by Dr. Philip Christensen at Arizona State University. Lockheed Martin Astronautics, Denver, is the prime contractor for the Odyssey project, and developed and built the orbiter. Mission operations are conducted jointly from Lockheed Martin and from JPL, a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Comet Schwassmann-Wachmann 3's Breakup Near Earth Offers Viewing Spectacle
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/health/bal-hs.comet05may05,0,7176805.story Comet's breakup near Earth offers viewing spectacle By Frank D. Roylance Baltimore Sun May 5, 2006 Astronomers will have a ringside seat during the coming weeks as a dying comet with a tongue-twisting name flies past the Earth and literally falls apart in front of their eyes. Comet 73P/Schwassmann-Wachmann 3 is buzzing the Earth -- closer than any comet in 23 years. It's gliding by as close as 5.5 million miles away, barely 20 times the moon's distance from the Earth. Even better for scientists, SW3's icy nucleus is coming undone like the seeds of a dandelion in a stiff wind, revealing the physical and chemical secrets of its interior. Astronomers have counted at least 59 fragments already, and there's no end in sight. It's driving us nuts; fragments of fragments of fragments, said Don Yeomans, manager of NASA's Near Earth Objects Program office at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. It is his job to keep track of them all and tell astronomers where to find them. It's doing its best to make our lives miserable, he said, laughing. As near as it is coming in astronomical terms, scientists insist there is no danger that SW3 will collide with the Earth, although its debris may produce a small meteor shower years from now. The comet's fragments are too small to produce a naked-eye spectacle, like comets Hyakutake in 1996 and Hale-Bopp in 1997. But one or two may be visible in the eastern sky for the next two weeks. You will need binoculars and a dark location. Look in the late evening. The comet is moving through the Summer Triangle, formed by the bright stars Vega, Altair and Deneb. It will drop closer to the eastern horizon each night. Many amateurs are already watching the comet's bust-up through backyard telescopes. I was able to hit it right away, said Tim Hickman, 60, who first photographed the comet's largest fragment April 15 from his backyard in Timonium. It's kind of cool to see one breaking up, the end of the life of a comet. It looked like a miniature comet, with a little head and a little tail. During several hours at his eyepiece, he said, I could actually see its motion relative to the stars. But it's been too faint to see with the naked eye. Hal Weaver, a planetary astronomer at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, had this advice: The next two weeks is when it's going to be brightest. People should get out there with their binoculars. Weaver has been leading a Hubble Space Telescope team watching the comet break apart. But he also plans to try to see SW3 with his own eyes. Why? My gosh, this thing is breaking apart, he said. Maybe it's the last time people will be able to see it. You can say you were there. The comet was discovered in 1930 by the German astronomers Arnold Schwassmann and Arno Arthur Wachmann. Subsequent calculations revealed that it circles once every 5 1/2 years between the sun and the orbit of Jupiter. But it wasn't seen again until 1979. Astronomers missed it in 1985, but found it again in 1990. On its 1995 return, SW3 startled everyone, Weaver said. It got dramatically brighter in a short period of time, and shortly after that people started seeing more than one nucleus. The comet -- a hunk of ice and dust that astronomers estimate was once 1 to 3 miles long, had broken apart. Now they had four fragments -- A, B, C and D. Only two were spotted on the comet's return in 2000. But astronomers had to peer all the way across the solar system to see it at all. Weaver applied for observation time on Hubble to watch the comet's 2006 return, hoping that SW3's fragment C had survived. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Will Winter Kill The Mars Rovers?
http://www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=aid=4220 Will winter kill the Mars rovers? Spirit and Opportunity prepare for a second winter on Mars. Michael Carroll Astronomy Magazine May 4, 2006 With temperatures plummeting on Mars, the twin rovers Spirit and Opportunity have been literally racing for survival. The heart of martian winter is less than 100 days away, and time is short for the intrepid robots to find safe havens. During winter, the rovers must be positioned on north-facing slopes for their solar panels to glean the most energy possible from the diminished winter sunlight. The situation is most critical for Spirit, which lies 12° farther south than its near-equatorial sibling. Spirit now receives only enough solar power for daily drives of about an hour on flat terrain. But Spirit is not on flat ground. The rover has been scaling the Columbia Hills, hitting steep slopes and soft sand, since July 2004. For the past several months, Spirit has been traversing a plateau called Home Plate. The site has signs of an explosive origin, like a volcano or impact. But despite Home Plate's scientific value, engineers knew they must reposition the rover if it is going to survive winter. Operators mapped a route to a north-facing slope, but Spirit was unable to climb the terrain. There was a time when we were concerned [about reaching] a safe haven in time, says John Callas, project manager for the Mars Exploration Rovers. But one of Spirit's motors has now failed, leaving the right front wheel paralyzed. When the wheel failed on us, the terrain turned out to be too difficult, so we had to choose a closer ridge, he says. The rover retraced its steps and then headed toward the second site. Spirit's solar panels continue to accumulate power-curbing dust while temperatures drop. The picture is rosier for Opportunity. The more equatorial site on the plains of Meridiani affords more power for the rover's solar panels, and the flat terrain makes daily drives of 2 hours possible. Engineers hope to arrive at the rim of Victoria Crater by early August. Both rovers are also showing signs of age. Each wheel motor has turned 13 million times, carrying the rovers 11 times as far as planned. The duo has returned 150,000 images, but there has been a price. Opportunity's instrument arm has jammed in certain positions. Spirit's rock grinder is worn out. And because of the failure of one of Spirit's wheel motors, the rover must negotiate the rugged landscape while dragging the useless wheel, which is locked in position. Scientists hope the rovers will be able to continue extensive research. Callas says Spirit is scheduled for a very ambitious winter campaign, including taking detailed panoramas using all 13 imaging filters. Spirit is also slated to brush away layers of soil and measure the material's properties at different depths. In addition, the rovers will study winter clouds and their surroundings' thermal properties. Callas likens Spirit's stationary science to the winter activities of American pioneers: After harvest, they'd settle down to catch up on fixing furniture and quilting. Spirit's winter campaign gives us an opportunity to catch up on all the science we've been putting off. If the rovers can survive a second winter, their rich scientific return may continue for months or years. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] possible impact crater (database)
Hello List, and all of those interested in Impact Research. Here is a useful link: http://xrl.us/craters Hope this helps in your research. Bob V. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Fireball reported over Tucson
--- Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have recovered (along with partners or found myself) now 6 Lunar meteorites now out of 42 known. Congratulations, Mike. Wow! 6 out of 42 Lunars. That's quite an impressive record. Best wishes, Robert Woolard __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Google Earth (Map) Question was New Impact Structures
Jeff Kuyken wrote: Or click here for a pic for those of you without Google Earth, etc When using Google Earth or Google Maps, is there some way of finding out what the metadata, i.e. source, date, kind, resolution, etc., of the imagery for the area being viewed? Best regards, Paul __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Dear List Members, Here are some of my thoughts on Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI). I feel this subject needs to be breached again as a few have not caught on to how destructive and lowly this practice is. Saying something is likely paired is the same as saying I am too cheap or lazy to have my material studied by a qualified Nom Com approved facility. Using notes provided for official meteorites to describe unofficial material is the same as stealing as far as I am concerned. Why should dealers who spend upwards of thousands per month having their material officially classified and getting their very own nomenclature allow others to violate this information? I know ebay will enforce number borrowing issues as they have been trained that although nobody owns these numbers they are treated the same as serial numbers. These serial numbers only apply to a certain amount of material and to borrow them is fraudulent. Some more news; ebay treats all product descriptions as proprietary data and will shut down auctions immediately if descriptions are borrowed and then reported. Even if somebody who deals meteorites is 99% sure their material is paired to somebody else's they should still follow the correct protocol, have their material made official and receive their very own number. The only meteorites excluded by this rule are from rare falls as stated by the Meteoritical Society. NWA 869 is an exception in that multiple type specimens from multiple dealers were submitted so all that contributed can share this number, a rare case. The I.M.C.A. stated that they stand behind the Meteoritical Society rules and so should members who belong to this organization that stands for Authenticity above all else. How can a dealer claim his material is authentic when no qualified laboratory has even looked at it? Collectors are entitled to official material or at the very least provisional if the rules are being adhered to. The rules have been stiffened up considerably on provisional numbers because only after a type specimen has been submitted to a Nom Com approved depository and studied will a provisional number be assigned. The market has moved a long way in the last year and a half with more than 95% compliance to these rules. It makes good sense 20 years down the road when others take over these collections or they are passed down to family members that they can say with confidence what they have. Terms like a Moroccan stating these are that or a dealer saying, likely paired or in my opinion won't fly because unstudied material has very little scientific or intrinsic value in my opinion. A few years ago, many unknowingly violated these rules because they were unclear. I was partially guilty of the same thing a few years back but have since reapplied and received new numbers for anything we brought out and noted this in my descriptions. The rules have been clear for the last two years and to continually violate them will only serve to undermine collector confidence. Enough from me, Regards, Adam Hupe The Hupe Collection Team LunarRock IMCA 2185 [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Ebay seller AZPotpourri
WOW! Just about every mistake that could be made when selling meteorites on ebay is on that one page. It's amazing, really. There has to be some kind of record here. -Walter Branch - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 1:20 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Ebay seller AZPotpourri Hello List, The IMCA Board received emails throughout the day pointing out the questionable Ebay auctions by AZpotpourri, Here is one of them: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=6626773556 Our ever diligent Ken Newton contacted the seller and pointed out some obvious errors and problems with those auctions, not the least being the name Harvey Nininger Meteorite Collection. The seller responded quickly that he had already received several emails and had decided to cancel the auctions rather than look like a fraud. Later this evening Ken contacted him again pointing out the problem with his ME page still advertising the said Collection, and a shadowy Organization. Again he responded quickly, rewrote his ME page and thanked Ken. I believe this is a Ebay seller who has learned an important lesson today: Don't mess with the Meteorite Community!!! Thank you for being part of it. Anne M. Black www.IMPACTIKA.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] President, I.M.C.A. Inc. www.IMCA.cc __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Hi Adam, Who are you writing about? -Walter Branch - Original Message - From: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 2:41 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI) Dear List Members, Here are some of my thoughts on Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI). I feel this subject needs to be breached again as a few have not caught on to how destructive and lowly this practice is. Saying something is likely paired is the same as saying I am too cheap or lazy to have my material studied by a qualified Nom Com approved facility. Using notes provided for official meteorites to describe unofficial material is the same as stealing as far as I am concerned. Why should dealers who spend upwards of thousands per month having their material officially classified and getting their very own nomenclature allow others to violate this information? I know ebay will enforce number borrowing issues as they have been trained that although nobody owns these numbers they are treated the same as serial numbers. These serial numbers only apply to a certain amount of material and to borrow them is fraudulent. Some more news; ebay treats all product descriptions as proprietary data and will shut down auctions immediately if descriptions are borrowed and then reported. Even if somebody who deals meteorites is 99% sure their material is paired to somebody else's they should still follow the correct protocol, have their material made official and receive their very own number. The only meteorites excluded by this rule are from rare falls as stated by the Meteoritical Society. NWA 869 is an exception in that multiple type specimens from multiple dealers were submitted so all that contributed can share this number, a rare case. The I.M.C.A. stated that they stand behind the Meteoritical Society rules and so should members who belong to this organization that stands for Authenticity above all else. How can a dealer claim his material is authentic when no qualified laboratory has even looked at it? Collectors are entitled to official material or at the very least provisional if the rules are being adhered to. The rules have been stiffened up considerably on provisional numbers because only after a type specimen has been submitted to a Nom Com approved depository and studied will a provisional number be assigned. The market has moved a long way in the last year and a half with more than 95% compliance to these rules. It makes good sense 20 years down the road when others take over these collections or they are passed down to family members that they can say with confidence what they have. Terms like a Moroccan stating these are that or a dealer saying, likely paired or in my opinion won't fly because unstudied material has very little scientific or intrinsic value in my opinion. A few years ago, many unknowingly violated these rules because they were unclear. I was partially guilty of the same thing a few years back but have since reapplied and received new numbers for anything we brought out and noted this in my descriptions. The rules have been clear for the last two years and to continually violate them will only serve to undermine collector confidence. Enough from me, Regards, Adam Hupe The Hupe Collection Team LunarRock IMCA 2185 [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Collectors are entitled to official material or at the very least provisional if the rules are being adhered to. *snip* The rules have been clear for the last two years and to continually violate them will only serve to undermine collector confidence. there are no 'rules' when it comes to offering material for sale (other than not violating copyrights). The NomCom, the IMCA and Adam Hupe are NOT regulatory bodies who have the authority to police the hobby/industry nor make binding resolutions that must be followed. Collectors are entitled to DISCLOSURE. There is nothing wrong with saying 'I belive this material to be paired to xxx' because a dealer who says that is giving his customer information to use in making a purchasing decision. It should be up to the collector to decide if the dealer's judgement is sufficent guarantee as to the identity of a prospective purchase. If a collector wants to buy only 'offical' material thats fine, if the collector doesnt mind buying unofficial material that is fine too. To suggest otherwise is like saying any coin dealer who sells anything but pcgs slabs is out to screw his customers - in short, BS. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Hi Again, The question was brought up about who I am talking about. I won't publicly mention names at this point but will if the violations continue. Another point off-List was brought up about ID cards. It may seem obvious but even if you make your own ID cards, you should save the previous ones as this demonstrates a chain-of-custody which is very important in proving provenance. An ID card from a dealer who will not even put his own name to it is of no value. I am not trying to create a long string or arguments here. It bothers me that some are still engaged in this practice and wanted to get it off of my chest before I became angry. I have to go now but will respond to questions later. Take Care, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
yea but... Stan wrote: there are no 'rules' when it comes to offering material for sale (other than not violating copyrights). The NomCom, the IMCA and Adam Hupe are NOT regulatory bodies who have the authority to police the hobby/industry nor make binding resolutions that must be followed. Collectors are entitled to DISCLOSURE. There is nothing wrong with saying 'I belive this material to be paired to xxx' because a dealer who says that is giving his customer information to use in making a purchasing decision. It should be up to the collector to decide if the dealer's judgement is sufficent guarantee as to the identity of a prospective purchase. If a collector wants to buy only 'offical' material thats fine, if the collector doesnt mind buying unofficial material that is fine too. To suggest otherwise is like saying any coin dealer who sells anything but pcgs slabs is out to screw his customers - in short, BS. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Yea but... A PCGS rated coin is worth a lot more than a dealer's self proclaimed rating which means nothing no matter how honest he may be perceived. Same for baseball cards. Borrowing a serial number from an officially rated baseball card would be considered fraudulent. A dealer rating a card a perfect 10 doesn't make it so. Borrowing NWA numbers is the same thing as far as I am concerned. Buyer beware I guess sums it up. Go to go, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Thanks for your thoughts Adam, your rants have become so tedious you now have acronyms for them. Can you point me in the direction of a lab that can analyze about 3000 fragments, I need to get these little guys some numbers? TTFN, 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: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 11:41 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI) Dear List Members, Here are some of my thoughts on Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI). __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Yea but... A PCGS rated coin is worth a lot more than a dealer's self proclaimed rating which means nothing no matter how honest he may be perceived. Same for baseball cards. Borrowing a serial number from an officially rated baseball card would be considered fraudulent. A dealer rating a card a perfect 10 doesn't make it so. Borrowing NWA numbers is the same thing as far as I am concerned. Buyer beware I guess sums it up. you are absolutly right - but thats not my point. you are arguing against self pairings that are disclosed as such by the seller. you are effectivly saying all collectors should ahve to buy PCGS slabs and cant use their own judgement and trust in a dealers information to ensure that ms60 high relief st guadens really is ms60 and not an omega. it's one thing to say that pcgs slabs command the highest premium. it's a totally diffrent thing to imply that anyone not using pcgs is out to screw over their customer. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
IMHO, there is significant difference between someone fraudulently proclaiming (without doing the legwork) This meteorite IS paired with and someone saying This meteorite I BELIEVE TO BE paired with or This meteorite MIGHT BE paired with . If the latter, I want to see large disclaimers and that an appropriate sample has been submitted for classification to the appropriate labs before I spend my money. although I have been known to take a flyer. That's also how I got a couple of my meteorwrongs :) It doesn't hurt to be a known reliable source either. Anyone can say they THINK they have the newest lunar, but show me the paperwork first. Allah will provide, but tie your camel anyway. Tracy Latimer From: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI) Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 12:56:05 -0700 Yea but... A PCGS rated coin is worth a lot more than a dealer's self proclaimed rating which means nothing no matter how honest he may be perceived. Same for baseball cards. Borrowing a serial number from an officially rated baseball card would be considered fraudulent. A dealer rating a card a perfect 10 doesn't make it so. Borrowing NWA numbers is the same thing as far as I am concerned. Buyer beware I guess sums it up. Go to go, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
I know better than to get involved in this discussion but I am going to anyway there are no 'rules' when it comes to offering material for sale (other than not violating copyrights). The NomCom, the IMCA and Adam Hupe are NOT regulatory bodies who have the authority to police the hobby/industry nor make binding resolutions that must be followed. That's a fair point Stan but as someone new to this game, I appreciate there being a a body out there who are trying to make sure the little guy isn't getting ripped off. Now I'm not so naive to think that there are purely altruistic reasons for this, I can think of several hedonistic, though justifiable reasons immediately and a couple of cynical ones too but I'm trying to get kids interested in our hobby (livelyhood for a lot of you) and I don't want them spending money on junk when there is a way to be sure you're getting the real deal and the IMCA are helping in that regard. I don't believe anyone is objecting to this. I suspect they are angry at some self appointed body with no real legal authority throwing its weight around. Now as meteorite enthusiasts, we know a lot of damage can be done when weight is thrown around the universe. Maybe IMCA et al have not been very delicate in the past I really don't know as it hasn't effected me. I occasionally wonder why some people may be angry and suspect a lack of subtlty is to blame. Or maybe not. It should be up to the collector to decide if the dealer's judgement is sufficent guarantee as to the identity of a prospective purchase. And this is the whole point of why I support Adam's original mail. A 14 year old kid buying his first meteorite may not have the skills or judgement to make a properly informed decision. We can always tell them to go to a dealer but ebay is such a convenient shop window and I reckon I've taken a few bargains from it which may have cost far more direct from a dealer. Words such as likely, I believe, in my opinion are unhelpful at best. I may not agree that terming something as a likely pairing is tantamount to theft but I'm seeing it from a different position. My home doesn't depend on it. I'm not taking sides, I won't get involved in one of the petty discussions that sometimes occur when this type of subject comes up. It's why I feel my getting involved is against all my better judgement and if someones going to give me abuse over my point of view I'm going to have to take it for being stupid enough to open my mouth. I seldom agree with the opinions of the bigger boys in the business and I wouldn't expect that I would. However, on this occasion I feel so strongly that I really must make a comment on behalf of the nobodies. I dread the day one of my students comes in with a lump of junk they bought and are so proud of what they think is a meteorite and clearly isn't or saved up for a Martian rock which turns out to be an ordinary chondrite. Thanks for taking the time to read my opinion Rob McCafferty --- stan . [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Collectors are entitled to official material or at the very least provisional if the rules are being adhered to. *snip* The rules have been clear for the last two years and to continually violate them will only serve to undermine collector confidence. there are no 'rules' when it comes to offering material for sale (other than not violating copyrights). The NomCom, the IMCA and Adam Hupe are NOT regulatory bodies who have the authority to police the hobby/industry nor make binding resolutions that must be followed. Collectors are entitled to DISCLOSURE. There is nothing wrong with saying 'I belive this material to be paired to xxx' because a dealer who says that is giving his customer information to use in making a purchasing decision. It should be up to the collector to decide if the dealer's judgement is sufficent guarantee as to the identity of a prospective purchase. If a collector wants to buy only 'offical' material thats fine, if the collector doesnt mind buying unofficial material that is fine too. To suggest otherwise is like saying any coin dealer who sells anything but pcgs slabs is out to screw his customers - in short, BS. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Hello Rob, I don't believe that a new find can ever be considered absolutely and without a doubt to be paired with another meteorite or group of meteorites that have already been analyzed and classified under a specific name. The best that can be said is that it is likely paired. You would have to submit the new material and go through the classification process again, which takes lots of money and may take years, even 5 years as Greg Hupe's anomalous chondrite did. This outlay of resources is the reason for the defensive post by Adam, which I understand. But he is also the one who benefited with the ~$1000/g sales, now reduced to only $15/g. What's not fair? See the following info on pairing: Meteorite Pairing (P. Benoit et al., 2000) PAIRING CRITERIA: Parent body history Bulk elemental and isotopic concentrations Mineral abundance and compositions Petrography (shock, metamorphic, and igneous textures) Stable isotope abundance and formation ages Meteoroid space history Cosmogenic noble gas ratios (cosmic-ray exposure age, shielding, solar gases, thermal history) Natural TL (reheating) Meteorite terrestrial history Geographic proximity Shape and size Number of specimens Terrestrial age Weathering grade Natural TL levels Applying data from these criteria to the formula below, a pairing score and its associated pairing likelihood is obtained. Prel = Prel* × Pss × Pbrec × Pcre × Psolar × P3He × Ptage × Pweath × PNatTL where... Prel* = relative abundance by classification Pss = relative abundance by shock stage Pbrec = relative abundance by brecciation Pcre = relative abundance by cosmic-ray exposure age Psolar = relative abundance by solar-gas-bearing meteorites P3He = relative abundance by light noble gas depleted meteorites Ptage = relative abundance by terrestrial age Pweath = relative abundance by weathering factor PNatTL = relative abundance by natural TL levels Pairing score (%) / Pairing likelihood 90___Likely 80-90_Probable 70-80_Possible 50-70_Potential 50___Candidate or Unlikely David __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
when there is a way to be sure you're getting the real deal and the IMCA are helping in that regard. well thats the thing. following 'the rules' as Adam put it isnt a sure fire was of making sure you have a 100% guagantee of buying what you thought you were buying. There have been many cases of 'musical classifications' in the past and this will continue in the future. Furthermore when a new find is classified that consists of many stones / fragments TYPICALLY a type specimin is not provided for each and every single fragment of meteorite recovered. What does that mean? well from one extreem it means that the holder of the find is self pairing all of the material to that of the rock that the type specimin came from or at best a researcher is doing a cursory examination of all the fragments, but not the full battery of tests that are required to confirm an 'offical' pairing. The typical procedure is that any mass reported before a classification is published becomes 'official' - if it is not reported in time then a whole slew of testing must be preformed to verify a pairing - testing that is not required for specimins that do not have a type specimin submitted for if they are reported in time. This is the root of most discontent with the whole 'number' game. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
I still think this is carried to the point of argueuing My meteorites are better than your meteorites although there are valid points to the arguement and no easy answer - especially the extreme difficulty getting classifications or even a provisional name from the met society. However, the coin analogy is interesting. Contrary to what was said earlier a coin is not necessarily worth more if it is PCGS graded. Might be worth more or sell easier on ebay where grade is in question but less so at shows where you can see them and make your own opinion. Remember, anybody can start up a coin grading service. And many people have. And you will find that PCGS, ICCS, ICG and others do not have the same grading standards. ICCS is in many dealers and collectors opinion (Including mine) that the coins are undergraded. Grades are lower than described in most coin books an doften make no sense. Compare an ICCS and an ICG coin and they are at least a half grade and often more different. An ICCS coin will be worth more but only because people know that the standard is different. Many people will bid higher on ebay knowing the coin is probably undergraded. Go to a coin show and buyers size up the quality and grade them themselves - maybe using the slab as a guide. A joke in the coin industry is that There is a grade when you buy and another grade when you sell. But if you buy ICG graded coins you will have a lower grade collection than if you buy ICCS graded coins. Also, on the coin slabs there is a disclaimer that its only their opinion that the coin is genuine and not legally binding (As one sharp eyed employee at one grading company found out a couple years ago after slabbing five MS63 1914D pennies that he noticed all had the same bag marks). It might work as a guide (And for insurance) but the slabed coins are not set in stone and not a perfect guide to their value. Maybe a couple competing meteorite recording companies competing with the met society might be in order. Might make it easier to get a name and maybe they could have different classifiaction standards. Maybe accept an optical technique for classifications - which will get the same or extremily close classifiaction as the expensive and time consuming petrographic classifications that is sued anyway. If that was done with the common stuff might clear up some work at the labs. Its not like the way classifications get done always get the same classification anyway - just look at NWA869 and all the different classifiactions on that or the howardites that sometimes get eucrite classifications depending on who is doing the classification and the sample that was used. But no matter what one thinks of the pairing issue it is not feisable to get the classifications on every single stone. But you can often recogonize them anyway and the arguement will then degenerate into the my meteorites are better than your meteorites thing. Nobody questioned the Imilacs I found a couple years ago and said that every single 2 gram stone should be paired. There are valid arguements on both sides but find some way to affordably and quickly get classifications done and this topic will mostly go away. Sincerely DEAN __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
AW: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Shalala. Mainly for a dealer it is a economical decision, whether a stone has to be classified. Classification means: To deposite a share of 20% or 20g, to wait a year++ until a stone is ready for sale or to pay for the classification. A collector has to think about the abilities of a seller, to judge whether a stone is paired or not and then he might get a stone cheaper than the same classified material. But be told, that out there are amateur dealers, to which I could give a piece of the curbstone in front of my house, which, if they would be told, that it is a nakhlite, they would sell it as a nakhlite. Also if the seller has it from the same source like the seller, who let the material properly classify, you never can't be sure. I remember Besedin asking about the Marses paired to NWA 1110. Voilá take this page: http://www.meteorites-r-us.com/subcategory.cfm?subcat_id=221 These individual fragments still exhibit the orange-ish desert coating proving... Folks, Stefan and me took most probably from the same source as many others did, those Marses. This Nelson Oakes was even to lazy to clean his crumbs, states by his own decision, that his pieces are paired with NWA 1110, avoides hence the loss and costs by classification and asks 800$/g. We carefully cleaned each crumb we received from our source and a quarter of the material turned out to be limestone, after the dirt crust was removed. Our material we had let classified. We gave the 20% deposit share, we paid for the thin section and the analyses and finally, because the classification wasn't done yet, although with our own ability and under the microscope we saw, that the sorted out pieces were indeed Mars, we asked 300$/g of course with the guarantee to take the specimens back with full refund, if they would turn out not to be that, as what we sold them. Buy from this Oakes, who has a certain reputation, and you can't be sure, whether you get a limestone and that you pay for that 3 times more, although he was to scrooge to bear the expences for the classification. I think, that's what Greg wanted to express. Of course you can have luck and get the real McCoy, if you take an unclassified piece, wherefrom the seller claims, that it is paired with a known number, but also be aware that you might not get that, what you have paid for. So we reduce that question to the old sentence: Know your sellers. Buckleboo Martin PS: This is no ad, our Marses were sold out months ago. -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von stan . Gesendet: Freitag, 5. Mai 2006 23:04 An: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Betreff: RE: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI) when there is a way to be sure you're getting the real deal and the IMCA are helping in that regard. well thats the thing. following 'the rules' as Adam put it isnt a sure fire was of making sure you have a 100% guagantee of buying what you thought you were buying. There have been many cases of 'musical classifications' in the past and this will continue in the future. Furthermore when a new find is classified that consists of many stones / fragments TYPICALLY a type specimin is not provided for each and every single fragment of meteorite recovered. What does that mean? well from one extreem it means that the holder of the find is self pairing all of the material to that of the rock that the type specimin came from or at best a researcher is doing a cursory examination of all the fragments, but not the full battery of tests that are required to confirm an 'offical' pairing. The typical procedure is that any mass reported before a classification is published becomes 'official' - if it is not reported in time then a whole slew of testing must be preformed to verify a pairing - testing that is not required for specimins that do not have a type specimin submitted for if they are reported in time. This is the root of most discontent with the whole 'number' game. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Mars Exploration Rover Update - May 5, 2006
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/status.html SPIRIT UPDATE: Spirit Begins First Interplanetary Layer-by-Layer Soil Analysis - sol 828-834, May 05, 2006: Spirit is healthy and continuing to make progress on the rover's winter campaign of scientific experiments. This week Spirit continued work on the full-color, 360-degree McMurdo panorama. The finished panorama will combine 27 columns of images. Scientists anticipate that Spirit will have finished collecting the first 10 of those columns by Martian day, or sol, 834 (May 8, 2006). Spirit also continued studies of two soil targets nicknamed Progress and Halley. A winter soil analysis experiment will involve a multi-step process of removing the Moessbauer spectrometer from the target, flipping the wrist joint at the end of the robotic arm to put it in a better position for exchanging tools, re-touching the target with the Moessbauer to confirm precise placement, and exchanging tools from the Moessbauer spectrometer to the rock abrasion tool. Using the brush at the end of the rock abrasion tool, Spirit will remove a layer of soil up to 1 millimeter thick (the thickness of a dime). During brushing, the rover will take a movie of the procedure with the right lens of the hazard-avoidance camera. After the brushing, the rover will acquire a microscopic image of the freshly exposed surface as well as a color image using all 13 filters of the panoramic camera. The rover will then start the process again and remove another layer of soil. Spirit is also poised to begin a five-month, remote, photometric study of seasonal changes in surface properties of soil exposed in the rover's tracks. As the newly arrived Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter continues the aerobraking phase of its mission (using friction from the Martian atmosphere to refine its orbit), high-frequency X-band communications directly between Spirit and Earth will not always be available. On sol 830 (May 4, 2006), NASA's Odyssey spacecraft began transmitting communications to Spirit at UHF frequencies. Sol-by-sol summary Sol 828 (May 2, 2006): Spirit conducted remote sensing and completed acquisition of column 8 of the McMurdo panorama. Sol 829: Spirit conducted a third day of Moessbauer spectrometry of the Progress soil target, for a total of 69 hours of analysis of the target with the instrument. Sol 830: Spirit began progressive brushing of loose soil for the first time and collected microscopic images. Sol 831: Spirit conducted remote sensing, acquired column 9 of the McMurdo pan, and completed an 18-hour analysis of Progress with the alpha particle X-ray spectrometer. Sol 832: Plans called for Spirit to acquire microscopic images of Halley. Sol 833: Plans called for Spirit to conduct remote sensing, acquire column 10 of the McMurdo pan, and complete a second 18-hour study of Progress with the alpha particle X-ray spectrometer. Sol 834 (May 8, 2006): Plans called for Spirit to continue remote sensing studies and begin monitoring changes in surface properties of soil exposed in the rover's tracks. Odometry: As of sol 831 (May 5, 2006), Spirit's total odometry remained at 6,876.18 meters (4.27 miles). __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
The excuse that I have 3,000 pieces of what looks like the same stone won't fly. As I stated before, every piece of NWA 1110 was examined by a Nom Com approved scientist. NWA 3118, which consisted of thousands of pieces was thoroughly gone through by Dr. Irving in the field, in Morocco. Dr. Bunch literally went through over 2,000 lbs. of my material in Denver taking three days to do so. Scientists help me to sort material at cutting parties. For the most part, they seem more than willing to go through large batches of material. I have a new find consisting of several thousand pieces that with the help of Dr. Irving were sorted out and classified. Which would you rather have, a self proclaimed pairing or pieces that have been examined by a competant scientist? I am not trying to police any market, just stating that the standards set by the I.M.C.A. and the Meteoritical Society serve a very important purpose. Every other industry seems to have standards in place, why not meteorites? If you agree to be a member of the I.M.C.A. you also agree to the standards set forth by the Meteoritical Society. A dealer who operates without standards is nothing more than a clown as far as I am concerned. Enough Said, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Hi, Adam and all, Which would you rather have, a self proclaimed pairing or pieces that have been examined by a competent scientist? The self-proclaimed pairing I'm sure would be much cheaper, and that's the one I'd rather [buy]! There are many levels of priorities for the assortment of collectors here. Some do need the specifics. Personally, I could care less what NWA designation the meteorite has. Just sell me one with some character in it. Cheers, Pete From: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI) Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 19:14:37 -0700 The excuse that I have 3,000 pieces of what looks like the same stone won't fly. As I stated before, every piece of NWA 1110 was examined by a Nom Com approved scientist. NWA 3118, which consisted of thousands of pieces was thoroughly gone through by Dr. Irving in the field, in Morocco. Dr. Bunch literally went through over 2,000 lbs. of my material in Denver taking three days to do so. Scientists help me to sort material at cutting parties. For the most part, they seem more than willing to go through large batches of material. I have a new find consisting of several thousand pieces that with the help of Dr. Irving were sorted out and classified. Which would you rather have, a self proclaimed pairing or pieces that have been examined by a competant scientist? I am not trying to police any market, just stating that the standards set by the I.M.C.A. and the Meteoritical Society serve a very important purpose. Every other industry seems to have standards in place, why not meteorites? If you agree to be a member of the I.M.C.A. you also agree to the standards set forth by the Meteoritical Society. A dealer who operates without standards is nothing more than a clown as far as I am concerned. Enough Said, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Clowns . was Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Perhaps the term should be Officially Sorted By A Scientist Over A Few Beers or OSBASOAFB's Just what could Dr Irving do in the field that I can't do in my office. Did he have his field SEM with him, his field ion microprobe, his field polarascope? Or was he a fish out of water without his lab relying on you to tell him what was and wasn't a meteorite? And the MetSoc has no position on selling meteorites yet, though members have been buying this material. Jeff Grossman's own unedited words (he is the NomCom chair Adam if you are not familiar with his work): On the question of pairing... for most meteorites, pairing studies are of little scientific interest and not worth taking the time to do. Visual pairings are almost worthless. For the important meteorites, pairings get worked out in the scientific literature over time. This may be unsettling for some dealers, but that's the way it is. So apply that to your cutting parties and the serious pairing work that goes on Adam. I could take these down to Cascadia tomorrow and say whaddya think and it would be no less official than yours. and finally from Dr Grossman: It is acceptable and routine, however, for people to make statements indicating that various numbered stones may be paired (although I would be cautious about believing such statements unless they appear in the Bulletin or other scientific publications). So don't proclaim IMCA standards as MetSoc/NomCom standards to me. Enough was said earlier, you had to open it again. And you bring up number borrowing, I paid for 20% of the cost to get NWA 1877 classified so it is just as much mine as yours. Cheap, lazy, thieving, Clown...out :0) 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: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 7:14 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI) The excuse that I have 3,000 pieces of what looks like the same stone won't fly. As I stated before, every piece of NWA 1110 was examined by a Nom Com approved scientist. NWA 3118, which consisted of thousands of pieces was thoroughly gone through by Dr. Irving in the field, in Morocco. Dr. Bunch literally went through over 2,000 lbs. of my material in Denver taking three days to do so. Scientists help me to sort material at cutting parties. For the most part, they seem more than willing to go through large batches of material. I have a new find consisting of several thousand pieces that with the help of Dr. Irving were sorted out and classified. Which would you rather have, a self proclaimed pairing or pieces that have been examined by a competant scientist? I am not trying to police any market, just stating that the standards set by the I.M.C.A. and the Meteoritical Society serve a very important purpose. Every other industry seems to have standards in place, why not meteorites? If you agree to be a member of the I.M.C.A. you also agree to the standards set forth by the Meteoritical Society. A dealer who operates without standards is nothing more than a clown as far as I am concerned. Enough Said, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Re: Clowns . was Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)
Rob, Since you felt it necessary to step up, claim guilt and show disrespect for a leader in Meteoritics, I felt I had better respond publicly. Dr. Irving has earned a Ph.D. and the Nom Com votes on his submissions. I think these qualifications speak for themselves as far as qualifying rocks. Of course, the stones were brought back and analyzed properly, something that you failed to do and then made up excuses for. I recently sent in 5 different type samples for the same type of meteorite because the variances made it unclear to me that they were part of the same event even though I have seen thousands of meteorites. Every stone from NWA 2999 had a piece removed, thin-sections made and were all studied. Every multiple stone classification sharing the same nomenclature was voted on and approved. The Nom Com has made provisions for multiple stone entries. One only has to read their submission forms to see this has been taken into consideration. If the Nom Com accepts classifications from Cascadia, then I suggest having your material examined there as they would be more qualified then yourself at making pairing judgements. Borrowing numbers and data to make stones look like official meteorites is in poor taste and demonstrates a lack of morals as far as I am concerned. Since when has NWA 1877 ever sold for a thousand a gram? You may be confusing it with NWA 1459 which is not paired, was the first Olivine Diogenite in private hands and weighed less than a hundred grams. I see you stole information from an AGU copyrighted abstract, posted it on your site and gave credit to NASA for it. Are you still dealing Campo as something else? Get your facts straight before pointing you finger at others. Adam - Original Message - From: Rob Wesel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 9:20 PM Subject: Clowns . was Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI) Perhaps the term should be Officially Sorted By A Scientist Over A Few Beers or OSBASOAFB's Just what could Dr Irving do in the field that I can't do in my office. Did he have his field SEM with him, his field ion microprobe, his field polarascope? Or was he a fish out of water without his lab relying on you to tell him what was and wasn't a meteorite? And the MetSoc has no position on selling meteorites yet, though members have been buying this material. Jeff Grossman's own unedited words (he is the NomCom chair Adam if you are not familiar with his work): On the question of pairing... for most meteorites, pairing studies are of little scientific interest and not worth taking the time to do. Visual pairings are almost worthless. For the important meteorites, pairings get worked out in the scientific literature over time. This may be unsettling for some dealers, but that's the way it is. So apply that to your cutting parties and the serious pairing work that goes on Adam. I could take these down to Cascadia tomorrow and say whaddya think and it would be no less official than yours. and finally from Dr Grossman: It is acceptable and routine, however, for people to make statements indicating that various numbered stones may be paired (although I would be cautious about believing such statements unless they appear in the Bulletin or other scientific publications). So don't proclaim IMCA standards as MetSoc/NomCom standards to me. Enough was said earlier, you had to open it again. And you bring up number borrowing, I paid for 20% of the cost to get NWA 1877 classified so it is just as much mine as yours. Cheap, lazy, thieving, Clown...out :0) 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: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 7:14 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI) The excuse that I have 3,000 pieces of what looks like the same stone won't fly. As I stated before, every piece of NWA 1110 was examined by a Nom Com approved scientist. NWA 3118, which consisted of thousands of pieces was thoroughly gone through by Dr. Irving in the field, in Morocco. Dr. Bunch literally went through over 2,000 lbs. of my material in Denver taking three days to do so. Scientists help me to sort material at cutting parties. For the most part, they seem more than willing to go through large batches of material. I have a new find consisting of several thousand pieces that with the help of Dr. Irving were sorted out and classified. Which would you rather have, a self proclaimed pairing or pieces that have been examined by a competant scientist? I am not trying to police any market, just stating that the standards set by the I.M.C.A. and the Meteoritical Society serve a
