[meteorite-list] zoom online meteorite sale this saturday

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

Hi all.  I just wanted to let you know about a zoom live sale that I am
having this Saturday at 10am arizona time.  Produced with the help of
Topher Spin meteorites, this sale will include 185 items and looks to have
a total sales value of well over $500,000. There will be three raffles
throughout
the sale, valued at roughly $8000 total, which you enter automatically by
purchasing any item. 10% of all revenue from the sale will come to
Topherspin Meteorites. Purchasers will also automatically be invited to my
party during the Tucson, 2025 show where we finally crack open our double
magnum of Martian infused champaign. The sale will be divided into three
segments, roughly as follows. Mixed valued items, 10am -12pm. Lower value
items. 12.00pm – 2pm. High value items. 2pm – 4pm. Zoom Meeting ID:#826
7552 7747 Password: Topherspin The raffle items are a 68.6 gram full slice
of hassi el biod 002, a set of small pieces of all 5 known martian types,
and a large individual of Libyan desert glass. This should be an awesome
show and I hope to see you all there. Please tell your friends!
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

Sorry. I am sure everyone is tired of this conversation, but I needed to
write one more email because I mis spoke about something, and this thing I
misspoke about should effectively end any credibility Jason Utas had in
this situation.  He accused me of using someone else's classification and
mispairing NWA 14743, and I had replied I had never used that number,
knowing that I had never paired a CV3 like that.  I looked into it more and
discovered that I had used the number because it was MY CLASSIFICATION, so
anything he said about me mispairing it is completely absurd.
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?code=77242.  So, again, my main
point -- don't make irresponsible claims.  Regarding the CR2, I have always
been upfront regarding anyone I sold it to about where it came from, and
while I was waiting for classification (which is different from waiting for
analysis) I did tell some people that it was found in the same strewnfield
as erg chech 003 and was likely the same material.  Regarding Utas's claim
that it was "incorrectly paired' and actually a "CV3" I have a screenshot
of a conversation with the classifier, way back from may 2022 saying that
the writup was complete and then it would be submitted for classification
that next day. I don't know why classification has taken so long, but that
is really an issue with nom-com and the classifying scientist.   This site
won't let me post the photo here but I have shared the screenshot it with
the presidents of the IMCA and GMA (since Utas brought them into it) and it
is available for anyone who wants to see it.  On another note, it is kind
of weird that Jason brought up the IMCA and GMA at all, since he was forced
out of the IMCA over classification issues, and he is not a member of the
GMA.

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 12:17 PM Mark Lyon  wrote:

> Jason,
>
> I am not going to extend this argument or bother reading past your first
> paragraph, but this is exactly the type of irresponsible claims that i am
> talking about.  I have no idea what Imgur is (the website you are sending
> photos from ) but I can tall you that none of those photographs are of my
> material, my hand or my yard.  They do say Mark Lyon at the bottom.  They
> don't make any reference to whose material it actually is or where these
> photographs come from.  I can also tell you that i have never claimed any
> of my meteorites were paired with NWA 14713.  Regarding erg chech 003, the
> photo you sent was again not my hand or my hard or my material, but I
> bought a few kilos of CR2 as paired with Erg chech 003 (I didn't "decide"
> it was paired but it was a large find and sold by a moroccan dealer from
> the same stewnfield) and that material has been analysed as CR2 and will
> have its own name soon.  I have no idea what the photo on the left is, but
> if I had to guess by the glove the photo on the right is probably Matt
> Streams.  I believe I did sell some to Matt Steam, and he probably put some
> up on ebay, but I guess my question is if unless you analysed the material
> what makes you so much more sure that it is a Cv3 than the classifying
> scientist who had the material and conducted the analysis?  Personally,
> deciding between two options, I would choose the insite over the scientist
> who actually analysed the material itself, whose job it is to be able to
> analyse the data, over someone who made the judgement just by looking at a
> photograph.  I have close to 100 classifications, and 95% of what I sell is
> material in which I am the main mass holder. I go out of my way to not use
> other people's classification.  With lunar, for example, everyone is
> selling bachar 003 (paired) whereas I went out of my way to get a new
> classification, NWA 15373.  Meteorites such as Erg Chech, Jikharra, etc,
> everyone is selling this material but I was on the original classification.
>   I don't blame them. it would be dumb to reclassify everytime anyone wants
> to sell.  Anyway, you can  write another long email if you want to, but I
> won't read that one either.  What I am saying is simple, and as an educated
> man and aspiring scientist you should understand it.  Don't make
> irresponsible claims.
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 12:03 PM Jason Utas 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Everyone,
>>
>> Sorry for the late reply - it's spring break, and the rocks don't find
>> themselves.
>>
>> It's hard to disagree with *common sense*.  Unfortunately, Mark has
>> already made at least a few pretty bad *common sense* pairing mistakes
>> that I'm pretty sure have put misrepresented material into circulation.
>> Like this one , where Mark decided that
>> an unclassified ~CV3 was paired with another dealer's published CR2.  And 
>> this
>> one , where Mark decided that a CV3 was
>> paired with what sure looks to me like an unpaired carbonaceous chondrite.
>> More on these meteorites below.
>>
>> Mark mentioned some of our past 

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

Jason,

I am not going to extend this argument or bother reading past your first
paragraph, but this is exactly the type of irresponsible claims that i am
talking about.  I have no idea what Imgur is (the website you are sending
photos from ) but I can tall you that none of those photographs are of my
material, my hand or my yard.  They do say Mark Lyon at the bottom.  They
don't make any reference to whose material it actually is or where these
photographs come from.  I can also tell you that i have never claimed any
of my meteorites were paired with NWA 14713.  Regarding erg chech 003, the
photo you sent was again not my hand or my hard or my material, but I
bought a few kilos of CR2 as paired with Erg chech 003 (I didn't "decide"
it was paired but it was a large find and sold by a moroccan dealer from
the same stewnfield) and that material has been analysed as CR2 and will
have its own name soon.  I have no idea what the photo on the left is, but
if I had to guess by the glove the photo on the right is probably Matt
Streams.  I believe I did sell some to Matt Steam, and he probably put some
up on ebay, but I guess my question is if unless you analysed the material
what makes you so much more sure that it is a Cv3 than the classifying
scientist who had the material and conducted the analysis?  Personally,
deciding between two options, I would choose the insite over the scientist
who actually analysed the material itself, whose job it is to be able to
analyse the data, over someone who made the judgement just by looking at a
photograph.  I have close to 100 classifications, and 95% of what I sell is
material in which I am the main mass holder. I go out of my way to not use
other people's classification.  With lunar, for example, everyone is
selling bachar 003 (paired) whereas I went out of my way to get a new
classification, NWA 15373.  Meteorites such as Erg Chech, Jikharra, etc,
everyone is selling this material but I was on the original classification.
  I don't blame them. it would be dumb to reclassify everytime anyone wants
to sell.  Anyway, you can  write another long email if you want to, but I
won't read that one either.  What I am saying is simple, and as an educated
man and aspiring scientist you should understand it.  Don't make
irresponsible claims.

On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 12:03 PM Jason Utas  wrote:

> Hello Everyone,
>
> Sorry for the late reply - it's spring break, and the rocks don't find
> themselves.
>
> It's hard to disagree with *common sense*.  Unfortunately, Mark has
> already made at least a few pretty bad *common sense* pairing mistakes
> that I'm pretty sure have put misrepresented material into circulation.
> Like this one , where Mark decided that
> an unclassified ~CV3 was paired with another dealer's published CR2.  And this
> one , where Mark decided that a CV3 was
> paired with what sure looks to me like an unpaired carbonaceous chondrite.
> More on these meteorites below.
>
> Mark mentioned some of our past conversations.  I agree: they were pretty
> crazy, but I wouldn't say it's because of anything *I* said.  I guess
> it's a good thing I saved them all, and can share them with you.
>
> Let's get right to it.
>
> In mid-January of 2023, I let John Humphreys know, in private, that some
> “Erg Chech 003" "CR2” slices he was offering on eBay looked to be swapped
> with a ~CV3.  John's one of the few dealers I would trust to handle an
> issue like that honestly and quickly.  Given the texture of the stone and
> its abundant CAIs, it couldn't have been a CR2.  Not possible.  A photo
> of the material speaks for itself : a
> real specimen of Erg Chech 003 is on the right.  To his credit, John
> immediately pulled the slices he'd listed.  I had no way of knowing it at
> the time, but Mark had sold John this unclassified meteorite as the
> published CR2 Erg Chech 003 .  Unfortunately,
> by the time I'd messaged John about the problem, some amount of the ~CV3
> had already been sold on by a few of the dealers who routinely distribute
> Mark's material, and you can still find some of those unclassified ~CV3
> slices in circulation as CR2s / Erg Chech 003
> .
> Not great.
>
> Had I said nothing, there's no reason to think anyone else would have
> caught the misrepresented material, and the rest of that ~CV3 would have
> been sold as the CR2.  Mark keeps telling people I'm often wrong, but...he
> admitted to the problem in private and refunded John
> .  Hm.
>
> I would add: I don't blame John Humphreys for what happened with the fake
> Erg Chech 003.  It's not reasonable to expect everyone to be able to ID a
> carbonaceous chondrite by sight, especially based on just a few small
> slices.  Someone classifying and selling new, unclassified meteorites has 

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

She could be talking about me. I was being very disrespectful.

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024, 7:00 PM John Lutzon via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

> Hello Anne,
>
>   In most cases, I Agree. In this case, both parties were respectful but
> had different views of
>  several implications of information divulgence. I enjoyed their points
> and the results.
>
>   Meteorite related aspects and meteorite discussions on a Meteorite-List,
> Brilliant!!
> John Lutzon
>
> > On 03/23/2024 2:19 PM EDT Anne Black via Meteorite-list <
> meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hey Everybody,
> >
> > When you have a disagreement with somebody, did you ever consider
> resolving it PRIVATELY?
> >
> >
> > Anne Black
> > IMPACTIKA.com
> > impact...@aol.com
> >
> >
> > On Friday, March 22, 2024 at 08:27:09 PM MDT, Mendy Ouzillou via
> Meteorite-list  wrote:
> >
> >
> > I’m not getting in the middle of these discussions. I will simply make
> the following 3 statements + 1 opinion:
> >   1. Here is Mohamed’s exact statement: “Hi all members liste , I have a
> nice carbonaceous Nwa 15758 CK6 paired ,if anyone interested please
> contacte me.” Notice that he used the word “paired” making no claim it was
> part of the TKW of NWA 15758.
> >   2. This discussion about “pairing” has been going on for forever. The
> Global Meteorite Association has a policy to guide transparency:
> https://gmeta.org/standards/descriptive-terms/pair-pairings. Mohamed
> could have use better terminology to clarify the type of pairing, but I
> personally did not see his description as problematic and applauded his
> transparency.
> >   3. On a related note, when a north African (or any seller) offers
> material for sale that is unclassified, there is NO issue with doing so.
> They are under no obligation to get material classified before trying to
> sell. As long as both parties are transparent, and they agree to the terms
> of the transaction, there is no injury to either party.
> >
> > My opinion is that our community is sufficiently large that we cannot
> know every seller, much less their intent. Most of us do repeat business
> with sellers we trust, but that in no way means that all other sellers have
> ill intent. Like anything transaction in life – caveat emptor.
> >
> > My regards to the community,
> >
> > Mendy
> >
> > From:Meteorite-list  On
> Behalf OfMark Lyon via Meteorite-list
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2024 9:50 PM
> > To: humboldt bay jay 
> > Cc: Meteorite-list 
> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15
> >
> > Jason Humboldt,
> >
> > You just have to learn to tune out Jason utas. He has been doing this
> for years. He isnt going to change. You should have seen some of the
> messages he sent me before i blocked him. The first time I met him he went
> in my display room in tucson and started complaining about me selling taza
> (nwa 859) because it was his dad's classification. Then he claimed he was
> just using it as an example because he thought he overheard me attacking
> dustin Dickens (a friend of mine) for pairing meteorites. More recently, he
> made damaging accusations about omolon specimens actually being brahin. Not
> caring how it affected a Russian group who had just spent months travelling
> and collecting the materials. He always thinks he is right, and he very
> seldom is. For the record, you did not attack a Moroccan seller. You
> politely told him not to use your classification, which was probably a
> single person classification with low total known weight. Anyone with
> common sense can see that this is different from huge finds like hah346 and
> jikhara 001 and erg chech and whatever else he complained about. I didn't
> read his whole message because I have heard it all before. Collectors want
> to know they are getting these, and not another meteorite. People are not
> using these names to be dishonest but to accurately describe what they are
> selling. It would be doing the community a disservice not to use these
> names.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024, 9:04 AM humboldt bay jay via Meteorite-list <
> meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > I appreciate the immense amount of time I anticipated you would spend
> on your reply.
> > >
> > > Thinking extensively about this, I wondered why you tried to shame me
> as a hypocrite, even when you have witness to me striving for best
> practices. Having autism I often struggle to understand people's intention.
> Many times I have gone wrong assuming the worst in people's actions. So one
> of my strategies is to try to think of the best possible intention that
> someone could have. I admit sometimes it is difficult with your approach
> (and attempt to shame me) but since your critique was not sound I came to
> reason that you saw an injustice that I perpetrated against Benzaki Mohamed
> and you felt the need to "punch the bully in his face". A fierce sense of
> justice that sometimes leads 

Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

Jason Humboldt,

You just have to learn to tune out Jason utas.  He has been doing this for
years.  He  isnt going to change.  You should have seen some of the
messages he sent me before i blocked him.  The first time I met him he went
in my display room in tucson and started complaining about me selling taza
(nwa 859) because it was his dad's classification. Then he claimed he was
just using it as an example because he thought he overheard me attacking
dustin Dickens (a friend of mine) for pairing meteorites.  More recently,
he made damaging accusations about omolon specimens actually being brahin.
Not caring how it affected a Russian group who had just spent months
travelling and collecting the materials.  He always thinks he is right, and
he very seldom is.For the record, you did not attack a Moroccan seller.
You politely told him not to use your classification, which was probably a
single person classification with low total known weight. Anyone with
common sense can see that this is different from huge finds like hah346 and
jikhara 001 and erg chech and whatever else he complained about. I didn't
read his whole message because I have heard it all before.   Collectors
want to know they are getting these, and not another meteorite.  People are
not using these names to be dishonest but to accurately describe what they
are selling.  It would be doing the community a disservice not to use these
names.

On Mon, Mar 18, 2024, 9:04 AM humboldt bay jay via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

> I appreciate the immense amount of time I anticipated you would spend on
> your reply.
>
> Thinking extensively about this, I wondered why you tried to shame me as a
> hypocrite, even when you have witness to me striving for best practices.
> Having autism I often struggle to understand people's intention.  Many
> times I have gone wrong assuming the worst in people's actions.  So one of
> my strategies is to try to think of the best possible intention that
> someone could have.  I admit sometimes it is difficult with your approach
> (and attempt to shame me) but since your critique was not sound I came to
> reason that you saw an injustice that I perpetrated against Benzaki Mohamed
> and you felt the need to "punch the bully in his face".  A fierce sense of
> justice that sometimes leads me to act foolish is also part of my condition
> so I was able to have sympathy with this realization.  Now that you have
> responded I can more clearly see your intention.  So here is my considered
> response.
>
> To the community:  I am happy to assist with meteoritics in any way that I
> can.  If you have material that you feel might be paired with mine I am
> happy to look at any information and give my honest response.  It would be
> unethical and dirty feeling to do otherwise.  I have not made it to where I
> am in life by acting in short term interests.  Relationships are life long.
>
> To Benzaki Mohamed:  I am sorry if I shamed you.  I am often blunt and act
> quickly.  Jason's best point is that I should have reached out to you in
> private first.  If you send me images or any supporting information I am
> happy to give you my honest opinion.  You would then have my full support
> marketing the material as paired if it checks out.
>
> To Jason: I forgive you.  I know what it is like to have conflict with the
> world.
>
> Best regards,
> Jason
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 5:50 PM Jason Utas  wrote:
>
>> Hello Jason,
>>
>> As long as material is described accurately, I don't care what you do.  I
>> only butted in here because it annoyed me to see you attacking a Moroccan
>> seller who is probably selling accurately paired material, while you’re
>> openly doing the same thing with other meteorites.  Glass house + throwing
>> stones, not cool.
>>
>> I'm saying that it *should* be fine for you to buy and sell HaH 346 and
>> Jikharra 001 as those meteorites as long as you've accurately IDd them.
>> But not if you're going to tell other people they can't do the same thing.
>> That's the rub.
>>
>> Your points -
>>
>> 1 & 4)  Why does it matter where you got your HaH 346?  It didn't matter
>> to you where Benzaki got his NWA 15758.
>>
>> Your posts didn't address the origin of Benzaki Mohamed's CK in any
>> way, or whether or not his material is paired with NWA 15758.  Based on
>> everything you've shared here, you don't know or care about whether or not
>> Benzaki's material is paired with yours.  Your concern is "your NWA number"
>> and protecting that investment. I can empathize with that, but your #1 and
>> #4 bullet points don't agree with your actions:
>>
>> Did you ask Benzaki where his material had come from before you sent that
>> public complaint?  No.  Did you confirm that it came from a different
>> finder, the same place, or a different place?  No.  When it came to
>> 'protecting  your NWA number,' none of that mattered.  Sure, the onus is on
>> him to show it's 

Re: [meteorite-list] Most confirmed falls in a year?

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

That's surprising that there would be a record in 1933.  I figured new
technology, rising populations, and an increase in meteorite hunters would
mean that there were more witnessed falls more recently than 90 years ago.
Have the number of witnessed falls per year tended to be significantly
higher more recently or has it stayed about the same?

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 6:52 AM Frank Cressy via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

> In addition to the 17 witnessed falls worldwide for 1933, that year also
> had two others that are possible falls, Elton, Texas and Willard (b) New
> Mexico.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Frank
>
> On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 03:45:48 PM PDT, Finbarr Connolly via
> Meteorite-list  wrote:
>
>
> 1933 has the record with 17. 1949 had 13 and 1950, 76 and 98 all with 12.
>
> Finbarr.
>
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 9:20 PM Michael Gilmer via Meteorite-list <
> meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Listees,
>
> I was recently wondering, what year has the most confirmed witnessed falls?
>
> I have been closely following falls since the year 2000, and according
> to my records we have a few contenders in recent years. I am thinking
> one of these must be the most.
>
> 2018 has 15 falls, but two of them are not official (HaH 346, aka
> Ghadamis, was classified as a find) and a fall over Pakistan was not
> recovered or recorded. This leaves 14 classified falls in a 12 month
> period :
>
> Jan 05, 2018 - Matarka (L6 chondrite) : Morocco
> Jan 16, 2018 - Hamburg (H4 chondrite) : Michigan USA
> Feb 16, 2018 - Ablaketka (H5 chondrite) : Kazakhstan
> Apr 19, 2018 - Aba Panu (L3.6 chondrite) : Nigeria
> Jun 01, 2018 - Mangui (L6 chondrite) : China (Hammer)
> Jun 02, 2018 - Motopi Pan (Howardite) : Botswana
> Jun 21, 2018 - Ozerki (L6 chondrite) : Russia
> Jul 10, 2018 - Renchen (L5-6 chondrite) : Germany
> Jul 26, 2018 - Glendale (L6 chondrite) : Arizona USA
> July 27, 2018 - Benenitra (L6 chondrite) : Madagascar
> Aug 12-17?, 2018 - "Bhakkar" (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Pakistan
> Aug 21, 2018 - Gueltat Zemmour (L4 chondrite) : Morocco
> Aug 26, 2018 - Hammadah al Hamra 346 (L6 chondrite) : Libya (aka
> "Ghadamis")
> Sep 26, 2018 - Komaki (L6 chondrite) : Japan (Hammer)
> Oct 28, 2018 - Ksar El Goraane (H5 chondrite) : Morocco
> Dec 23, 2018 - Mhabes el Hamra (H4/5 chondrite) : Mauritania
>
> 2020 gave us Covid-19 and 13 classified falls :
>
> Jan 01, 2020 - Cavezzo (L5-an chondrite) : Italy
> Jan 09, 2020 - Zhob (H3-4 chondrite) : Pakistan (Hammer)
> Feb 28, 2020 - Novo Mesto (L5 chondrite) : Slovenia
> Apr 1-7, 2020 - Tihigrin (L4 chondrite) : Mali
> Apr 24, 2020 - Gatuto (L6 chondrite) : Kenya (Hammer)
> May 08, 2020 - Tiros (eucrite-cm) : Brazil
> Jun 19, 2020 - Madura Cave (L5 chondrite) : Australia
> July 02, 2020 - Narashino (H5 chondrite) : Japan (Hammer)
> Aug 01, 2020 - Kolang (CM1/2 chondrite) : Indonesia (Hammer)
> Aug 19, 2020 - Santa Filomena (H5-6 chondrite) : Brazil (Hammer)
> Aug 25, 2020 - Tarda (C2-ung) : Morocco
> Nov 04, 2020 - Djadjarm (L6 chondrite) : Iran
> Nov 19, 2020 - Kindberg (L6 chondrite) : Austria
>
> 2016 gave us 12 classified falls :
>
> Jan 24, 2016 - Osceola (L6 chondrite) : Florida USA
> Feb 06, 2016 - Ejby (H5/6 chondrite) : Denmark (Hammer)
> Feb 18, 2016 - Mount Blanco (L5 chondrite) : Texas USA
> Mar 06, 2016 - Stubenberg (LL6 chondrite) : Germany/Austria
> Mar 20, 2016 - Degtevo (H5 chondrite) : Russia
> May 17, 2016 - Hradec Kralove (LL5 chondrite) : Czech Republic
> Jun 02, 2016 - Dishchii'bikoh (LL7 chondrite) : Arizona
> Aug 24, 2016 - Banma (L5 chondrite) : China
> Sep 16, 2016 - Mazichuan (Diogenite) : China
> Oct 31, 2016 - Dingle Dell (LL6 chondrite) : Australia
> Nov 18, 2016 - Oudiyat Sbaa (EH5 chondrite) : Morocco/Sahara
> Nov 20, 2016 - Aiquile (H5 chondrite) : Bolivia
>
> Source : https://galactic-stone.com/pages/falls
>
> Best regards and happy huntings,
>
> MikeG
> www.galactic-stone.com
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Small, earth-impacting asteroid/meteoroid videos now showing up online

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

is there any more info on what was recovered and where?

On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 10:17 AM Chris Peterson via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

> Meteorites have now been recovered.
>
> Models suggest a single main mass of around 1kg from the terminal
> explosion and multiple small pieces from earlier fragmentation events
> along the meteor path.
>
> Chris
>
> ***
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatory
> https://www.cloudbait.com
>
> On 2/15/2023 3:56 AM, Graham Ensor wrote:
> > Apologies for the last message. I misinterpreted the initial predictions
> > and it does appear to have been heading the other way and AMS has it
> > terminating near the coast slode to Dieppe and FRIPON even closer...other
> > models now showing that indeed it may have dropped material on land. Good
> > luck to my friends heading there for a search.
> >
> > Graham
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 3:55 PM Chris Peterson via Meteorite-list <
> > meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It was heading generally eastward over the Channel and was still burning
> >> when it crossed the French shoreline. It is likely to have dropped
> >> meteorites on land.
> >>
> >> Chris
> >>
> >> ***
> >> Chris L Peterson
> >> Cloudbait Observatory
> >> https://www.cloudbait.com
> >>
> >> On 2/14/2023 3:29 AM, Graham Ensor via Meteorite-list wrote:
> >>> It was heading from France and terminated it seems just as it reached
> the
> >>> channel so likely everything is in the sea if it did drop anything. Not
> >>> seen any predictions that it made landfall in France or the UK. So
> close
> >>> and yet so far.
> >>>
> >>> Graham
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 11:27 PM Darryl Pitt via Meteorite-list <
> >>> meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> >>>
> 
> 
>  Nice!   :-)
> 
>  On Feb 12, 2023, at 11:10 PM, Matson, Rob D. [US-US] via
> Meteorite-list
> >> <
>  meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> 
>  A small (~1-meter) asteroid that astronomers have been tracking for
>  several hours earlier today crossed over the English Channel one hour
> >> ago
>  (3:00 UT 13 February) and broke up over the coast of Normandy. Many
> >> videos
>  of it are already appearing on the web. Here’s one taken from
> Brighton,
> >> UK
>  (south coast of England) looking across the channel toward France:
> 
>  https://twitter.com/KadeFlowers/status/1624967147708420103
> 
>  Should be numerous meteorites on the ground – the meteoroid was at
> about
>  40-km altitude at the point it crossed the French coastline north of
>  Saint-Martin-aux-Buneaux, so nearly all of it should be over land.
> >> --Rob
>  __
>  Meteorite-list mailing list
>  Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>  https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> 
> 
>  __
>  Meteorite-list mailing list
>  Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>  https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> __
> >>> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >>> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> >>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >> __
> >> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> >> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >>
> >
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Free giveaway and special tucson pricing

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

Hi All,

I am doing a free giveaway of a martian/lunar set, valued at $4000, during
a live drawing on January 28th, 11am Arizona time to members of my Mark
Lyon Meteorites facebook page.  The drawing is open only to members of this
group who make purchases either before that time or during the live sale.


To join the group, and to see the full terms, follow this link:  Mark Lyon
Meteorites | Facebook 

If you don't use facebook and are interested in entering, you can message
me for details.
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] CERTIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

That makes sense.  Maybe it is an American thing.  I am used to the word
certificate being used much more loosely.  There are certificates of
ownership, certificates of completion,, certificates of awards, and
certificates of many other things.  It is just a word used to mean that the
document (the certificate) is formally stating that some specific entity is
acknowledging something as being the case. With a COA, I see it as just
stating that the entity (the seller) is formally acknowledging the
authenticity of the item.  But anyway I think people are probably tired of
the discussion by now.

On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 12:52 AM Maurizio Eltri via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

>
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I am thinking that perhaps there are
> interpretative rules that may vary from country
> to country. At least here in Italy and a little
> more generally in Europe, a certificate is an
> important document and as such its value can only
> be given if it is drawn up by a person or body
> legally responsible for doing so. If everyone
> could draw up any certificate on their own, it
> certainly would no longer have the same value.
> In the specific case you write "In this case the
> seller is" certifying "the" authenticity "of the
> meteorite he is selling." In this case the
> document cannot define a certificate but rather a
> self-certification or rather a self-declaration,
> which are very different things.
>
>
>
> At 17:34 26/07/2022, you wrote:
> >I guess I am just not understanding how the word
> >"certificate' is misrepresenting anything.  I
> >am not sure where the text you copied came from
> >or how it relates, but the word certificate is
> >appropriate when a specific entity is formallyÂ
> >stating something.  In this case, the seller is
> >"certifying" the "authenticity" of the meteorite
> >they are selling.  It is correct usage.   The
> >cards I use don't actually say "certificate of
> >authenticity" on them  but when customers ask
> >about a "COA" I know what they are talking about
> >and don't see anything wrong with the
> >term.  They clearly know that it is the seller,
> >and not some other entity, making the claim that
> >the item is authentic, so there is no problem of
> >confusion of what it means.  Regarding the
> >issue of a "lack of seriousness" of the seller,
> >times change.  It could be that at one point
> >people might have found the term weird, but for
> >new collectors a COA is just an assumed part of
> >a purchase.  If they asked for one and you said
> >"I don't provide those, but I have a label" that
> >would indicate to them a lack of
> >seriousness.  The difference is that the term
> >"label" doesn't imply that the seller is
> >vouching for the authenticity of something --
> >and although it is true the owner would be
> >responsible for mistakes whether he vouched for
> >it or not, there is really no downside to
> >vouching for it, and it gives the buyer some
> >piece of mind to have a document providing
> >provenance in which the seller stated that the
> >item was genuine.  But if you don't like the
> >term certificate of authenticity, don't use it
> >on your cards -- I don't -- but don't imply that
> >there is anything incorrect or dishonest or
> >unserious about the term just because it doesn't appeal to you
> personally.Â
> >
> >
> >
> >On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 12:09 AM Maurizio Eltri
> >via Meteorite-list
> ><
> meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >Dear friends,
> >
> >I believe that even a "marketing tool" cannot
> >misrepresent the meaning of the words, this can
> >lead to suspect the lack of seriousness of the seller.
> >
> >..
> >Significato della parola “CERTIFICATO† :
> >
> >   In sintetici si può dire che il certificato è
> >un attestato di conformità (rilasciato rispetto
> >ad una specifica precisata, non esiste la
> >certificazione generica) emesso da un soggetto,
> >terzo e, autorizzato (qualificato, accreditato,
> >indipendente) a farlo (per legge , per norme ISO
> >e relativi accordi di riconoscimento, ecc.)
> >Â  Â
> >
> https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificato
> >
> >
> >Meaning of the word "CERTIFICATE":
> >Â  Â  In summary, it can be said that the
> >certificate is a certificate of conformity
> >(issued with respect to a specified
> >specification, there is no generic certification)
> >issued by a subject, third party and authorized
> >(qualified, accredited, independent) to do so (by
> >law, for ISO standards and related recognition agreements, etc.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast
> antivirus.
> >https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> >
> >
> >__
> >Meteorite-list mailing list
> 

Re: [meteorite-list] CERTIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

I guess I am just not understanding how the word "certificate' is
misrepresenting anything.  I am not sure where the text you copied came
from or how it relates, but the word certificate is appropriate when a
specific entity is formally stating something.  In this case, the seller is
"certifying" the "authenticity" of the meteorite they are selling.  It is
correct usage.   The cards I use don't actually say "certificate of
authenticity" on them  but when customers ask about a "COA" I know what
they are talking about and don't see anything wrong with the term.  They
clearly know that it is the seller, and not some other entity, making the
claim that the item is authentic, so there is no problem of confusion of
what it means.  Regarding the issue of a "lack of seriousness" of the
seller, times change.  It could be that at one point people might have
found the term weird, but for new collectors a COA is just an assumed part
of a purchase.  If they asked for one and you said "I don't provide those,
but I have a label" that would indicate to them a lack of seriousness.  The
difference is that the term "label" doesn't imply that the seller is
vouching for the authenticity of something -- and although it is true the
owner would be responsible for mistakes whether he vouched for it or not,
there is really no downside to vouching for it, and it gives the buyer some
piece of mind to have a document providing provenance in which the seller
stated that the item was genuine.  But if you don't like the term
certificate of authenticity, don't use it on your cards -- I don't -- but
don't imply that there is anything incorrect or dishonest or unserious
about the term just because it doesn't appeal to you personally.



On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 12:09 AM Maurizio Eltri via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

>
> Dear friends,
>
> I believe that even a "marketing tool" cannot
> misrepresent the meaning of the words, this can
> lead to suspect the lack of seriousness of the seller.
>
> ..
> Significato della parola “CERTIFICATO” :
>
>In sintetici si può dire che il certificato è
> un attestato di conformità (rilasciato rispetto
> ad una specifica precisata, non esiste la
> certificazione generica) emesso da un soggetto,
> terzo e, autorizzato (qualificato, accreditato,
> indipendente) a farlo (per legge , per norme ISO
> e relativi accordi di riconoscimento, ecc.)
>https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificato
>
>
> Meaning of the word "CERTIFICATE":
> In summary, it can be said that the
> certificate is a certificate of conformity
> (issued with respect to a specified
> specification, there is no generic certification)
> issued by a subject, third party and authorized
> (qualified, accredited, independent) to do so (by
> law, for ISO standards and related recognition agreements, etc.)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast
> antivirus.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] CERTIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

Alfredo,

You can call a certificate of authenticity a "marketing tool" but at the
same time I feel it is as good of a description as any of what it is, and
it does have a function.  When you say that "in many cases they are printed
by the seller" that, to me, is the main point of them. They are like
labels, but labels that emphasize the information of the prior owner, so
they form a provenance chain.  So I always make sure I keep the COAs from
my pieces, so that I never misplace them, so that I can trace the ownership
chain as far back as I can.

On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 7:40 AM Alfredo Petrov via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

> Meteorite "Certificates of Authenticity" are mainly just a marketing tool
> to appeal to the general public, as in many cases they are printed by the
> seller, so they are no different from any other seller-issued "product
> guarantee", and are in fact unnecessary because, in most countries,
> commercial law obliges sellers to provide accurate labeling for their
> merchandise. So an honest seller will compensate a buyer for any
> identification mistakes with or without a "certificate", and a dishonest
> seller's "certificates" were worthless to begin with.
> So at least in my personal opinion what I need from the seller is a
> *label*, the more detailed the better, and using words like "Certificate
> of Authenticity" does not impress me at all nor add any extra value to a
> specimen.
>
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 09:24, Maurizio Eltri via Meteorite-list <
> meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Some sell meteorites with a CERTIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY document,
>> maybe I'm wrong, but a "CERTIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY" document
>> shouldn't be issued only by a specific body that is legally
>> recognized? Such as GIA, IGI, HRD for diamonds? A simple WARRANTY
>> DOCUMENT is no longer appropriate for meteorites?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast
>> antivirus.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>> __
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] CERTIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

There is no body that is legally recognized. Also, with all the diversity
in meteorites and the way the whole hobby/business is set up it would be
impossible for there to be a body like that and for the hobby to continue
in its current state.  Diamonds are an example of something that the
industry has created a value for that doesn't really exist -- meaning that
once you buy one it loses 80% of that value -- and probably not a good
thing for the meteorite community to model itself after.

On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 9:25 AM Maurizio Eltri via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

>
> Some sell meteorites with a CERTIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY document,
> maybe I'm wrong, but a "CERTIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY" document
> shouldn't be issued only by a specific body that is legally
> recognized? Such as GIA, IGI, HRD for diamonds? A simple WARRANTY
> DOCUMENT is no longer appropriate for meteorites?
>
>
> --
> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast
> antivirus.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] looking for big gibeon, at least 30 kilograms.

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

Hi,

This is Mark Lyon. If anyone on this list has a gibeon of at least 30 kilos
(doesn't have to be beautiful) that they would be interested in selling or
trading, please email me privately.

Thanks
__

Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] CONFUSION OVER MY POSTING ON THE LIST

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

Rob,

It was great to meet you in Denver and I'm glad you generally had a great
time. I am not really involved in this issue (or really want to be) but I
did want to clarify that it is my understanding that Dd told someone that
he planned on asking you if you would like to be involved in an auction,
and the story sort of snowballed from there in a way that was out of his
control. I know he feels really bad about it, and I'm glad he apologized,
but I don't believe there was any attempt at misrepresentation.  It was
just a misunderstanding between two people, both of whom are my friends and
both of whom feel really bad about the turn this has taken.

Mark

On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 2:08 PM Robert Haag via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

> Hello everyone
> For the record
> This is important.
> I was angered about something that was not true and I should have been
> more precise.
> My previous post regarding Dd stand for Dustin Dickens.
> NOT Darryl Pitt.
>  Dustin told some dealers in Denver of his plans to sell my meteorite
> collection in his new auction house and that we were
> working together.
> This is not true.
> I am NOT at all involved in Dustins auction business.I never was and I
> have no plans to be.
>
> Dustin has since apologized and I forgive him.
>
> Darry’s auctions have done great things for everyone involved and I love
> the man.
> A huge worldwide market
> No one has more for meteorite collecting !
> Except me!!
>
>  So please everyone move on with our own space race. Its fantastic
> honestly
> Really good fun and great Science for the planet.Planets !!!
>
> Keep on space rocking !
>
> Sincerely
> Robert Haag
> __
>
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
__

Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] SALE: BUR-ABOR, AN INCOMPARABLE METEORITE SPECIMEN – MAIN MASS

[Mark Lyon via Meteorite-list]

Aside from the term "unwitnessed fall" the other issue is that in the
auction description it has a fall date.  The term "unwitnessed fall" should
be changed to "find" and the fall date should be removed.

[image: image.png]

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 8:18 AM Darryl Pitt via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

>
> Hi Elizabeth,
>
> Bur-Abor is not considered an “unwitnessed fall” by anyone as no such
> designation exists.  The features of this meteorite are consistent with a
> residency on Earth of at least decades — if not centuries...or far more;
> Bur-Abor is an outstanding, highly weathered meteorite.  Please remedy as
> we all get hurt when the line between puffing and misrepresentation is
> blurred.
>
>
>
>
> On May 18, 2021, at 11:34 AM, Elizabeth Grose via Meteorite-list <
> meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
>
>
> *NOW AVAILABLE AT AUCTION*
> *BUR-ABOR, AN INCOMPARABLE METEORITE SPECIMEN – MAIN MASS*
>
> *Iron, medium octahedrite IIIABNortheastern Province, Kenya*
> https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/27190/lot/11/
>
> A thrilling 600-pound main mass, the Bur-Abor meteorite main mass may
> arguably be classed at the top of all large iron meteorites to be offered
> at auction. Bur -Abor was found in Northeastern Kenya in a local family's
> garden, after it fell on Nov. 27, 1997. Considered an unwitnessed fall,
> Bur-Abor boasts numerous distinguished qualities.
>
> The present main mass is replete with regmaglypts and large scoops while
> also displaying the rarely seen feature of orientation. These distinctive
> features were caused by ablation as the meteorite coursed through Earth's
> atmosphere. One can see the surface area where elongated, parallel
> thumbprints indicate oriented flight, which melted grooves into the
> surface, mirroring each other in shape and size. Created by millions of
> years in the heavy metal core of an asteroid, it weighs a massive 274
> kilograms and has never been cleaned or wire brushed; its appearance is
> exactly as it was the day it was found.
>
> After its discovery, a portion of Bur-Abor was taken to the Natural
> History Museum in London. The present offering is the main mass. Iron
> meteorites of this size and beauty are generally only seen in world
> renowned museums and a few university display collections. The magnificent
> piece is offered on a rotating custom steel stand. *Weighing 274kg (602.8
> lbs). Measuring 32 x 20 x 15 in*
>
> View it online:  https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/27190/lot/11/
>
> For inquiries:  tom.lindg...@bonhams.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This email is intended solely for the named recipient(s) only. It may
> contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not one of
> the intended recipients, please notify the sender immediately and destroy
> this email. You must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance
> upon it. Whilst all efforts are made to safeguard emails, Bonhams cannot
> guarantee that attachments are virus free or compatible with your systems
> and does not accept any liability in respect of viruses or computer
> problems experienced. Any views expressed in this message are those of the
> individual sender, except where specifically stated to be the view of
> Bonhams, its subsidiaries or associates. When addressed to our clients, any
> opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the relevant
> Bonhams terms of business. http://www.bonhams.com/terms
>
> Bonhams 1793 Ltd, Montpelier Galleries, Montpelier Street, London, SW7
> 1HH. Incorporated in England. Registered Number 4326560
> Bonhams SAM, Le Beau Rivage, 9 Ave d'Ostende, Monaco MC 98000 Commerce
> Register No. 92S02808
> Bonhams GmbH, Maximilianstrasse 52, 80538 Munchen Handelsregister-Nr 102178
>
> Bonhams France SAS, 4 rue de la Paix, 75002 Paris, France
> Bonhams (Hong Kong) Ltd, Suite 2001 20/F, One Pacific Place, 88 Queensway
> Admiralty, Hong Kong, Registration no. : 1426522
> Bonhams (Europe) SA, 10, rue Etienne-Dumont, 1204 Geneva, Switzerland,
> Registration no. : CH-660-1356997-8
> Bonhams & Butterfields Auctioneers Corporation, 580 Madison Avenue, New
> York, NY 10022, NYC DCA License No. 2077070
> __
>
> EXTREMELY RARE MARTIAN AND LUNAR MAIN MASS METEORITES
> https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/27190/
> Coming to auction in Bonhams’ Meteorites Online sale.  Browse 90+ lots of
> superb planetary meteorite specimens & impact memorabilia, including rare
> main mass Martian and Lunar meteorites.
>
> Bid online May 18-28 at Bonhams : Meteorites Online
> https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/27190/
> __
>
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
> __
>
> EXTREMELY RARE MARTIAN AND LUNAR MAIN MASS METEORITES
> https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/27190/
>