Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions.
Michael, Jim, Matteo, list, This is an interesting thread. I think it should be developped.And I have questions for experts like you guys. A: Does the presence of some flow lines is enough to say that a meteorite is oriented ? B. Does a meteorite with conical shape ( approx similar to Bob Haag Venus cone ) but without any crust ( due to a long stay on earth surface before find) can be said oriented . C: When thumbprints have a particular elliptical shape with a depressed side and a rim on the other side, is it a signof orientation.? Best regards Michel FRANCO Caillou Noir - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 11:46 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions I would like to note that people need to learn a little about how to describe their meteorites. I have been perusing ebay, and I note so many flawed descriptions. People are either 1, trying to deceive, or 2, just clueless about what they have. For instance, Steve Arnold list a piece of Orissa that broke off of his larger piece, then calling it a "complete individual". People, thisis a fragment, NOT an individual. An individual is a complete piece, or almost complete, where you can see it was completely covered in fusion crust, or if broken, you can see that it is nearly complete, not a broken off fragment from a much larger piece. Casper used to pull the same crap, describing complete individuals then selling you fragments with a scrap of crust. Another problem I see alot is "oriented". Most of the stones I see on ebay described as oriented never were, nor even begin to look oriented. To be oriented, it needs to clearly show that it maintained a particular flight orientation, and in doing so will show flow lines in one direction, usually the backside is flat and lipped. Some of the boxy pieces that I see as oriented on ebay could not be further from the truth. We need to clear this up and jump on these people who take liberty to trump up the pieces they are selling with false claims. Mike Farmer
Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions.
My opinion on your points... A - I would term the mere presence of flow lines as saying that the meteorite was "flight marked" but not necessarily Oriented. B - I don't think that the absence of fusion crust would mean that a specimen could not be Oriented. An example would be the famous "King of Irons" Gibeon. In my opinion, Orientation refers to shape also. C- Yes, I believe that the elongation of regmaglypts is a sign of possible orientation. When this is combined with a flat bottom with a roll over rim the signs of Orientation are even more convincing. I think the real test of orientation is when you can look at the piece and actually visualize the direction of flight. I have seen many photos on ebay described as oriented where I ask myself - "Oriented in what direction?" Orientation should be obvious to the casual observer or the term "flight marked" should be used. Best Wishes to all.. Jim Strope421 Fourth StreetGlen Dale, WV 26038 Catch a Falling Star Meteoriteshttp://www.catchafallingstar.com - Original Message - From: Michel Franco To: Michael Farmer ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 3:24 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions. Michael, Jim, Matteo, list, This is an interesting thread. I think it should be developped.And I have questions for experts like you guys. A: Does the presence of some flow lines is enough to say that a meteorite is oriented ? B. Does a meteorite with conical shape ( approx similar to Bob Haag Venus cone ) but without any crust ( due to a long stay on earth surface before find) can be said oriented . C: When thumbprints have a particular elliptical shape with a depressed side and a rim on the other side, is it a signof orientation.? Best regards Michel FRANCO Caillou Noir
Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions.
TKS Jim All your ansewer makes sense. Should be obvious to the casual observer or the term "flight marked" should be used. This can be a real rule and easy for all ! The term flight marked is not often used, am I right? I will use it now. Best regards Michel FRANCO - Original Message - From: Jim Strope To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 1:13 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions. My opinion on your points... A - I would term the mere presence of flow lines as saying that the meteorite was "flight marked" but not necessarily Oriented. B - I don't think that the absence of fusion crust would mean that a specimen could not be Oriented. An example would be the famous "King of Irons" Gibeon. In my opinion, Orientation refers to shape also. C- Yes, I believe that the elongation of regmaglypts is a sign of possible orientation. When this is combined with a flat bottom with a roll over rim the signs of Orientation are even more convincing. I think the real test of orientation is when you can look at the piece and actually visualize the direction of flight. I have seen many photos on ebay described as oriented where I ask myself - "Oriented in what direction?" Orientation should be obvious to the casual observer or the term "flight marked" should be used. Best Wishes to all.. Jim Strope421 Fourth StreetGlen Dale, WV 26038 Catch a Falling Star Meteoriteshttp://www.catchafallingstar.com - Original Message - From: Michel Franco To: Michael Farmer ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 3:24 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions. Michael, Jim, Matteo, list, This is an interesting thread. I think it should be developped.And I have questions for experts like you guys. A: Does the presence of some flow lines is enough to say that a meteorite is oriented ? B. Does a meteorite with conical shape ( approx similar to Bob Haag Venus cone ) but without any crust ( due to a long stay on earth surface before find) can be said oriented . C: When thumbprints have a particular elliptical shape with a depressed side and a rim on the other side, is it a signof orientation.? Best regards Michel FRANCO Caillou Noir
[meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions
I would like to note that people need to learn a little about how to describe their meteorites. I have been perusing ebay, and I note so many flawed descriptions. People are either 1, trying to deceive, or 2, just clueless about what they have. For instance, Steve Arnold list a piece of Orissa that broke off of his larger piece, then calling it a "complete individual". People, thisis a fragment, NOT an individual. An individual is a complete piece, or almost complete, where you can see it was completely covered in fusion crust, or if broken, you can see that it is nearly complete, not a broken off fragment from a much larger piece. Casper used to pull the same crap, describing complete individuals then selling you fragments with a scrap of crust. Another problem I see alot is "oriented". Most of the stones I see on ebay described as oriented never were, nor even begin to look oriented. To be oriented, it needs to clearly show that it maintained a particular flight orientation, and in doing so will show flow lines in one direction, usually the backside is flat and lipped. Some of the boxy pieces that I see as oriented on ebay could not be further from the truth. We need to clear this up and jump on these people who take liberty to trump up the pieces they are selling with false claims. Mike Farmer
Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions
This is oriented... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=3239item=2209729716 Bid high and bid often. Jim Strope421 Fourth StreetGlen Dale, WV 26038 Catch a Falling Star Meteoriteshttp://www.catchafallingstar.com - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:46 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions I would like to note that people need to learn a little about how to describe their meteorites. I have been perusing ebay, and I note so many flawed descriptions. People are either 1, trying to deceive, or 2, just clueless about what they have. For instance, Steve Arnold list a piece of Orissa that broke off of his larger piece, then calling it a "complete individual". People, thisis a fragment, NOT an individual. An individual is a complete piece, or almost complete, where you can see it was completely covered in fusion crust, or if broken, you can see that it is nearly complete, not a broken off fragment from a much larger piece. Casper used to pull the same crap, describing complete individuals then selling you fragments with a scrap of crust. Another problem I see alot is "oriented". Most of the stones I see on ebay described as oriented never were, nor even begin to look oriented. To be oriented, it needs to clearly show that it maintained a particular flight orientation, and in doing so will show flow lines in one direction, usually the backside is flat and lipped. Some of the boxy pieces that I see as oriented on ebay could not be further from the truth. We need to clear this up and jump on these people who take liberty to trump up the pieces they are selling with false claims. Mike Farmer
Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions
oh my, yes, that is the coolest SA I have seen in a long time! Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Jim Strope To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 4:40 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions This is oriented... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=3239item=2209729716 Bid high and bid often. Jim Strope421 Fourth StreetGlen Dale, WV 26038 Catch a Falling Star Meteoriteshttp://www.catchafallingstar.com - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:46 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions I would like to note that people need to learn a little about how to describe their meteorites. I have been perusing ebay, and I note so many flawed descriptions. People are either 1, trying to deceive, or 2, just clueless about what they have. For instance, Steve Arnold list a piece of Orissa that broke off of his larger piece, then calling it a "complete individual". People, thisis a fragment, NOT an individual. An individual is a complete piece, or almost complete, where you can see it was completely covered in fusion crust, or if broken, you can see that it is nearly complete, not a broken off fragment from a much larger piece. Casper used to pull the same crap, describing complete individuals then selling you fragments with a scrap of crust. Another problem I see alot is "oriented". Most of the stones I see on ebay described as oriented never were, nor even begin to look oriented. To be oriented, it needs to clearly show that it maintained a particular flight orientation, and in doing so will show flow lines in one direction, usually the backside is flat and lipped. Some of the boxy pieces that I see as oriented on ebay could not be further from the truth. We need to clear this up and jump on these people who take liberty to trump up the pieces they are selling with false claims. Mike Farmer
Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions
this is a SA bullett, not nice photo but flow lines visible http://it.geocities.com/meteoriti20002/SIKHOTEALINGR.7.2.JPG this is another oriented http://it.geocities.com/mcomemeteoritecollection/NWAXXXgr.91.6.JPG a oriented Gao http://it.geocities.com/mcomemeteoritecollection/Gaogr.6.5.JPG Matteo --- Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: oh my, yes, that is the coolest SA I have seen in a long time! Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Jim Strope To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 4:40 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions This is oriented... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=3239item=2209729716 Bid high and bid often. Jim Strope 421 Fourth Street Glen Dale, WV 26038 Catch a Falling Star Meteorites http://www.catchafallingstar.com - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:46 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions I would like to note that people need to learn a little about how to describe their meteorites. I have been perusing ebay, and I note so many flawed descriptions. People are either 1, trying to deceive, or 2, just clueless about what they have. For instance, Steve Arnold list a piece of Orissa that broke off of his larger piece, then calling it a complete individual. People, this is a fragment, NOT an individual. An individual is a complete piece, or almost complete, where you can see it was completely covered in fusion crust, or if broken, you can see that it is nearly complete, not a broken off fragment from a much larger piece. Casper used to pull the same crap, describing complete individuals then selling you fragments with a scrap of crust. Another problem I see alot is oriented. Most of the stones I see on ebay described as oriented never were, nor even begin to look oriented. To be oriented, it needs to clearly show that it maintained a particular flight orientation, and in doing so will show flow lines in one direction, usually the backside is flat and lipped. Some of the boxy pieces that I see as oriented on ebay could not be further from the truth. We need to clear this up and jump on these people who take liberty to trump up the pieces they are selling with false claims. Mike Farmer = M come Meteorite - Matteo Chinellato Via Triestina 126/A - 30030 - TESSERA, VENEZIA, ITALY Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sale Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.com Collection Site: http://www.mcomemeteorite.info International Meteorite Collectors Association #2140 MSN Messanger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EBAY.COM:http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/mcomemeteorite/ __ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
