[meteorite-list] Novato
Novato is approved. Alan Rubin Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California 3845 Slichter Hall 603 Charles Young Dr. E Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567 phone: 310-825-3202 e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato
Thanks for your work, Alan! Nice write up. Jim On 1/24/2014 9:39 AM, Alan Rubin wrote: Novato is approved. Alan Rubin Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California 3845 Slichter Hall 603 Charles Young Dr. E Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567 phone: 310-825-3202 e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3681/7030 - Release Date: 01/24/14 -- Jim Wooddell jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net http://pages.suddenlink.net/chondrule/ __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Hi Jason, A few remarks on your recent email: With regards to Novato: Without Dr. Jenniskens' efforts (published fireball trajectory estimates and his description of what to look for), Novato #1 would not have been recognized, and we do not know whether or not any of the subsequent finds would have been made. Whether Petrus had published a trajectory or not, a trajectory *was* provided by me, just as I did for Sutter's Mill, Chelyabinsk, Mifflin and quite a few other falls over the last decade. So in the case of Novato, there was redundancy. Also, if not for the second find at Novato by a private hunter, the first might very well have gone unrecognized as a meteorite. Don't forget that Dr. Jenniskens initially misidentified it as being terrestrial. Instead, thanks to the newspaper articles about the fireball (with information from Dr. Jenniskens), Novato #1 was recovered. I agree that what Petrus should be most commended for is generating excellent PR in the Bay Area which no doubt contributed to that initial house-hitter being suspected by the homeowner as a meteorite candidate. Once we had that data point, we knew where to look. People knew where to look, with or without that data point -- at least to within a couple miles crosstrack. It also gave us greater incentive to look in general. There's no denying that there is always nagging uncertainty prior to making that first find. That first find is always a game-changer. Stanfield will be another case of a poorly documented fall unless the coordinates are eventually made 'public' on Galactic Analytics. There seems to be a bit of animosity directed toward the Stanfield fall, or at least it has become a bit of a whipping boy. I don't recall seeing similar negative remarks being made about Ash Creek or Whetstone Mountains or Grimsby or Buzzard Coulee or dare-I-say Chelyabinsk. Why pick on Stanfield? I'm not saying there are rules that must be adhered to or anything like that, but the way things are generally being done is unscientific. If data is being lost, it's a shame. No data is being lost, any more than data at any of the other falls I mentioned has been lost. Cheers, Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Let me tell you all one thing. 50-60% of Chelyabinsk is comprised of impact-melt pieces, most of which have little or no crust, and are hard for almost anyone to identify as meteorites. I have a piece my guide found that even the meteorite people had trouble identifying except for a tiny piece of metal protruding. It is almost a sphere of lava. First piece of Novato was a joke, several media debacles that made a mess of things. Luckily the first piece which was discounted by scientists was not thrown away and the second piece was discarded only to be recovered from the trash before it was too late. Please don't suggest Novato was handled in a professional way. The blimp was cool, but useless again. A lot more could have been found without the secrecy on the ground. Greed led to virtually no recoveries from a massive fireball. Russia is pretty much just private hunters and very determined locals and some institutions, and plenty of data sharing and recoveries. Private/scientific cooperation works when there is not an overlord:) Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 7, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Rob Matson mojave_meteori...@cox.net wrote: Hi Jason, A few remarks on your recent email: With regards to Novato: Without Dr. Jenniskens' efforts (published fireball trajectory estimates and his description of what to look for), Novato #1 would not have been recognized, and we do not know whether or not any of the subsequent finds would have been made. Whether Petrus had published a trajectory or not, a trajectory *was* provided by me, just as I did for Sutter's Mill, Chelyabinsk, Mifflin and quite a few other falls over the last decade. So in the case of Novato, there was redundancy. Also, if not for the second find at Novato by a private hunter, the first might very well have gone unrecognized as a meteorite. Don't forget that Dr. Jenniskens initially misidentified it as being terrestrial. Instead, thanks to the newspaper articles about the fireball (with information from Dr. Jenniskens), Novato #1 was recovered. I agree that what Petrus should be most commended for is generating excellent PR in the Bay Area which no doubt contributed to that initial house-hitter being suspected by the homeowner as a meteorite candidate. Once we had that data point, we knew where to look. People knew where to look, with or without that data point -- at least to within a couple miles crosstrack. It also gave us greater incentive to look in general. There's no denying that there is always nagging uncertainty prior to making that first find. That first find is always a game-changer. Stanfield will be another case of a poorly documented fall unless the coordinates are eventually made 'public' on Galactic Analytics. There seems to be a bit of animosity directed toward the Stanfield fall, or at least it has become a bit of a whipping boy. I don't recall seeing similar negative remarks being made about Ash Creek or Whetstone Mountains or Grimsby or Buzzard Coulee or dare-I-say Chelyabinsk. Why pick on Stanfield? I'm not saying there are rules that must be adhered to or anything like that, but the way things are generally being done is unscientific. If data is being lost, it's a shame. No data is being lost, any more than data at any of the other falls I mentioned has been lost. Cheers, Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
(and apparently bragging rights) -- No. Without the 'consortium,' publicly posted numbers, etc. we would have much less of an idea of where/how many of the Sutter's Mill meteorites were recovered. The majority of the information shared on the SETI website would not be known, the strewn field would be poorly known (relative to now), etc. And the fall is now well-documented, and the information is publicly shared. That's worth a heck of a lot. How many of you checked the SETI website for updates while hunting for SM or N? Yeah. Useful. Really not sure where all of the criticism is coming from. This meteorite isn't lost. It's not in limbo. It's being studied and will be approved. This should be done with in a few months. A scientist wants to do a thorough job on it. Sounds good to me. Regards, Jason On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: I seem to think this is a control issue. Someone wants total control over the meteorite. Sad to dominate a meteorite fall. Never seen this type of action before. Submission changes nothing about the science or the papers released later. It is simply the act of registering the meteorite officially. I think they don't want to release the type specimen or else the receiving institution (UCLA) or (NASA) will then possibly release papers outside the control of the Consortium? My two kopeks. Michael Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Carl Agee a...@unm.edu wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding this problem with Novato. Since when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed and classified and then if it merits further research that happens next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite. Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen. Carl Agee -- Carl B. Agee Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences MSC03 2050 University of New Mexico Albuquerque NM 87131-1126 Tel: (505) 750-7172 Fax: (505) 277-3577 Email: a...@unm.edu http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/ On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
All, re: Navato, Sutter's Mill... I feel that the efforts of one individual purposely 'attempted' to drive a huge wedge between the private sector and the land owners starting at Sutter's Mill (I was not at Navato to witness first hand this, but read about it!!). During that meteorite event, that tactic worked initially but the stamina and longevity of private funds and professionalism fueled further local resident recoveries and financial motivation to find the Sutter's Mill stones yet to be discovered. To further challenge the antic's of the 'NASA' representative, I believe the PRIVATE sector donated a greater portion of the specimens being studied around the world as we speak!! My only issue is when one 'pro' distorts the truth to a point where the unknowing believe it true because it comes from a 'NASA' representative!! Greg -Original Message- From: Jason Utas Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 9:15 PM To: Jim Wooddell ; Michael Gilmer ; Meteorite-list Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hello Jim, Michael, I'll be frank: I do not believe that the majority of meteorite hunters and especially locals would have reached out to submit their find data had not an official/NASA online tally been published. At the very least, I think we can all agree that you would have collected *as much* data as did Dr. Jenniskens. Many locals clearly wanted nothing to do with private meteorite hunters, and the importance of SM numbers was only realized when the stone weights/locations/finder's names were published on the NASA-affiliated website. We all appreciate the work you put into it, and you probably did as good of a job as you could have, but the locals in the field were very excited about being involved with a NASA/SETI project, and that helped to drive many of the submissions. With regards to Novato: Without Dr. Jenniskens' efforts (published fireball trajectory estimates and his description of what to look for), Novato #1 would not have been recognized, and we do not know whether or not any of the subsequent finds would have been made. The entire fall could easily have been missed. Instead, thanks to the newspaper articles about the fireball (with information from Dr. Jenniskens), Novato #1 was recovered. Once we had that data point, we knew where to look. It also gave us greater incentive to look in general. It's much harder to motivate getting out to hunt when you're *pretty sure* rocks made it to the ground, but know little else about where they might be. You wind up spending less time in the right areas, etc. His subsequent outreach efforts subsequently yielded Novato #6. I think that would make him indirectly one of the most successful hunters of the strewn-field. He was responsible for the discovery of Novato stones #1 and #6, and the information he published indirectly led to the recovery of...everything else. Stanfield will be another case of a poorly documented fall unless the coordinates are eventually made 'public' on Galactic Analytics. I'm not saying there are rules that must be adhered to or anything like that, but the way things are generally being done is unscientific. If data is being lost, it's a shame. That's about it. I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that it's nice to see the data at some point, and to make a strewn-field map. If it's an important fall like Sutter's Mill, it helps to recover more, too. Also, Dr. Rubin pointed out he was the one the distributed with was sent to him, not Peter. The sample was forwarded to Dr. Rubin from the sample obtained by Dr. Jenniskens, I believe -- from Novato #1. Not sure exactly what you mean. Regards, Jason www.fallsandfinds.com On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com wrote: Jason, And keep in mind I was the one maintaining the filed data field for the Garmin GPS (gdp) files daily on the project and GE KMZ for finds. Not all meteorites found have SM numbers. Can not speak for that process for Novato. While I agree 100% that it's nice to have field datalord knows I've go through hell with the Franconia project, Stanfield is a perfect example of this process not working. Has no really useful field data in regards to assigned numbers. It simply is not working as data is withheldso only those hunters know what their finds are. Nothing but bragging rights and I am not saying there is anything wrong with bragging rights. That said, no one needs to or has to comply to these rules. They are unofficial. You and I might never know about finds in the field. Hunters want to delay public information as long as they can for have better chances of finding stones for themselves. We see thisand I am not complaining, just pointing it out. So in the real world, it is not working. Also, Dr. Rubin pointed out he was the one the distributed with was sent to him, not Peter. Jim On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Hello Greg, After getting turned down a few times, I started asking a few questions of the landowners who said they were committed to only NASA coming onto their land. Turns out a few private hunters whose names I won't mention decided to say that they were working with NASA, and they told landowners not to let (other) private hunters on their land. Kind of made sense after I recalled that we'd run into one of the two men earlier in the field, and his truck had a NASA sticker in the window. Before he recognized me, he told me he was working with NASA, but I hadn't thought anything of it. I suppose Dr. Jennisken's team could have been doing similar things, but that wasn't the impression I got in the field. The stories about NASA being so tough was largely being told by one of the aforementioned two hunters. Go figure. Jason www.fallsandfinds.com On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Greg Hupé gmh...@centurylink.net wrote: All, re: Navato, Sutter's Mill... I feel that the efforts of one individual purposely 'attempted' to drive a huge wedge between the private sector and the land owners starting at Sutter's Mill (I was not at Navato to witness first hand this, but read about it!!). During that meteorite event, that tactic worked initially but the stamina and longevity of private funds and professionalism fueled further local resident recoveries and financial motivation to find the Sutter's Mill stones yet to be discovered. To further challenge the antic's of the 'NASA' representative, I believe the PRIVATE sector donated a greater portion of the specimens being studied around the world as we speak!! My only issue is when one 'pro' distorts the truth to a point where the unknowing believe it true because it comes from a 'NASA' representative!! Greg -Original Message- From: Jason Utas Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 9:15 PM To: Jim Wooddell ; Michael Gilmer ; Meteorite-list Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hello Jim, Michael, I'll be frank: I do not believe that the majority of meteorite hunters and especially locals would have reached out to submit their find data had not an official/NASA online tally been published. At the very least, I think we can all agree that you would have collected *as much* data as did Dr. Jenniskens. Many locals clearly wanted nothing to do with private meteorite hunters, and the importance of SM numbers was only realized when the stone weights/locations/finder's names were published on the NASA-affiliated website. We all appreciate the work you put into it, and you probably did as good of a job as you could have, but the locals in the field were very excited about being involved with a NASA/SETI project, and that helped to drive many of the submissions. With regards to Novato: Without Dr. Jenniskens' efforts (published fireball trajectory estimates and his description of what to look for), Novato #1 would not have been recognized, and we do not know whether or not any of the subsequent finds would have been made. The entire fall could easily have been missed. Instead, thanks to the newspaper articles about the fireball (with information from Dr. Jenniskens), Novato #1 was recovered. Once we had that data point, we knew where to look. It also gave us greater incentive to look in general. It's much harder to motivate getting out to hunt when you're *pretty sure* rocks made it to the ground, but know little else about where they might be. You wind up spending less time in the right areas, etc. His subsequent outreach efforts subsequently yielded Novato #6. I think that would make him indirectly one of the most successful hunters of the strewn-field. He was responsible for the discovery of Novato stones #1 and #6, and the information he published indirectly led to the recovery of...everything else. Stanfield will be another case of a poorly documented fall unless the coordinates are eventually made 'public' on Galactic Analytics. I'm not saying there are rules that must be adhered to or anything like that, but the way things are generally being done is unscientific. If data is being lost, it's a shame. That's about it. I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that it's nice to see the data at some point, and to make a strewn-field map. If it's an important fall like Sutter's Mill, it helps to recover more, too. Also, Dr. Rubin pointed out he was the one the distributed with was sent to him, not Peter. The sample was forwarded to Dr. Rubin from the sample obtained by Dr. Jenniskens, I believe -- from Novato #1. Not sure exactly what you mean. Regards, Jason www.fallsandfinds.com On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com wrote: Jason, And keep in mind I was the one maintaining the filed data field for the Garmin GPS (gdp) files daily on the project and GE KMZ for finds. Not all meteorites found have SM numbers. Can not speak
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Hi Jason, I do not know who you are talking about so please post their unprofessional initials at least! As for the problem [at Sutter's Mill], we were all(some) presented with cards of the NASA 'representatives' who bad-mouthed the 'unqualified' private armatures as we were according to that one 'pro' and team. This was the first strewnfield where land owners posted, No Meteorite Hunting - NASA ONLY. I am really not trying to draw too much here, but when one person props up someone who has done damage against us 'private amateurs'', then someone needs to speak up!! Sometimes unprofessional behavior happens on 'all' levels of meteoritics... Greg -Original Message- From: Jason Utas Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 11:51 PM To: Greg Hupé ; Meteorite-list Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hello Greg, After getting turned down a few times, I started asking a few questions of the landowners who said they were committed to only NASA coming onto their land. Turns out a few private hunters whose names I won't mention decided to say that they were working with NASA, and they told landowners not to let (other) private hunters on their land. Kind of made sense after I recalled that we'd run into one of the two men earlier in the field, and his truck had a NASA sticker in the window. Before he recognized me, he told me he was working with NASA, but I hadn't thought anything of it. I suppose Dr. Jennisken's team could have been doing similar things, but that wasn't the impression I got in the field. The stories about NASA being so tough was largely being told by one of the aforementioned two hunters. Go figure. Jason www.fallsandfinds.com On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Greg Hupé gmh...@centurylink.net wrote: All, re: Navato, Sutter's Mill... I feel that the efforts of one individual purposely 'attempted' to drive a huge wedge between the private sector and the land owners starting at Sutter's Mill (I was not at Navato to witness first hand this, but read about it!!). During that meteorite event, that tactic worked initially but the stamina and longevity of private funds and professionalism fueled further local resident recoveries and financial motivation to find the Sutter's Mill stones yet to be discovered. To further challenge the antic's of the 'NASA' representative, I believe the PRIVATE sector donated a greater portion of the specimens being studied around the world as we speak!! My only issue is when one 'pro' distorts the truth to a point where the unknowing believe it true because it comes from a 'NASA' representative!! Greg -Original Message- From: Jason Utas Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 9:15 PM To: Jim Wooddell ; Michael Gilmer ; Meteorite-list Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hello Jim, Michael, I'll be frank: I do not believe that the majority of meteorite hunters and especially locals would have reached out to submit their find data had not an official/NASA online tally been published. At the very least, I think we can all agree that you would have collected *as much* data as did Dr. Jenniskens. Many locals clearly wanted nothing to do with private meteorite hunters, and the importance of SM numbers was only realized when the stone weights/locations/finder's names were published on the NASA-affiliated website. We all appreciate the work you put into it, and you probably did as good of a job as you could have, but the locals in the field were very excited about being involved with a NASA/SETI project, and that helped to drive many of the submissions. With regards to Novato: Without Dr. Jenniskens' efforts (published fireball trajectory estimates and his description of what to look for), Novato #1 would not have been recognized, and we do not know whether or not any of the subsequent finds would have been made. The entire fall could easily have been missed. Instead, thanks to the newspaper articles about the fireball (with information from Dr. Jenniskens), Novato #1 was recovered. Once we had that data point, we knew where to look. It also gave us greater incentive to look in general. It's much harder to motivate getting out to hunt when you're *pretty sure* rocks made it to the ground, but know little else about where they might be. You wind up spending less time in the right areas, etc. His subsequent outreach efforts subsequently yielded Novato #6. I think that would make him indirectly one of the most successful hunters of the strewn-field. He was responsible for the discovery of Novato stones #1 and #6, and the information he published indirectly led to the recovery of...everything else. Stanfield will be another case of a poorly documented fall unless the coordinates are eventually made 'public' on Galactic Analytics. I'm not saying there are rules that must be adhered to or anything like that, but the way things are generally being done is unscientific. If data is being lost, it's a shame. That's about it. I don't
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
to dominate a meteorite fall. Never seen this type of action before. Submission changes nothing about the science or the papers released later. It is simply the act of registering the meteorite officially. I think they don't want to release the type specimen or else the receiving institution (UCLA) or (NASA) will then possibly release papers outside the control of the Consortium? My two kopeks. Michael Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Carl Agee a...@unm.edu wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding this problem with Novato. Since when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed and classified and then if it merits further research that happens next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite. Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen. Carl Agee -- Carl B. Agee Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences MSC03 2050 University of New Mexico Albuquerque NM 87131-1126 Tel: (505) 750-7172 Fax: (505) 277-3577 Email: a...@unm.edu http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/ On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013. If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
-up in the bulletin will reflect the variety of analyses performed on the rock, I'm sure. Since most folks wouldn't go through the trouble of doing this much work on an L6, I'm glad that someone is organizing it. 7) Re: Jim's comments about find numbers (and apparently bragging rights) -- No. Without the 'consortium,' publicly posted numbers, etc. we would have much less of an idea of where/how many of the Sutter's Mill meteorites were recovered. The majority of the information shared on the SETI website would not be known, the strewn field would be poorly known (relative to now), etc. And the fall is now well-documented, and the information is publicly shared. That's worth a heck of a lot. How many of you checked the SETI website for updates while hunting for SM or N? Yeah. Useful. Really not sure where all of the criticism is coming from. This meteorite isn't lost. It's not in limbo. It's being studied and will be approved. This should be done with in a few months. A scientist wants to do a thorough job on it. Sounds good to me. Regards, Jason On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: I seem to think this is a control issue. Someone wants total control over the meteorite. Sad to dominate a meteorite fall. Never seen this type of action before. Submission changes nothing about the science or the papers released later. It is simply the act of registering the meteorite officially. I think they don't want to release the type specimen or else the receiving institution (UCLA) or (NASA) will then possibly release papers outside the control of the Consortium? My two kopeks. Michael Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Carl Agee a...@unm.edu wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding this problem with Novato. Since when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed and classified and then if it merits further research that happens next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite. Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen. Carl Agee -- Carl B. Agee Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences MSC03 2050 University of New Mexico Albuquerque NM 87131-1126 Tel: (505) 750-7172 Fax: (505) 277-3577 Email: a...@unm.edu http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/ On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
up their alley. 6) Michael Mulgrew's recent comment makes no sense to me. Every meteorite must be studied to some extent prior to publication, or it could not be published. Some meteorites require O-isotope analyses, some require trapped gas analyses, and others require only a few mineralogical data points and a petrographic description. Where to draw that line can be somewhat arbitrary, but one must be careful. There was some confusion a few years ago because O-isotope data was not obtained on a new NWA acapulcoite, and it was classified as an winonaite. Later pairings were worked on more thoroughly. Novato is a little different because we all know it's an L6, but still. The write-up in the bulletin will reflect the variety of analyses performed on the rock, I'm sure. Since most folks wouldn't go through the trouble of doing this much work on an L6, I'm glad that someone is organizing it. 7) Re: Jim's comments about find numbers (and apparently bragging rights) -- No. Without the 'consortium,' publicly posted numbers, etc. we would have much less of an idea of where/how many of the Sutter's Mill meteorites were recovered. The majority of the information shared on the SETI website would not be known, the strewn field would be poorly known (relative to now), etc. And the fall is now well-documented, and the information is publicly shared. That's worth a heck of a lot. How many of you checked the SETI website for updates while hunting for SM or N? Yeah. Useful. Really not sure where all of the criticism is coming from. This meteorite isn't lost. It's not in limbo. It's being studied and will be approved. This should be done with in a few months. A scientist wants to do a thorough job on it. Sounds good to me. Regards, Jason On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: I seem to think this is a control issue. Someone wants total control over the meteorite. Sad to dominate a meteorite fall. Never seen this type of action before. Submission changes nothing about the science or the papers released later. It is simply the act of registering the meteorite officially. I think they don't want to release the type specimen or else the receiving institution (UCLA) or (NASA) will then possibly release papers outside the control of the Consortium? My two kopeks. Michael Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Carl Agee a...@unm.edu wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding this problem with Novato. Since when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed and classified and then if it merits further research that happens next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite. Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen. Carl Agee -- Carl B. Agee Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences MSC03 2050 University of New Mexico Albuquerque NM 87131-1126 Tel: (505) 750-7172 Fax: (505) 277-3577 Email: a...@unm.edu http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/ On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013. If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders) to submit a type specimen to UCLA. But not until we all have been given a proper explanation. -- Bob V. --- On Mon, 4/29/13, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com wrote: From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Pat Brown scientificlifest...@hotmail.com, Jim Wooddell jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net, Met List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 8:51 PM Hi All, I've been informed by one of the Novato finders that this is a non-issue. Dr. Jenniskens has long-since pledged to donate more than adequate Novato type specimen to UCLA for it to be approved by the Nomenclature Committee. That it hasn't happened already is simply because Dr. Jenniskens wished to ensure that all academic requests for meteoritical material were handled promptly. 29 grams of the first recovered stone were generously donated by Lisa Webber to SETI for scientific analysis; of that, whatever is not consumed in destructive analyses has been promised to UCLA. So there is no cause for alarm; people just need to be patient. --Rob On Apr 30, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com wrote: Actually, it's still the Novato (provisional) meteorite. It still is not in the Meteoritical Bulletin. This is the slice that Brien Cook originally cut with the intention of submitting it to UCLA. But when he read that someone else was going to supply the type-specimen, he then placed it on eBay. It would be nice if some Institute or consortium would make an offer and try to repatriate this slice and make it a type-specimen so that this US-fall could finally be made official. All I'm saying is, this leaving an official-status hanging-in-mid-air would never happen in Canada. They would
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Hi Carl and all! I do not think classification is the issue. There was a small sample classified. Submission is the issue. The type spec has not been deposited and the sample classified was not large enough to be the type specimen. Jeff confirmed the concept of the type specfor scientific study. I trust this is actually possible and is working. It seems things changed since Sutter's Mill in regards to control. We suddenly are now numbering (unofficially) field recoveries for nothing more than bragging rights by the hunters that choose to participate in such. Some finds will never have a number under such a system nor need it. For Sutter's Mill and Novato, both areas of responsibility of Peter's, he has taken charge of who gets what and others bow to this process and not following the procedure that we all know and have been following. The excuse has been stated that he wanted scientist to have an opportunity to study it before submitting the type sample. So, this raises really BIG QUESTIONS! 1. Do scientist have the same opportunity to study, even if destructive (a part of), a type spec after it is submitted at the level someone like Peter wants? 2. During the Sutter's Mill event, it seemed a completely different group of scientist got involved and did some remarkable work. Is this the reason why he is managing this effort on meteorites in his own area? I saw names of people involved in meteoritic studies that I hade never seen before. I cant imagine type specs not being available for the same exact studies that are going on right nowmaybe this is not correct??? I am in agreement with the NomCom on this 100%. We all play by the same rules and it should work out fine. Jim On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Carl Agee a...@unm.edu wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding this problem with Novato. Since when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed and classified and then if it merits further research that happens next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite. Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen. Carl Agee -- Carl B. Agee Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences MSC03 2050 University of New Mexico Albuquerque NM 87131-1126 Tel: (505) 750-7172 Fax: (505) 277-3577 Email: a...@unm.edu http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/ On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
I received a sample of Novato for classification not too long after it fell. I made a thin section, did the microscopy and probe work and classified the stone. This was the first thing that was done. I am not working on any paper about the meteorite. I was asked to cut up the small piece I was sent and then send those pieces to different researchers for the gathering of additional data. I sent those out and now have almost no sample left at UCLA save the original thin section. I was told that eventually the requisite amount would be deposited at UCLA as the type specimen after some additional research was done on the specimen. My only interest at this point is to receive the specimen, log it in to the UCLA collection and inform the NOMCOM that everything is now in order. I'm not holding anything up. Alan Alan Rubin Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California 3845 Slichter Hall 603 Charles Young Dr. E Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567 phone: 310-825-3202 e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com To: Carl Agee a...@unm.edu Cc: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:58 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update I seem to think this is a control issue. Someone wants total control over the meteorite. Sad to dominate a meteorite fall. Never seen this type of action before. Submission changes nothing about the science or the papers released later. It is simply the act of registering the meteorite officially. I think they don't want to release the type specimen or else the receiving institution (UCLA) or (NASA) will then possibly release papers outside the control of the Consortium? My two kopeks. Michael Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Carl Agee a...@unm.edu wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding this problem with Novato. Since when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed and classified and then if it merits further research that happens next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite. Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen. Carl Agee -- Carl B. Agee Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences MSC03 2050 University of New Mexico Albuquerque NM 87131-1126 Tel: (505) 750-7172 Fax: (505) 277-3577 Email: a...@unm.edu http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/ On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
My salute to Michael (and you other two :) for taking the fortune for us all to the next level, this time way ovedr there in Russia. There would be no classifications, collections to enhance, stories to embrace and share without the eyes on the groundnot to mention the risk, expense and all the other inhibitors. I'm pretty durned proud. Slog, mud, slog... Thanks too, Richard M - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer To: Carl Agee Cc: Jason Utas ; meteoritelist meteoritelist ; Robert Verish ; Richard Montgomery Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 12:02 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update I'm just saying that in the scientific world the same bullshit seems to be happening as in the private sector. Everyone is guarding their territory and all for self gain. I am in Russia and I've been hunting more than a week and haven't seen scientist one out here in the mud. But I am sure I will hear crying when I am selling Chelyabinsk back home. I have already spread it throughout the world via donations and sales so all can work as they see fit without a boss overseer. At least I can admit it:) Mike Sent from my iPhone On May 2, 2013, at 12:57 AM, Carl Agee a...@unm.edu wrote: Jason People can take as much time as they please before submittal for classification. All I am saying is that no science on it can be published at LPSC or MetSoc if it is not classified. Also the name Novato hasn't been approved. Carl Agee On May 1, 2013 11:50 AM, Jason Utas meteorite...@gmail.com wrote: Hello All, 1) I think this is making a mountain out of a molehill. Dr. Jenniskens went through the work of obtaining the type specimen and he should be able to work on it as he sees fit. If that delays the publication of the meteorite for a few months, it doesn't matter. Doing so does not adversely affect anyone or anything, in any way. 2) Carl -- I think the difference here is that the stone has had all of the work necessary for approval completed, but it is being held up so that Dr. Jenniskens can oversee the additional work that is being done. If he had given the type sample to UCLA earlier on, he might not have been able to accommodate sample requests (and he has been very forthcoming with doing so), so I think it's less a matter of control as one of opportunity. Many of the studies that have been performed on the rock are not often done on equilibrated ordinary chondrites. It's still valuable information, but not data that is usually included in a Meteoritical Bulletin writeup. Which isn't to say that UCLA is not capable of doing the same, butnone of this matters. The stone will be approved and UCLA will get their type specimen. Since Dr. Rubin already received a small sample in order to describe the stone petrographically, he is included in the consortium and will be a co-author in any publications turned out by it (thus rendering Michael Farmer's most recent criticism somewhat moot). Since Dr. Jenniskens did put in a lot of trajectory calculation/outreach/recovery effort, I don't see why he's not entitled to work on the specimen first. 3) The destructive work mentioned by some in a negative light includes many studies outlined here: http://asima.seti.org/n/ Stuff like Ar-Ar dating, raman spectroscopy, and other studies require the dissolution or otherwise destruction of small portions of the meteorite. It's standard procedure. Most of those kinds of studies aren't performed on your average equilibrated chondrite fall, though, so...be glad that it's happening with this one. More of this kind of information could help us better understand the histories of these bodies in the solar system. So for those of you saying that SETI/Dr. Jenniskens is doing things they can't or shouldn'tthey're not. They're just organizing things. 4) Having met with Lisa Webber and Glen Rivera a few times after they handed N#1 over to Dr. Jenniskens, I don't think Richard Montgomery's statement holds any water, either. They seemed genuinely happy to provide the stone for analysis. I can't see how or why that would have changed in the time since then, since they had already handed over the stone and clearly expected ~20+ grams to go to an institution. 5) Some people seem to not like Dr. Jenniskens. I loaned them N#5 for non-destructive work and picked it up in person last Friday night. SETI's pretty cool, and they seem to be doing good work, most of it pertaining to asteroids, near-Earth/Earth-crossing bodies, Mars, and a variety of other things. This kind of thing is really right up their alley. 6) Michael Mulgrew's recent comment makes no sense to me. Every meteorite must be studied to some extent prior to publication, or it could not be published. Some meteorites require O-isotope analyses, some require trapped gas analyses, and others require only a few mineralogical data points and a petrographic description. Where to draw that line can be somewhat arbitrary, but one must
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Jason (and list), My comment was actually a question, and that question was with regards to the fact than any work done on an unapproved meteorite cannot be published by LPSC or MetSoc, so why not get it approved first, then commence with the tests, paper writings, and publications? What merit do the test results have if they cannot be published? It was an honest question born of ignorance of the process. Michael in so. Cal. On May 1, 2013 11:50 AM, Jason Utas meteorite...@gmail.com wrote: 6) Michael Mulgrew's recent comment makes no sense to me. Every meteorite must be studied to some extent prior to publication, or it could not be published. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
This was taken from the Meteoritical Societies website. It relates to self-paired meteorites which will never have an official name, cannot be used in scientific papers or provide any meaningful long-term investment potential to collectors. * Unambiguous and reliable meteorite names are indispensable to anyone with an interest in meteorites - citizens, writers, scientists, and collectors alike. Official names are also required in order to publish studies of meteorites in certain journals and meeting proceedings,among them MAPS, GCA, and Earth and Planetary Science Letters, and the abstracts of the Lunar and Planetary Science Conferences, the Goldschmidt Conferences, and the annual meetings of the Meteoritical Society. * - Original Message - From: Michael Mulgrew mikest...@gmail.com To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2013 7:47 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Jason (and list), My comment was actually a question, and that question was with regards to the fact than any work done on an unapproved meteorite cannot be published by LPSC or MetSoc, so why not get it approved first, then commence with the tests, paper writings, and publications? What merit do the test results have if they cannot be published? It was an honest question born of ignorance of the process. Michael in so. Cal. On May 1, 2013 11:50 AM, Jason Utas meteorite...@gmail.com wrote: 6) Michael Mulgrew's recent comment makes no sense to me. Every meteorite must be studied to some extent prior to publication, or it could not be published. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
I looked for that slice on Ebay and can not find it. Jim On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com wrote: Hi All, I've been informed by one of the Novato finders that this is a non-issue. Dr. Jenniskens has long-since pledged to donate more than adequate Novato type specimen to UCLA for it to be approved by the Nomenclature Committee. That it hasn't happened already is simply because Dr. Jenniskens wished to ensure that all academic requests for meteoritical material were handled promptly. 29 grams of the first recovered stone were generously donated by Lisa Webber to SETI for scientific analysis; of that, whatever is not consumed in destructive analyses has been promised to UCLA. So there is no cause for alarm; people just need to be patient. --Rob -Original Message- From: Pat Brown [mailto:scientificlifest...@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 8:36 PM To: Matson, Robert D.; Jim Wooddell; Michael Farmer; Robert Verish; Met List Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Getting Novato approved Hello Rob, the other Novato searchers and the List, This is a very interesting Urban fall and a very challenging meteorite to hunt. Personally, I hunted my backside off and did not find a crumb (although, I went right past the individual that Bob Verish discovered, like within 4-6 feet!). Is not the rule 20 grams or 20% if the original mass was less than 100 grams? If the finder that deposited ~14.4 grams represented that as 20% of the individual meteorite found, does that not meet the Meteoritical Society Nomenclature Committee guidelines? Personally, I would very much like to see this one in the Bulletin. I would be very interested in understanding the masses that were found. Yours in Science, Pat Brown __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com 928-247-2675 __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013. If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders) to submit a type specimen to UCLA. But not until we all have been given a proper explanation. -- Bob V. --- On Mon, 4/29/13, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com wrote: From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Pat Brown scientificlifest...@hotmail.com, Jim Wooddell jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net, Met List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 8:51 PM Hi All, I've been informed by one of the Novato finders that this is a non-issue. Dr. Jenniskens has long-since pledged to donate more than adequate Novato type specimen to UCLA for it to be approved by the Nomenclature Committee. That it hasn't happened already is simply because Dr. Jenniskens wished to ensure that all academic requests for meteoritical material were handled promptly. 29 grams of the first recovered stone were generously donated by Lisa Webber to SETI for scientific analysis; of that, whatever is not consumed in destructive analyses has been promised to UCLA. So there is no cause for alarm; people just need to be patient. --Rob On Apr 30, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com wrote: Actually, it's still the Novato (provisional) meteorite. It still is not in the Meteoritical Bulletin. This is the slice that Brien Cook originally cut with the intention of submitting it to UCLA. But when he read that someone else was going to supply the type-specimen, he then placed it on eBay. It would be nice if some Institute or consortium would make an offer and try to repatriate this slice and make it a type-specimen so that this US-fall could finally be made official. All I'm saying is, this leaving an official-status hanging-in-mid-air would never happen in Canada. They would just simply buy the type-specimen. It's time for the US to catch-up with Canada. It's time for a change. Bob V. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Hi Bob, Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I don't know the answer. This sounds like a good question for Jeff Grossman. I can certainly ~imagine~ some possible explanations, not the least of which is that I believe some past meteorites have gotten Nomenclature Committee approval on the promise of an adequate type specimen, only to have that promise never fulfilled. In the Novato case, it would appear there is more than enough type specimen distributed between at least two recognized institutions; it's just that the final destination of a fraction of it has not yet occurred. Perhaps more to the point, the actual type specimen mass is not yet known, since it involves the balance of a 29-gram sample -- an unknown portion of which has been used in destructive analysis. Kind of hard for the Committee to vote on a meteorite when they don't know the actual type specimen mass -- even if that mass is almost surely greater than 20 grams. None of this discussion would appear to impact the decision to approve a provision name, however. Best, Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
I was informed by Laurence Garvie that they don't deal in promises. They will approve the name only after they are notified that an actual physical specimen of the proper mass is in the possession of a qualified institution. Alan Alan Rubin Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California 3845 Slichter Hall 603 Charles Young Dr. E Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567 phone: 310-825-3202 e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html - Original Message - From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com To: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com; Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hi Bob, Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I don't know the answer. This sounds like a good question for Jeff Grossman. I can certainly ~imagine~ some possible explanations, not the least of which is that I believe some past meteorites have gotten Nomenclature Committee approval on the promise of an adequate type specimen, only to have that promise never fulfilled. In the Novato case, it would appear there is more than enough type specimen distributed between at least two recognized institutions; it's just that the final destination of a fraction of it has not yet occurred. Perhaps more to the point, the actual type specimen mass is not yet known, since it involves the balance of a 29-gram sample -- an unknown portion of which has been used in destructive analysis. Kind of hard for the Committee to vote on a meteorite when they don't know the actual type specimen mass -- even if that mass is almost surely greater than 20 grams. None of this discussion would appear to impact the decision to approve a provision name, however. Best, Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
As should be done. Congrats though on third California fall. Two in one year ain't half bad :) Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 12:36 AM, Alan Rubin aeru...@ucla.edu wrote: I was informed by Laurence Garvie that they don't deal in promises. They will approve the name only after they are notified that an actual physical specimen of the proper mass is in the possession of a qualified institution. Alan Alan Rubin Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California 3845 Slichter Hall 603 Charles Young Dr. E Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567 phone: 310-825-3202 e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html - Original Message - From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com To: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com; Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hi Bob, Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I don't know the answer. This sounds like a good question for Jeff Grossman. I can certainly ~imagine~ some possible explanations, not the least of which is that I believe some past meteorites have gotten Nomenclature Committee approval on the promise of an adequate type specimen, only to have that promise never fulfilled. In the Novato case, it would appear there is more than enough type specimen distributed between at least two recognized institutions; it's just that the final destination of a fraction of it has not yet occurred. Perhaps more to the point, the actual type specimen mass is not yet known, since it involves the balance of a 29-gram sample -- an unknown portion of which has been used in destructive analysis. Kind of hard for the Committee to vote on a meteorite when they don't know the actual type specimen mass -- even if that mass is almost surely greater than 20 grams. None of this discussion would appear to impact the decision to approve a provision name, however. Best, Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
I am glad to see that no compromises are being made and that the Meteoritical Society rules are being followed. It is also good that most dealers are aware of the rules and are willing to honor them. I am particularly impressed with the fact that a List Member(s) was willing to step up and provide additional material if needed to make this fall official. Happy Hunting, Adam From: Alan Rubin aeru...@ucla.edu To: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com; Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com; Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:36 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update I was informed by Laurence Garvie that they don't deal in promises. They will approve the name only after they are notified that an actual physical specimen of the proper mass is in the possession of a qualified institution. Alan Alan Rubin Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California 3845 Slichter Hall 603 Charles Young Dr. E Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567 phone: 310-825-3202 e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html - Original Message - From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com To: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com; Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hi Bob, Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I don't know the answer. This sounds like a good question for Jeff Grossman. I can certainly ~imagine~ some possible explanations, not the least of which is that I believe some past meteorites have gotten Nomenclature Committee approval on the promise of an adequate type specimen, only to have that promise never fulfilled. In the Novato case, it would appear there is more than enough type specimen distributed between at least two recognized institutions; it's just that the final destination of a fraction of it has not yet occurred. Perhaps more to the point, the actual type specimen mass is not yet known, since it involves the balance of a 29-gram sample -- an unknown portion of which has been used in destructive analysis. Kind of hard for the Committee to vote on a meteorite when they don't know the actual type specimen mass -- even if that mass is almost surely greater than 20 grams. None of this discussion would appear to impact the decision to approve a provision name, however. Best, Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
In regards to what Alan stated, this makes perfect sense to me and I agree with that of which the committee has decided. We have a procedure and it seems only one person is not in compliance with that procedurein regards to classification and submittal to the NomCom. No matter what the excuse is. If the type spec amount (20 grams in this case) is not for the purpose of science, then what's it for...hoarding? Is it going to kill anyone to give the classifying institution 20 grams? Alan, if I had it, I give UCLA the whole darn thing and be proud to do it. I don't knowthis just sounds messed up to me. Jim Wooddell __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Agreed, somebody needs to cough up a piece to consolidate the type specimen and satisfy the requirements for publication in the Met Bulletin. That is how it should be. Until such a specimen is analyzed, submitted, and approved, it is not a meteorite, it is a rock that is suspected to be a meteorite. Giving it any unofficial name does not make it a meteorite, unless that name is approved by NonCom. Everybody wins when the specimen is classified and approved via an open, transparent, and official manner. There are too many falls that are not approved yet. Going back to the year 2000, there are seventeen (17) falls that are not officially approved yet. They come from all corners of the world and some are very well documented, but have not been approved for various reasons. For example, someone earlier mentioned that Canada does not drag it's feet on classifications and would simply buy the type specimen. Well, there is the Montney fall from 2005 that is lost somewhere in the system. Canada is usually pretty quick, but why hasn't Montney been approved? Is there doubt about the fall in some way, or is it a problem similar to Novato where it is a bonafide fall but has not been approved for logistical reasons? Collectors and probably some scientists are eager for a few recent falls to become approved. Until these meteorites are approved, they cannot be published in most peer-reviewed journals. And until they are approved, there will always be an element of reluctance on the behalf of some collectors. Zunhua? No doubt there. Penetrated a house and was documented thoroughly. Why hasn't this one been classified yet? What are the Chinese waiting on? Nobody else outside China will submit it for classification because it is a scientific courtesy, so will it remain in limbo forever because ? Katol? It's distinctive and on the market. Again, there is no doubt that it is a fall. Let's hope GSI submits it so it can be published. Collectors want to know. It may be a meteorite that is interesting to science as well. Draveil? What's the hold up on this one? Oslo? The list - Jan 15, 2013 - Planeta Rica (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Colombia Feb 11, 2012 - Huangzhong/Xining (unofficial) (L6 chondrite?) : China Mar 01, 2012 - Oslo (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Norway (Hammer) May 03, 2012 - Diplo (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Pakistan May 22, 2012 - Katol (unofficial) (achondrite) : India (Hammer) Jun 03, 2012 - Comayagua (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite) : Honduras (Hammer) Jul 08, 2012 - Jalangi (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : India Oct 12, 2012 - Beni Yacoub (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Morocco Oct 17, 2012 - Novato (unofficial) (L6 chondrite) : California USA(Hammer) Oct 30, 2012 - Addison (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Alabama USA Dec 16, 2012 - Algeria (unofficial) (LL chondrite?) : Algeria Jul 11-12, 2011 - Draveil/Essonne? (unofficial) (H chondrite?) : France (Hammer) May 01, 2010 - Breja/Taouz (unofficial) (LL6 chondrite?) : Morocco/Algeria Mar 01, 2009 - Cartersville (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite) : Georgia USA (Hammer) Apr 12, 2008 - Zunhua (unofficial) (L4 chondrite?) : China (Hammer) Sep 07, 2007 - Guadalajara (L or LL3 chondrite?) : Mexico (Hammer) Jul 17, 2005 - Montney (H6 chondrite?) : Canada (Hammer) Best regards, MikeG -- - Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone Twitter - http://twitter.com/GalacticStone Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone RSS - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 - On 4/30/13, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: As should be done. Congrats though on third California fall. Two in one year ain't half bad :) Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 12:36 AM, Alan Rubin aeru...@ucla.edu wrote: I was informed by Laurence Garvie that they don't deal in promises. They will approve the name only after they are notified that an actual physical specimen of the proper mass is in the possession of a qualified institution. Alan Alan Rubin Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California 3845 Slichter Hall 603 Charles Young Dr. E Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567 phone: 310-825-3202 e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html - Original Message - From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com To: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com; Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hi Bob, Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least
[meteorite-list] Novato update
First off, I'd like to say how pleased I am to see Matija Bericic, the original purchaser, put the meteorite back on the market. He had been in touch with me within days and actively pursued getting a piece for research purposes. At the time no one had any idea how many, or little, would be recovered so it was a bit of a gamble. As far donating a piece for classification, Peter called me within an hour of posting pictures of my slice. He was clearly concerned he may have discarded the Webber meteorite prematurely. During our conversation we talked about classification and he told me he would retrieve the Webber meteorite be taking care of that. And that's where we left it. I never followed up with him or Alan regarding this, I just assume it got done. On a related note, there may have been another find a couple days ago. I'm not at liberty to disclose more details but I suspect the finder will step forth after it is verified. ___ Unlimited Disk, Data Transfer, PHP/MySQL Domain Hosting http://www.doteasy.com __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Jim Wrote, We have a procedure and it seems only one person is not in compliance with thatprocedure.. I agree completely. If one dealer can hold up a classification because he/she is too cheap to deposit their share or thinks they are above the rules, the world is better off without them! Adam - Original Message - From: Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com To: Alan Rubin aeru...@ucla.edu Cc: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com; Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:17 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update In regards to what Alan stated, this makes perfect sense to me and I agree with that of which the committee has decided. We have a procedure and it seems only one person is not in compliance with that procedurein regards to classification and submittal to the NomCom. No matter what the excuse is. If the type spec amount (20 grams in this case) is not for the purpose of science, then what's it for...hoarding? Is it going to kill anyone to give the classifying institution 20 grams? Alan, if I had it, I give UCLA the whole darn thing and be proud to do it. I don't knowthis just sounds messed up to me. Jim Wooddell __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Meteorite Falls in Central California are hereby suspended until further notice. Jim On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com wrote: Meteorite Falls in Central California are hereby suspended until further notice. Jim On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Adam Hupe raremeteori...@yahoo.com wrote: Jim Wrote, We have a procedure and it seems only one person is not in compliance with thatprocedure.. I agree completely. If one dealer can hold up a classification because he/she is too cheap to deposit their share or thinks they are above the rules, the world is better off without them! Adam - Original Message - From: Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com To: Alan Rubin aeru...@ucla.edu Cc: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com; Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 12:17 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update In regards to what Alan stated, this makes perfect sense to me and I agree with that of which the committee has decided. We have a procedure and it seems only one person is not in compliance with that procedurein regards to classification and submittal to the NomCom. No matter what the excuse is. If the type spec amount (20 grams in this case) is not for the purpose of science, then what's it for...hoarding? Is it going to kill anyone to give the classifying institution 20 grams? Alan, if I had it, I give UCLA the whole darn thing and be proud to do it. I don't knowthis just sounds messed up to me. Jim Wooddell __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com 928-247-2675 -- Jim Wooddell jimwoodd...@gmail.com 928-247-2675 __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Peter informed me yesterday that some additional research is being done, presumably on the sample that is to be donated to UCLA. If all goes according to plan, then sometime, hopefully within the next few months, we'll have the name approved. Alan Alan Rubin Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California 3845 Slichter Hall 603 Charles Young Dr. E Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567 phone: 310-825-3202 e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html - Original Message - From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com To: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com; Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hi Bob, Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I don't know the answer. This sounds like a good question for Jeff Grossman. I can certainly ~imagine~ some possible explanations, not the least of which is that I believe some past meteorites have gotten Nomenclature Committee approval on the promise of an adequate type specimen, only to have that promise never fulfilled. In the Novato case, it would appear there is more than enough type specimen distributed between at least two recognized institutions; it's just that the final destination of a fraction of it has not yet occurred. Perhaps more to the point, the actual type specimen mass is not yet known, since it involves the balance of a 29-gram sample -- an unknown portion of which has been used in destructive analysis. Kind of hard for the Committee to vote on a meteorite when they don't know the actual type specimen mass -- even if that mass is almost surely greater than 20 grams. None of this discussion would appear to impact the decision to approve a provision name, however. Best, Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved, not just Novato)
Hi List, I wasn't pointing fingers or trying to refer specifically to Novato. I may have come off that way, I am afraid. I meant in general with all falls, and this recent mention of Novato jogged my memory about the recent spate of unapproved falls. I had meant to post to the List a couple of weeks ago about this same issue, but I got side-tracked and forgot. The Novato discussion reminded me. I'll post something to the List to that effect. My main goal is the same as most - to see Novato classified. Regardless of who found what or who has what specimen, I'd just like to see it in the Met Bull and in MAPS journals. That won't happen until the kink in the hose is worked out, so to speak. As was pointed out - look how quickly Battle Mountain got approved. Novato fell over a densely populated urban area, Battle Mountain fell over underpopulated BLM land. Both are OC's. Why so quick with one and not the other? Same with that Alabama fall (Addison?) - another stoppage in the pipeline somewhere. We need to encourage people to come forward and get finds classified, and not make it more difficult. If we publicly nitpick and clobber people for not handling the classification properly, then it will make others reluctant to come forward. We should be positive and say - look, who cares why it took so long for this particular fall, let's just be happy it is getting done now. Everybody still wins. Some of us collectors are the nitpickers. I want something official to put on my labels for my falls collection. I have no dog in this fight other than science. Best regards and happy huntings for all, MikeG --- On Tue, 4/30/13, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: From: Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com Cc: Alan Rubin aeru...@ucla.edu, Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com, Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com Date: Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 12:24 PM Agreed, somebody needs to cough up a piece to consolidate the type specimen and satisfy the requirements for publication in the Met Bulletin. That is how it should be. Until such a specimen is analyzed, submitted, and approved, it is not a meteorite, it is a rock that is suspected to be a meteorite. Giving it any unofficial name does not make it a meteorite, unless that name is approved by NonCom. Everybody wins when the specimen is classified and approved via an open, transparent, and official manner. There are too many falls that are not approved yet. Going back to the year 2000, there are seventeen (17) falls that are not officially approved yet. They come from all corners of the world and some are very well documented, but have not been approved for various reasons. For example, someone earlier mentioned that Canada does not drag it's feet on classifications and would simply buy the type specimen. Well, there is the Montney fall from 2005 that is lost somewhere in the system. Canada is usually pretty quick, but why hasn't Montney been approved? Is there doubt about the fall in some way, or is it a problem similar to Novato where it is a bonafide fall but has not been approved for logistical reasons? Collectors and probably some scientists are eager for a few recent falls to become approved. Until these meteorites are approved, they cannot be published in most peer-reviewed journals. And until they are approved, there will always be an element of reluctance on the behalf of some collectors. Zunhua? No doubt there. Penetrated a house and was documented thoroughly. Why hasn't this one been classified yet? What are the Chinese waiting on? Nobody else outside China will submit it for classification because it is a scientific courtesy, so will it remain in limbo forever because ? Katol? It's distinctive and on the market. Again, there is no doubt that it is a fall. Let's hope GSI submits it so it can be published. Collectors want to know. It may be a meteorite that is interesting to science as well. Draveil? What's the hold up on this one? Oslo? The list - Jan 15, 2013 - Planeta Rica (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Colombia Feb 11, 2012 - Huangzhong/Xining (unofficial) (L6 chondrite?) : China Mar 01, 2012 - Oslo (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Norway (Hammer) May 03, 2012 - Diplo (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Pakistan May 22, 2012 - Katol (unofficial) (achondrite) : India (Hammer) Jun 03, 2012 - Comayagua (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite) : Honduras (Hammer) Jul 08, 2012 - Jalangi (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : India Oct 12, 2012 - Beni Yacoub (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) : Morocco Oct 17, 2012 - Novato (unofficial) (L6 chondrite) : California USA(Hammer) Oct 30, 2012 - Addison (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved, not just Novato)
Hi Mike and List, No need to apologize, I agree completely with the following statement you made in your earlier post: ** Everybody wins when the specimen is classified and approved via an open, transparent, and official manner. *** To me, dealers who self-pair, steal nomenclature used to describe another meteorite and piggyback off of those who follow the rules are committing a great disservice to the rest of the community. One or two dealers think nothing of plagiarizing copyrighted scientific documents that describe official meteorites in a effort to add an air of authenticity to their untested material! These self-paired meteorites are virtually worthless because they have no real name, cannot be published in scientific papers and collectors will not maintain any real long-term value. Everybody loses except the dealer who was either too cheap or too lazy to follow the rules. Fortunately, I would estimate that 99% of community sees the value in following the rules, Adam - Original Message - From: Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 2:51 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved, not just Novato) Hi List, I wasn't pointing fingers or trying to refer specifically to Novato. I may have come off that way, I am afraid. I meant in general with all falls, and this recent mention of Novato jogged my memory about the recent spate of unapproved falls. I had meant to post to the List a couple of weeks ago about this same issue, but I got side-tracked and forgot. The Novato discussion reminded me. I'll post something to the List to that effect. My main goal is the same as most - to see Novato classified. Regardless of who found what or who has what specimen, I'd just like to see it in the Met Bull and in MAPS journals. That won't happen until the kink in the hose is worked out, so to speak. As was pointed out - look how quickly Battle Mountain got approved. Novato fell over a densely populated urban area, Battle Mountain fell over underpopulated BLM land. Both are OC's. Why so quick with one and not the other? Same with that Alabama fall (Addison?) - another stoppage in the pipeline somewhere. We need to encourage people to come forward and get finds classified, and not make it more difficult. If we publicly nitpick and clobber people for not handling the classification properly, then it will make others reluctant to come forward. We should be positive and say - look, who cares why it took so long for this particular fall, let's just be happy it is getting done now. Everybody still wins. Some of us collectors are the nitpickers. I want something official to put on my labels for my falls collection. I have no dog in this fight other than science. Best regards and happy huntings for all, MikeG --- On Tue, 4/30/13, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: From: Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com Cc: Alan Rubin aeru...@ucla.edu, Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com, Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com Date: Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 12:24 PM Agreed, somebody needs to cough up a piece to consolidate the type specimen and satisfy the requirements for publication in the Met Bulletin. That is how it should be. Until such a specimen is analyzed, submitted, and approved, it is not a meteorite, it is a rock that is suspected to be a meteorite. Giving it any unofficial name does not make it a meteorite, unless that name is approved by NonCom. Everybody wins when the specimen is classified and approved via an open, transparent, and official manner. There are too many falls that are not approved yet. Going back to the year 2000, there are seventeen (17) falls that are not officially approved yet. They come from all corners of the world and some are very well documented, but have not been approved for various reasons. For example, someone earlier mentioned that Canada does not drag it's feet on classifications and would simply buy the type specimen. Well, there is the Montney fall from 2005 that is lost somewhere in the system. Canada is usually pretty quick, but why hasn't Montney been approved? Is there doubt about the fall in some way, or is it a problem similar to Novato where it is a bonafide fall but has not been approved for logistical reasons? Collectors and probably some scientists are eager for a few recent falls to become approved. Until these meteorites are approved, they cannot be published in most peer-reviewed
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013. If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders) to submit a type specimen to UCLA. But not until we all have been given a proper explanation. -- Bob V. --- On Mon, 4/29/13, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com wrote: From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Pat Brown scientificlifest...@hotmail.com, Jim Wooddell jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net, Met List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 8:51 PM Hi All, I've been informed by one of the Novato finders that this is a non-issue. Dr. Jenniskens has long-since pledged to donate more than adequate Novato type specimen to UCLA for it to be approved by the Nomenclature Committee. That it hasn't happened already is simply because Dr. Jenniskens wished to ensure that all academic requests for meteoritical material were handled promptly. 29 grams of the first recovered stone were generously donated by Lisa Webber to SETI for scientific analysis; of that, whatever is not consumed in destructive analyses has been promised to UCLA. So there is no cause for alarm; people just need to be patient. --Rob On Apr 30, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com wrote: Actually, it's still the Novato (provisional) meteorite. It still is not in the Meteoritical Bulletin. This is the slice that Brien Cook originally cut with the intention of submitting it to UCLA. But when he read that someone else was going to supply the type-specimen, he then placed it on eBay. It would be nice if some Institute or consortium would make an offer and try to repatriate this slice and make it a type-specimen so that this US-fall could finally be made official. All I'm saying is, this leaving an official-status hanging-in-mid-air would never happen in Canada. They would just simply buy the type-specimen. It's time for the US to catch-up with Canada. It's time for a change. Bob V. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved, not just Novato)
Very good post, Michael. And thanks for making my point - if Novato is already classified (L6 br), you would like to update your database and fill out labels with an officially approved name. How long of a delay and why is there a delay? -- Bob V. http://www.mail-archive.com/meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com/msg108950.html --- On Tue, 4/30/13, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: From: Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved, not just Novato) To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 2:51 PM Hi List, I wasn't pointing fingers or trying to refer specifically to Novato. I may have come off that way, I am afraid. I meant in general with all falls, and this recent mention of Novato jogged my memory about the recent spate of unapproved falls. I had meant to post to the List a couple of weeks ago about this same issue, but I got side-tracked and forgot. The Novato discussion reminded me. I'll post something to the List to that effect. My main goal is the same as most - to see Novato classified. Regardless of who found what or who has what specimen, I'd just like to see it in the Met Bull and in MAPS journals. That won't happen until the kink in the hose is worked out, so to speak. As was pointed out - look how quickly Battle Mountain got approved. Novato fell over a densely populated urban area, Battle Mountain fell over underpopulated BLM land. Both are OC's. Why so quick with one and not the other? Same with that Alabama fall (Addison?) - another stoppage in the pipeline somewhere. We need to encourage people to come forward and get finds classified, and not make it more difficult. If we publicly nitpick and clobber people for not handling the classification properly, then it will make others reluctant to come forward. We should be positive and say - look, who cares why it took so long for this particular fall, let's just be happy it is getting done now. Everybody still wins. Some of us collectors are the nitpickers. I want something official to put on my labels for my falls collection. I have no dog in this fight other than science. Best regards and happy huntings for all, MikeG --- On Tue, 4/30/13, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: From: Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com Cc: Alan Rubin aeru...@ucla.edu, Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com, Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com Date: Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 12:24 PM Agreed, somebody needs to cough up a piece to consolidate the type specimen and satisfy the requirements for publication in the Met Bulletin. That is how it should be. Until such a specimen is analyzed, submitted, and approved, it is not a meteorite, it is a rock that is suspected to be a meteorite. Giving it any unofficial name does not make it a meteorite, unless that name is approved by NonCom. Everybody wins when the specimen is classified and approved via an open, transparent, and official manner. There are too many falls that are not approved yet. Going back to the year 2000, there are seventeen (17) falls that are not officially approved yet. They come from all corners of the world and some are very well documented, but have not been approved for various reasons. For example, someone earlier mentioned that Canada does not drag it's feet on classifications and would simply buy the type specimen. Well, there is the Montney fall from 2005 that is lost somewhere in the system. Canada is usually pretty quick, but why hasn't Montney been approved? Is there doubt about the fall in some way, or is it a problem similar to Novato where it is a bonafide fall but has not been approved for logistical reasons? Collectors and probably some scientists are eager for a few recent falls to become approved. Until these meteorites are approved, they cannot be published in most peer-reviewed journals. And until they are approved, there will always be an element of reluctance on the behalf of some collectors. Zunhua? No doubt there. Penetrated a house and was documented thoroughly. Why hasn't this one been classified yet? What are the Chinese waiting on? Nobody else outside China will submit it for classification because it is a scientific courtesy, so will it remain in limbo forever because ? Katol? It's distinctive and on the market. Again, there is no doubt that it is a fall. Let's hope GSI submits it so it can be published. Collectors want to know. It may be a meteorite
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved, not just Novato)
re: 'Navato' To repeat a comment I made to a Facebook thread that parallels this one... It would seem to me that the more accurate Type Sample amount IS the entire 29 grams ['donated' by Lisa Webber and Glenn Rivera]!! Obviously some material is eaten up for analysis so the only hold up for official name is for SETI to hand over what is left over of the 29 gram 'Type Sample' that was [most generously] donated by Lisa Webber and Glenn Rivera. Kudos to Lisa and Glenn!!! I personally see no need for other to chop up the few stones that were found from this fall because of some 'confusion'!!! (I did not hunt Navato so I have no personal fight here other than give credit to the 'owners' of the 29 gram original stone!!) Best Regards, Greg Greg Hupé The Hupé Collection gmh...@centurylink.net www.NaturesVault.net (Online Catalog Reference Site) www.LunarRock.com (Online Planetary Meteorite Site) NaturesVault (Facebook, Pinterest eBay) http://www.facebook.com/NaturesVault http://pinterest.com/NaturesVault IMCA 3163 Click here for my current eBay auctions: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault -Original Message- From: Robert Verish Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 8:50 PM To: Galactic Stone Ironworks Cc: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved,not just Novato) Very good post, Michael. And thanks for making my point - if Novato is already classified (L6 br), you would like to update your database and fill out labels with an officially approved name. How long of a delay and why is there a delay? -- Bob V. http://www.mail-archive.com/meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com/msg108950.html --- On Tue, 4/30/13, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: From: Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved, not just Novato) To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 2:51 PM Hi List, I wasn't pointing fingers or trying to refer specifically to Novato. I may have come off that way, I am afraid. I meant in general with all falls, and this recent mention of Novato jogged my memory about the recent spate of unapproved falls. I had meant to post to the List a couple of weeks ago about this same issue, but I got side-tracked and forgot. The Novato discussion reminded me. I'll post something to the List to that effect. My main goal is the same as most - to see Novato classified. Regardless of who found what or who has what specimen, I'd just like to see it in the Met Bull and in MAPS journals. That won't happen until the kink in the hose is worked out, so to speak. As was pointed out - look how quickly Battle Mountain got approved. Novato fell over a densely populated urban area, Battle Mountain fell over underpopulated BLM land. Both are OC's. Why so quick with one and not the other? Same with that Alabama fall (Addison?) - another stoppage in the pipeline somewhere. We need to encourage people to come forward and get finds classified, and not make it more difficult. If we publicly nitpick and clobber people for not handling the classification properly, then it will make others reluctant to come forward. We should be positive and say - look, who cares why it took so long for this particular fall, let's just be happy it is getting done now. Everybody still wins. Some of us collectors are the nitpickers. I want something official to put on my labels for my falls collection. I have no dog in this fight other than science. Best regards and happy huntings for all, MikeG --- On Tue, 4/30/13, Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com wrote: From: Galactic Stone Ironworks meteoritem...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com Cc: Alan Rubin aeru...@ucla.edu, Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com, Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com Date: Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 12:24 PM Agreed, somebody needs to cough up a piece to consolidate the type specimen and satisfy the requirements for publication in the Met Bulletin. That is how it should be. Until such a specimen is analyzed, submitted, and approved, it is not a meteorite, it is a rock that is suspected to be a meteorite. Giving it any unofficial name does not make it a meteorite, unless that name is approved by NonCom. Everybody wins when the specimen is classified and approved via an open, transparent, and official manner. There are too many falls that are not approved yet. Going back to the year 2000, there are seventeen (17) falls that are not officially approved yet. They come from all corners of the world and some are very well documented, but have not been approved for various reasons. For example
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013. If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders) to submit a type specimen to UCLA. But not until we all have been given a proper explanation. -- Bob V. --- On Mon, 4/29/13, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com wrote: From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Pat Brown scientificlifest...@hotmail.com, Jim Wooddell jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net, Met List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 8:51 PM Hi All, I've been informed by one of the Novato finders that this is a non-issue. Dr. Jenniskens has long-since pledged to donate more than adequate Novato type specimen to UCLA for it to be approved by the Nomenclature Committee. That it hasn't happened already is simply because Dr. Jenniskens wished to ensure that all academic requests for meteoritical material were handled promptly. 29 grams of the first recovered stone were generously donated by Lisa Webber to SETI for scientific analysis; of that, whatever is not consumed in destructive analyses has been promised to UCLA. So there is no cause for alarm; people just need to be patient. --Rob On Apr 30, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com wrote: Actually, it's still the Novato (provisional) meteorite. It still is not in the Meteoritical Bulletin. This is the slice that Brien Cook originally cut with the intention of submitting it to UCLA. But when he read that someone else was going to supply the type-specimen, he then placed it on eBay. It would be nice if some Institute or consortium would make an offer and try to repatriate this slice and make it a type-specimen so that this US-fall could finally be made official. All I'm saying is, this leaving an official-status hanging-in-mid-air would never happen in Canada
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
This is a long thread and I haven't read all of it. But here are the facts about provisional names and approvals of new meteorites: Provisional names are ONLY given to meteorites from dense collection areas. The reason is that the geographic part of the name is already agreed upon. The provisional part is the number. The whole system is meant to handle places where many meteorites are being found and slowly classified. We wanted a way to track all of these meteorites as early in the process as possible, before they got divided up, mixed up and sold/traded into many hands. The type specimen requirement is really the gold standard for approval of new meteorites. It's the one thing that the committee will not bend, as a meteorite without an accessible type specimen may as well not exist, as far as science is concerned. Promises don't cut it. And when a specimen is deposited in an institution, it has to be an institution that makes specimens available to qualified investigators, has a long-term commitment to curation, and has permanent custody of the specimen. Meteorites that have been delayed in getting published in the Bulletin usually fall in to one of these categories: 1) Nobody has ever submitted it to the nomcom. 2) It was submitted, but has problems that have not been fixed by the submitter in a revised entry. 3) It was submitted, but the type specimen was either too small or not properly deposited in a qualified institutional collection. 4) Nomcom screwed up (regrettable, but it happens. I think it's happening much less now that we're more automated). I think that very few unapproved falls, including Novato, are in categories 2 and 4. Jeff On 4/30/2013 8:20 PM, Richard Montgomery wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013. If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders) to submit a type specimen to UCLA. But not until we all have been given a proper explanation. -- Bob V. --- On Mon, 4/29/13, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com wrote: From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Pat Brown scientificlifest...@hotmail.com, Jim Wooddell jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net, Met List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 8:51 PM Hi All, I've been informed by one of the Novato finders that this is a non-issue. Dr. Jenniskens has long-since pledged to donate more than adequate Novato
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Hi Bob, Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I don't know the answer. This sounds like a good question for Jeff Grossman. I can certainly ~imagine~ some possible explanations, not the least of which is that I believe some past meteorites have gotten Nomenclature Committee approval on the promise of an adequate type specimen, only to have that promise never fulfilled. In the Novato case, it would appear there is more than enough type specimen distributed between at least two recognized institutions; it's just that the final destination of a fraction of it has not yet occurred. Perhaps more to the point, the actual type specimen mass is not yet known, since it involves the balance of a 29-gram sample -- an unknown portion of which has been used in destructive analysis. Kind of hard for the Committee to vote on a meteorite when they don't know the actual type specimen mass -- even if that mass is almost surely greater than 20 grams. None of this discussion would appear to impact the decision to approve a provision name, however. Best, Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013. If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders) to submit a type specimen to UCLA. But not until we all have been given a proper explanation. -- Bob V. --- On Mon, 4/29/13, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com wrote: From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Pat Brown scientificlifest...@hotmail.com, Jim Wooddell jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net, Met List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 8:51 PM Hi All, I've been informed by one of the Novato finders that this is a non-issue. Dr. Jenniskens has long-since pledged to donate more than adequate Novato type specimen to UCLA for it to be approved by the Nomenclature Committee. That it hasn't happened already is simply because Dr. Jenniskens wished to ensure that all academic requests for meteoritical material were handled promptly. 29 grams of the first recovered stone were generously donated by Lisa Webber to SETI for scientific analysis; of that, whatever is not consumed in destructive analyses has been promised to UCLA. So there is no cause for alarm; people just need to be patient. --Rob On Apr 30, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com wrote: Actually, it's still the Novato (provisional) meteorite. It still is not in the Meteoritical Bulletin. This is the slice
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
I'm having a hard time understanding this problem with Novato. Since when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed and classified and then if it merits further research that happens next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite. Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen. Carl Agee -- Carl B. Agee Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences MSC03 2050 University of New Mexico Albuquerque NM 87131-1126 Tel: (505) 750-7172 Fax: (505) 277-3577 Email: a...@unm.edu http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/ On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013. If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders) to submit a type specimen to UCLA. But not until we all have been given a proper explanation. -- Bob V. --- On Mon, 4/29/13, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com wrote: From: Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato update To: Pat Brown scientificlifest...@hotmail.com, Jim Wooddell jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net, Met List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 8
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
I seem to think this is a control issue. Someone wants total control over the meteorite. Sad to dominate a meteorite fall. Never seen this type of action before. Submission changes nothing about the science or the papers released later. It is simply the act of registering the meteorite officially. I think they don't want to release the type specimen or else the receiving institution (UCLA) or (NASA) will then possibly release papers outside the control of the Consortium? My two kopeks. Michael Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Carl Agee a...@unm.edu wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding this problem with Novato. Since when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed and classified and then if it merits further research that happens next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite. Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen. Carl Agee -- Carl B. Agee Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences MSC03 2050 University of New Mexico Albuquerque NM 87131-1126 Tel: (505) 750-7172 Fax: (505) 277-3577 Email: a...@unm.edu http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/ On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
That makes perfect sense to me. Follow the basic principals of the scientific method. Why does SETI operate outside the norms of science? Of what merit are the findings of any tests they perform on an unofficial meteorite? Michael in so. Cal. On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Carl Agee a...@unm.edu wrote: I'm having a hard time understanding this problem with Novato. Since when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed and classified and then if it merits further research that happens next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite. Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen. Carl Agee -- Carl B. Agee Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences MSC03 2050 University of New Mexico Albuquerque NM 87131-1126 Tel: (505) 750-7172 Fax: (505) 277-3577 Email: a...@unm.edu http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/ On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com wrote: Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No credit cards accepted where I am:) But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on this one. Science must come first. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPhone On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane rrobb...@msn.com wrote: The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting ain't free. On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Richard Montgomery rickm...@earthlink.net wrote: One of the stones from this find was lent to the NASA team, with an open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never see it again. - Original Message - From: Robert Verish bolidecha...@yahoo.com To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update Thanks Rob, for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track. And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern: Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved? Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way: If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward with approving at least the name Novato (if need be, at least provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean, for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here. Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we know the approved name of this meteorite? I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the results of the consortium, then. Why now? But before I conclude, allow me to state several things FOR THE RECORD: Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this List, there is no problem getting type-specimens from finders to researchers: There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders property owners. The name Sutter's Mill was approved BEFORE a classification could be agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results. There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders to researchers. The name Battle Mountain was approved 30 days after the fall. What delay? Other US falls with no problems getting type-specimens: Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name approval. Finders of the Novato meteorite were making arrangements to submit type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013. If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders) to submit a type specimen to UCLA. But not until we all have been given a proper explanation. -- Bob V
[meteorite-list] Novato update
Hi All, I've been informed by one of the Novato finders that this is a non-issue. Dr. Jenniskens has long-since pledged to donate more than adequate Novato type specimen to UCLA for it to be approved by the Nomenclature Committee. That it hasn't happened already is simply because Dr. Jenniskens wished to ensure that all academic requests for meteoritical material were handled promptly. 29 grams of the first recovered stone were generously donated by Lisa Webber to SETI for scientific analysis; of that, whatever is not consumed in destructive analyses has been promised to UCLA. So there is no cause for alarm; people just need to be patient. --Rob -Original Message- From: Pat Brown [mailto:scientificlifest...@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 8:36 PM To: Matson, Robert D.; Jim Wooddell; Michael Farmer; Robert Verish; Met List Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Getting Novato approved Hello Rob, the other Novato searchers and the List, This is a very interesting Urban fall and a very challenging meteorite to hunt. Personally, I hunted my backside off and did not find a crumb (although, I went right past the individual that Bob Verish discovered, like within 4-6 feet!). Is not the rule 20 grams or 20% if the original mass was less than 100 grams? If the finder that deposited ~14.4 grams represented that as 20% of the individual meteorite found, does that not meet the Meteoritical Society Nomenclature Committee guidelines? Personally, I would very much like to see this one in the Bulletin. I would be very interested in understanding the masses that were found. Yours in Science, Pat Brown __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Novato meteorite
Hi, I am looking for a sample of the Novato meteorite, any out there? Thanks, Peter Scherff __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite
Hi: Me too. John Schooler - Original Message - From: petersche...@rcn.com To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:45 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite Hi, I am looking for a sample of the Novato meteorite, any out there? Thanks, Peter Scherff __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite
John, Peter and List, This first part goes to John and Peter. The second part is not for them as they are already keenly aware of and most likely agree with my observations of the market forces. I am pretty certain the one and only piece of Novato that will ever be sold publicly was the small slice that sold on EBay back about 2 weeks after the fall. It is my understanding that all the pieces are permanently in strong hands and some may never change possession again until maybe 75 years from now. Second part: That is the gamble with the new falls. The prices are high at first, then they always come down later...or not. Sometimes they never ever show up again, for any price, in one's lifetime. I would guess that even though the slice sold for, what about $155/gram, I doubt if someone wanted to offer $1,000/g they could not get any of it now from those that have some. Then again, an open offer for $1,000 per gram might get some locals to go out and find another piece! But if a whole new piece showed up, then the value would drop from $1,000 per gram down to around $300/g wouldn't it? Crazy how market forces work isn't it? Steve Arnold Sent from my iPhone On Jan 23, 2013, at 8:52 AM, john schooler johns1...@schoolersinc.com wrote: Hi: Me too. John Schooler - Original Message - From: petersche...@rcn.com To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:45 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite Hi, I am looking for a sample of the Novato meteorite, any out there? Thanks, Peter Scherff __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite
Me three. Michael On 1/23/13 6:52 AM, john schooler johns1...@schoolersinc.com wrote: Hi: Me too. John Schooler - Original Message - From: petersche...@rcn.com To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:45 AM Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite Hi, I am looking for a sample of the Novato meteorite, any out there? Thanks, Peter Scherff __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others?
The U.S. market is in the process of going underground due to new restrictions and monitoring. We saw the same thing happen in Australia which has less restrictive laws than the U.S. I have always stated that too much price hype in the media equals governmental interest. Interest equals the need to control. Happy Hunting, Adam - Original Message - From: MikeG meteoritem...@gmail.com To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 8:13 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others? We've had lots of new falls this year, and especially over the last couple of months. Yet, we are hearing very little chatter. What gives? Any new Novato or Addison finds? Any reports? What about some of the older falls, like Battle Mountain and Sutter's Mill? Are any new finds being made from those strewnfields? The Met-List seems strangely quiet, given the amount of space rocks we are being peppered with. Best regards and happy huntings, MikeG -- - Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone Twitter - http://twitter.com/GalacticStone Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone RSS - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 - __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others?
Yes, social media. Pretty soon, you will be rated on your online social profile if Bill Gates gets has his way. I can see it now, insurance companies refusing to insure due to a non-existent or poor social profile. Even the founder of Facebook refused to open an account until recently knowing this information is shared for profit, offering user demographics and interests to companies. Nowadays, Information equals money. Even your cell phone imbeds GPS coordinates into your images that can and will be used against you if the time arises. I recently rented a car with Onstar on-board and had to sign a contract stating that I would not take the 4-wheel drive vehicle off-road and that they would know if I did. What purpose does a rental 4-wheel drive Jeep Wrangler serve if it cannot be taken into the dirt? Recently, a computer in a car was used in court to convict a driver of manslaughter. Maybe not a bad thing if the person were guilty but taking the word of a computer over the testimony of human beings is something else. I know this sounds like paranoia on my part but I assure you that it is all true. Too much information can be a bad thing thus the meaning of going underground. At least in Australia, the museums actually issue export permits. Lets see if anybody gets a U.S. meteorite collecting permit for commercial purposes. My belief is that it will never happen! I ponder all of this as I may be eating the last Hostess Twinkie ever produced after 82 years of being in business! The Battle Mountain fall may be remembered as the last event on U.S. public land where hunters could openly share. Happy Hunting Fellow Comrades, Adam - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com To: Adam Hupe raremeteori...@yahoo.com Cc: Adam meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 7:32 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others? Actually plenty is going on behind the scenes. The lack of interest on the list with new falls has finally driven most of us working actively on such new falls to no longer bother with sharing much. Sadly many of the people here actually aren't interested in actual meteorites, but other things. It takes time to compose emails, share information, and write about these adventures and to share with a thousand people who don't actually care, is a waste of that time. I know many of the people working these falls now, though for the last two I have not had time to go and with Novato, I decided to pass on that fall since the scientific response was so poorly handled and the overwhelming chaotic treasure hunt mentality of the locals make it a hunt I did not want to participate in. Over the years I have seen the responses on here drop to nothing other than attacks after a fall, so I think that mostly the reason you don't see many hunters bothering with it. Most information has gone the Facebook route. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPad On Nov 18, 2012, at 7:56 AM, Adam Hupe raremeteori...@yahoo.com wrote: The U.S. market is in the process of going underground due to new restrictions and monitoring. We saw the same thing happen in Australia which has less restrictive laws than the U.S. I have always stated that too much price hype in the media equals governmental interest. Interest equals the need to control. Happy Hunting, Adam - Original Message - From: MikeG meteoritem...@gmail.com To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 8:13 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others? We've had lots of new falls this year, and especially over the last couple of months. Yet, we are hearing very little chatter. What gives? Any new Novato or Addison finds? Any reports? What about some of the older falls, like Battle Mountain and Sutter's Mill? Are any new finds being made from those strewnfields? The Met-List seems strangely quiet, given the amount of space rocks we are being peppered with. Best regards and happy huntings, MikeG -- - Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone Twitter - http://twitter.com/GalacticStone Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone RSS - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 - __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others?
Yeah, Adam, we soon may be eating twinkie knock offs, made in Mexico. What a shame. The same type of intrusion will most likely see it's way into the meteorite community. This too, will be a shame. I'm not a hunter, but, what hurts you hunters, hurts me as a collector. The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen. I'd say that's a pretty solid axiom. Greg L. Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:09:21 -0800 From: raremeteori...@yahoo.com To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others? Yes, social media. Pretty soon, you will be rated on your online social profile if Bill Gates gets has his way. I can see it now, insurance companies refusing to insure due to a non-existent or poor social profile. Even the founder of Facebook refused to open an account until recently knowing this information is shared for profit, offering user demographics and interests to companies. Nowadays, Information equals money. Even your cell phone imbeds GPS coordinates into your images that can and will be used against you if the time arises. I recently rented a car with Onstar on-board and had to sign a contract stating that I would not take the 4-wheel drive vehicle off-road and that they would know if I did. What purpose does a rental 4-wheel drive Jeep Wrangler serve if it cannot be taken into the dirt? Recently, a computer in a car was used in court to convict a driver of manslaughter. Maybe not a bad thing if the person were guilty but taking the word of a computer over the testimony of human beings is something else. I know this sounds like paranoia on my part but I assure you that it is all true. Too much information can be a bad thing thus the meaning of going underground. At least in Australia, the museums actually issue export permits. Lets see if anybody gets a U.S. meteorite collecting permit for commercial purposes. My belief is that it will never happen! I ponder all of this as I may be eating the last Hostess Twinkie ever produced after 82 years of being in business! The Battle Mountain fall may be remembered as the last event on U.S. public land where hunters could openly share. Happy Hunting Fellow Comrades, Adam - Original Message - From: Michael Farmer m...@meteoriteguy.com To: Adam Hupe raremeteori...@yahoo.com Cc: Adam meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 7:32 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others? Actually plenty is going on behind the scenes. The lack of interest on the list with new falls has finally driven most of us working actively on such new falls to no longer bother with sharing much. Sadly many of the people here actually aren't interested in actual meteorites, but other things. It takes time to compose emails, share information, and write about these adventures and to share with a thousand people who don't actually care, is a waste of that time. I know many of the people working these falls now, though for the last two I have not had time to go and with Novato, I decided to pass on that fall since the scientific response was so poorly handled and the overwhelming chaotic treasure hunt mentality of the locals make it a hunt I did not want to participate in. Over the years I have seen the responses on here drop to nothing other than attacks after a fall, so I think that mostly the reason you don't see many hunters bothering with it. Most information has gone the Facebook route. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPad On Nov 18, 2012, at 7:56 AM, Adam Hupe raremeteori...@yahoo.com wrote: The U.S. market is in the process of going underground due to new restrictions and monitoring. We saw the same thing happen in Australia which has less restrictive laws than the U.S. I have always stated that too much price hype in the media equals governmental interest. Interest equals the need to control. Happy Hunting, Adam - Original Message - From: MikeG meteoritem...@gmail.com To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 8:13 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others? We've had lots of new falls this year, and especially over the last couple of months. Yet, we are hearing very little chatter. What gives? Any new Novato or Addison finds? Any reports? What about some of the older falls, like Battle Mountain and Sutter's Mill? Are any new finds being made from those strewnfields? The Met-List seems strangely quiet, given the amount of space rocks we are being peppered with. Best regards and happy huntings, MikeG
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others?
Actually plenty is going on behind the scenes. The lack of interest on the list with new falls has finally driven most of us working actively on such new falls to no longer bother with sharing much. Sadly many of the people here actually aren't interested in actual meteorites, but other things. It takes time to compose emails, share information, and write about these adventures and to share with a thousand people who don't actually care, is a waste of that time. I know many of the people working these falls now, though for the last two I have not had time to go and with Novato, I decided to pass on that fall since the scientific response was so poorly handled and the overwhelming chaotic treasure hunt mentality of the locals make it a hunt I did not want to participate in. Over the years I have seen the responses on here drop to nothing other than attacks after a fall, so I think that mostly the reason you don't see many hunters bothering with it. Most information has gone the Facebook route. Michael Farmer Sent from my iPad On Nov 18, 2012, at 7:56 AM, Adam Hupe raremeteori...@yahoo.com wrote: The U.S. market is in the process of going underground due to new restrictions and monitoring. We saw the same thing happen in Australia which has less restrictive laws than the U.S. I have always stated that too much price hype in the media equals governmental interest. Interest equals the need to control. Happy Hunting, Adam - Original Message - From: MikeG meteoritem...@gmail.com To: Meteorite List meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 8:13 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato, Addison, Battle Mountain, Sutter's Mill, Beni Yacoub, Others? We've had lots of new falls this year, and especially over the last couple of months. Yet, we are hearing very little chatter. What gives? Any new Novato or Addison finds? Any reports? What about some of the older falls, like Battle Mountain and Sutter's Mill? Are any new finds being made from those strewnfields? The Met-List seems strangely quiet, given the amount of space rocks we are being peppered with. Best regards and happy huntings, MikeG -- - Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone Twitter - http://twitter.com/GalacticStone Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone RSS - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 - __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Novato 002 price
Hi All, Haven't seen anyone mention it, but I was impressed that Brien's slice of Novato sold for over $185 a gram on eBay over the weekend. Perhaps that precedent will get more of the locals interested in searching their yards! --Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato 002 price
First specimens of a new fall always fetch the highest price. Remember the first Mifflin auctions right after the fall that Steve Arnold listed? Similar dynamic. If you have to be the first one on the block to own something, you'll always pay more. Congrats to Brien. But, unless the type turns out to be something unusual, or the TKW is very small, I don't think later specimens will fetch this kind of price. Best regards and happy huntings, MikeG -- - Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone Twitter - http://twitter.com/GalacticStone Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone RSS - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 - On 10/29/12, Matson, Robert D. robert.d.mat...@saic.com wrote: Hi All, Haven't seen anyone mention it, but I was impressed that Brien's slice of Novato sold for over $185 a gram on eBay over the weekend. Perhaps that precedent will get more of the locals interested in searching their yards! --Rob __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Novato - Mill Valley, CA Meteorite Ordinary Chondrite slice 11.7 grams
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=160912068402 ___ Unlimited Disk, Data Transfer, PHP/MySQL Domain Hosting http://www.doteasy.com __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Novato, CA Meteorite photos and post
Dear List, Novato, CA Meteorite photos and post http://lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.jp/2012/10/california-two-meteorites-found-from.html Dirk Ross...Tokyo __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato
Dear Cal G, Any meteorite hunter worth his salt would leave his metal detector behind and use his EYES. Please do not be a Meteorite Men Zombie! Best in your hunt. Dirk Ross...Tokyo --- On Fri, 10/26/12, C.G. petca...@gmail.com wrote: From: C.G. petca...@gmail.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Friday, October 26, 2012, 1:46 AM Does anyone know the location in Novato where the 2nd specimen was found? I'm close to the area, and wanted to hunt today..Novato is spread quite large, so, pinning down a spot would help..I did hunt some shoreline of a nearby lake, with no luck, but, I had left my batteries in my metal detector, and, they were dead, with no spares in truck...learned my lesson about taking the 9-volts out afer use! Good Luck Hunting! Cal G. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato
The meteorite hunter worth his salt would use ALL his tools he has available to him because some of us dont have the best EYES as we get older. Im sure I can get an agreement on that On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Danny Mills dannysp...@gmail.com wrote: The meteorite hunter worth his salt would use ALL his tools he has available to him because some of us dont have the best EYES as we get older. Im sure I can get an agreement on that. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:48 AM, drtanuki drtan...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Cal G, Any meteorite hunter worth his salt would leave his metal detector behind and use his EYES. Please do not be a Meteorite Men Zombie! Best in your hunt. Dirk Ross...Tokyo --- On Fri, 10/26/12, C.G. petca...@gmail.com wrote: From: C.G. petca...@gmail.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Friday, October 26, 2012, 1:46 AM Does anyone know the location in Novato where the 2nd specimen was found? I'm close to the area, and wanted to hunt today..Novato is spread quite large, so, pinning down a spot would help..I did hunt some shoreline of a nearby lake, with no luck, but, I had left my batteries in my metal detector, and, they were dead, with no spares in truck...learned my lesson about taking the 9-volts out afer use! Good Luck Hunting! Cal G. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato Meteorite Stick
Your eyes are always the best tool in the shed when meteorite hunting, but when you go to war, you need an arsenal. The next best thing to having 20/20 vision is the Bazooka of all meteorite hunting tools the Meteorite Stick! Leave your metal detectors home! Metal detectors are useless in finding Novato they are not suited for this meteorite or terrain. The Meteorite Stick is the ultimate tool, it's ultra light, weighing in under 2 pounds and has proven to be invaluable time and time again! The Novato meteorite will quickly jump and stick onto the ultra powerful magnet! Best of Luck! www.meteoritestick.com John Higgins IMCA#9822 www.outerspacerocks.com From: Danny Mills dannysp...@gmail.com To: C.G. petca...@gmail.com; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 3:43 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato The meteorite hunter worth his salt would use ALL his tools he has available to him because some of us dont have the best EYES as we get older. Im sure I can get an agreement on that On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Danny Mills dannysp...@gmail.com wrote: The meteorite hunter worth his salt would use ALL his tools he has available to him because some of us dont have the best EYES as we get older. Im sure I can get an agreement on that. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:48 AM, drtanuki drtan...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Cal G, Any meteorite hunter worth his salt would leave his metal detector behind and use his EYES. Please do not be a Meteorite Men Zombie! Best in your hunt. Dirk Ross...Tokyo --- On Fri, 10/26/12, C.G. petca...@gmail.com wrote: From: C.G. petca...@gmail.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Date: Friday, October 26, 2012, 1:46 AM Does anyone know the location in Novato where the 2nd specimen was found? I'm close to the area, and wanted to hunt today..Novato is spread quite large, so, pinning down a spot would help..I did hunt some shoreline of a nearby lake, with no luck, but, I had left my batteries in my metal detector, and, they were dead, with no spares in truck...learned my lesson about taking the 9-volts out afer use! Good Luck Hunting! Cal G. __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
I found this in Novato yesterday. To my knowledge it is the second meteorite found and the new main mass at 65.9 grams and 49 mm. http://briencook.com/Novato_2012-10-22/ More to follow... __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
Great job Brien! Congrat's on your accomplishment. Sincerely, Larry Atkins IMCA # 1941 Ebay alienrockfarm -Original Message- From: Brien Cook cont...@briencook.com To: meteorite-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Tue, Oct 23, 2012 3:44 pm Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find I found this in Novato yesterday. To my knowledge it is the second meteorite found and the new main mass at 65.9 grams and 49 mm. http://briencook.com/Novato_2012-10-22/ More to follow... __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
Wow! For Heaven's sake! Gorgeous individual! Chondritic or achondritic??? Not sure, but I think I can see triple junctions, which would make it something achondritic! Looking for my socks that have been blown off! Thank you for sharing with us! Bernd To: cont...@briencook.com meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
These brecciated stones and the fall over an urbanized area is reminiscent of Park Forest. Of course, there are many differences as well, but this one might produce more than one hammer stone like Park Forest did, but maybe not nearly as many. Congrats on the find Brien, and good luck to all the hunters in the field. :) Best regards, MikeG PS - is there any preliminary word yet on the type? On 10/23/12, Brien Cook cont...@briencook.com wrote: I found this in Novato yesterday. To my knowledge it is the second meteorite found and the new main mass at 65.9 grams and 49 mm. http://briencook.com/Novato_2012-10-22/ More to follow... __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list -- - Web - http://www.galactic-stone.com Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone Twitter - http://twitter.com/GalacticStone Pinterest - http://pinterest.com/galacticstone RSS - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516 - __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
Kind of looks like maskelynite ! Reports were that it stuck to a magnet though... Could it be? -Paul Gessler -Original Message- From: Brien Cook Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:37 PM To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find I found this in Novato yesterday. To my knowledge it is the second meteorite found and the new main mass at 65.9 grams and 49 mm. http://briencook.com/Novato_2012-10-22/ More to follow... __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
Hola All, A big congrats to Brien! Looks like the first stone -- a highly shocked ordinary chondrite, type 5-6. The shiny things you're seeing are probably Fe-Ni or troilite. Regards, Jason From: Paul Gessler cetu...@shaw.ca Date: Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 1:24 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find To: Brien Cook cont...@briencook.com, meteorite-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Kind of looks like maskelynite ! Reports were that it stuck to a magnet though... Could it be? -Paul Gessler -Original Message- From: Brien Cook Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:37 PM To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find I found this in Novato yesterday. To my knowledge it is the second meteorite found and the new main mass at 65.9 grams and 49 mm. http://briencook.com/Novato_2012-10-22/ More to follow... __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
From the reports I've read of the magnetic attraction, it's too responsive to be an achondrite. And it looks like an equilibrated O.C. to me. --R -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Paul Gessler Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 1:25 PM To: Brien Cook; meteorite-list Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find Kind of looks like maskelynite ! Reports were that it stuck to a magnet though... Could it be? -Paul Gessler -Original Message- From: Brien Cook Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:37 PM To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find I found this in Novato yesterday. To my knowledge it is the second meteorite found and the new main mass at 65.9 grams and 49 mm. http://briencook.com/Novato_2012-10-22/ More to follow... __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
Way to go Brien! 26 miles paid off!! More to follow, does that mean you have more...? Congratulations, Bob and Moni From: cont...@briencook.com Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:37:37 -0700 To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find I found this in Novato yesterday. To my knowledge it is the second meteorite found and the new main mass at 65.9 grams and 49 mm. http://briencook.com/Novato_2012-10-22/ More to follow... __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
HI All, news brief! Brien's seems to be the 1st find!!! http://cams.seti.org/ Yeah! Happy hunting, Moni __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
Moni, Hmmm... my first impression when I saw the picture was, that's not a meteorite. Phil Whitmer Joshua Tree Earth Space Museum - Original Message - From: Moni Waiblinger moni2...@hotmail.com To: cont...@briencook.com; meteor list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; bob v bolidecha...@yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 5:04 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find HI All, news brief! Brien's seems to be the 1st find!!! http://cams.seti.org/ Yeah! Happy hunting, Moni __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find
This is turning into a mystery wrapped inside an enigma. Phil Whitmer - That was my first impression too. Hmmm Bob L -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of dorifry Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:32 PM To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find Moni, Hmmm... my first impression when I saw the picture was, that's not a meteorite. Phil Whitmer Joshua Tree Earth Space Museum - Original Message - From: Moni Waiblinger moni2555 at hotmail.com To: contact at briencook.com; meteor list meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com; bob v bolidechaser at yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 5:04 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato meteorite find HI All, news brief! Brien's seems to be the 1st find!!! http://cams.seti.org/ __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found
Apparently the first meteorite has been found: Novato (N1) , 63 g cams.seti.org/Novato-Webber-Jenniskens.jpg http://cams.seti.org/ Martin Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found
Here are some images and a video: VIDEO: http://novato.patch.com/articles/small-rock-that-hit-novato-house-is-confirmed-chunk-of-meteor#video-11827352 http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.25.13.jpg http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.24.47.jpg http://o5.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/PATCH/resize/600x450/http://hss-prod.hss.aol.com/hss/storage/patch/f0667542b8618eb45a0b8ea59e0813cb Martin Von: karmaka karmaka-meteori...@t-online.de An: met-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Betreff: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found Datum: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 23:43:52 +0200 Apparently the first meteorite has been found: Novato (N1) , 63 g cams.seti.org/Novato-Webber-Jenniskens.jpg http://cams.seti.org/ Martin Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found
Congrats!! By it being a breccia, could it be lunar?? * Stuart McDaniel Lawndale, NC Secr., Cleve. Co. Astronomical Society IMCA #9052 Sirius Meteorites Node35 - Sentinel All Sky http://spacerocks.weebly.com * -Original Message- From: karmaka Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 5:43 PM To: met-list Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found Apparently the first meteorite has been found: Novato (N1) , 63 g cams.seti.org/Novato-Webber-Jenniskens.jpg http://cams.seti.org/ Martin Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found -- why the Orionid description?
Hi everyone, Anyone know why the reports are quoting Dr. Jenniskens as saying that the meteorite is from the Orionid meteor shower? If this is the Oct. 17 bolide, it was not an Orionid. Thanks, Bob On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 5:11 PM, karmaka karmaka-meteori...@t-online.de wrote: Here are some images and a video: VIDEO: http://novato.patch.com/articles/small-rock-that-hit-novato-house-is-confirmed-chunk-of-meteor#video-11827352 http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.25.13.jpg http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.24.47.jpg http://o5.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/PATCH/resize/600x450/http://hss-prod.hss.aol.com/hss/storage/patch/f0667542b8618eb45a0b8ea59e0813cb Martin Von: karmaka karmaka-meteori...@t-online.de An: met-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Betreff: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found Datum: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 23:43:52 +0200 Apparently the first meteorite has been found: Novato (N1) , 63 g cams.seti.org/Novato-Webber-Jenniskens.jpg http://cams.seti.org/ Martin Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found -- why the Orioniddescription?
Hi Bob. It could very well be, but then the meteorite... it should seem, would have to be a carbonaceous chondrite, since the Orionids are remnants of Halley's Comet! Last I knew all comets are usually composed of carbonaceous chondrite material. As far as the date being the 17th, the Orionids have a longer period of meteor shower then most other meteor showers. That means the Orionids can last several weeks BUT the peak of the Orionid shower falls around Oct. 20-21. This peak is where scientists/astronomers have calculated where the Earth's orbit comes into the path of the most debris left by Halley's comet. Also remember that the debris path with Halley's comet covers a long wide swath in the solar system, thus the longer length in time of meteor shower. Hope this helps or clears it up some. Sincerely Don Merchant Founder-Cosmic Treasures Celestial Wonders www.ctreasurescwonders.com IMCA #0960 - Original Message - From: Bob King nightsk...@gmail.com To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 7:30 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found -- why the Orioniddescription? Hi everyone, Anyone know why the reports are quoting Dr. Jenniskens as saying that the meteorite is from the Orionid meteor shower? If this is the Oct. 17 bolide, it was not an Orionid. Thanks, Bob On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 5:11 PM, karmaka karmaka-meteori...@t-online.de wrote: Here are some images and a video: VIDEO: http://novato.patch.com/articles/small-rock-that-hit-novato-house-is-confirmed-chunk-of-meteor#video-11827352 http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.25.13.jpg http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.24.47.jpg http://o5.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/PATCH/resize/600x450/http://hss-prod.hss.aol.com/hss/storage/patch/f0667542b8618eb45a0b8ea59e0813cb Martin Von: karmaka karmaka-meteori...@t-online.de An: met-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Betreff: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found Datum: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 23:43:52 +0200 Apparently the first meteorite has been found: Novato (N1) , 63 g cams.seti.org/Novato-Webber-Jenniskens.jpg http://cams.seti.org/ Martin Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found -- why the Orioniddescription?
Hi Don, Thanks for your reply. What you say is all true, but the meteor radiated from the direction of Sagittarius, not Orion. Bob On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Don Merchant dmerc...@rochester.rr.com wrote: Hi Bob. It could very well be, but then the meteorite... it should seem, would have to be a carbonaceous chondrite, since the Orionids are remnants of Halley's Comet! Last I knew all comets are usually composed of carbonaceous chondrite material. As far as the date being the 17th, the Orionids have a longer period of meteor shower then most other meteor showers. That means the Orionids can last several weeks BUT the peak of the Orionid shower falls around Oct. 20-21. This peak is where scientists/astronomers have calculated where the Earth's orbit comes into the path of the most debris left by Halley's comet. Also remember that the debris path with Halley's comet covers a long wide swath in the solar system, thus the longer length in time of meteor shower. Hope this helps or clears it up some. Sincerely Don Merchant Founder-Cosmic Treasures Celestial Wonders www.ctreasurescwonders.com IMCA #0960 - Original Message - From: Bob King nightsk...@gmail.com To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 7:30 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found -- why the Orioniddescription? Hi everyone, Anyone know why the reports are quoting Dr. Jenniskens as saying that the meteorite is from the Orionid meteor shower? If this is the Oct. 17 bolide, it was not an Orionid. Thanks, Bob On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 5:11 PM, karmaka karmaka-meteori...@t-online.de wrote: Here are some images and a video: VIDEO: http://novato.patch.com/articles/small-rock-that-hit-novato-house-is-confirmed-chunk-of-meteor#video-11827352 http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.25.13.jpg http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.24.47.jpg http://o5.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/PATCH/resize/600x450/http://hss-prod.hss.aol.com/hss/storage/patch/f0667542b8618eb45a0b8ea59e0813cb Martin Von: karmaka karmaka-meteori...@t-online.de An: met-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Betreff: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found Datum: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 23:43:52 +0200 Apparently the first meteorite has been found: Novato (N1) , 63 g cams.seti.org/Novato-Webber-Jenniskens.jpg http://cams.seti.org/ Martin Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found -- why the Orioniddescription?
Hello, That was not a statement from Jenniskens. That was already in the press stories, days earlier that this fall was from the shower. They are wrong, but it is now part of the legend. The stories say scientist said this, but I doubt any real scientist in the know would say this. Some writer got it wrong again. Michael Cottingham On Oct 21, 2012, at 7:03 PM, Bob King wrote: Hi Don, Thanks for your reply. What you say is all true, but the meteor radiated from the direction of Sagittarius, not Orion. Bob On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Don Merchant dmerc...@rochester.rr.com wrote: Hi Bob. It could very well be, but then the meteorite... it should seem, would have to be a carbonaceous chondrite, since the Orionids are remnants of Halley's Comet! Last I knew all comets are usually composed of carbonaceous chondrite material. As far as the date being the 17th, the Orionids have a longer period of meteor shower then most other meteor showers. That means the Orionids can last several weeks BUT the peak of the Orionid shower falls around Oct. 20-21. This peak is where scientists/astronomers have calculated where the Earth's orbit comes into the path of the most debris left by Halley's comet. Also remember that the debris path with Halley's comet covers a long wide swath in the solar system, thus the longer length in time of meteor shower. Hope this helps or clears it up some. Sincerely Don Merchant Founder-Cosmic Treasures Celestial Wonders www.ctreasurescwonders.com IMCA #0960 - Original Message - From: Bob King nightsk...@gmail.com To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 7:30 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found -- why the Orioniddescription? Hi everyone, Anyone know why the reports are quoting Dr. Jenniskens as saying that the meteorite is from the Orionid meteor shower? If this is the Oct. 17 bolide, it was not an Orionid. Thanks, Bob On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 5:11 PM, karmaka karmaka-meteori...@t-online.de wrote: Here are some images and a video: VIDEO: http://novato.patch.com/articles/small-rock-that-hit-novato-house-is-confirmed-chunk-of-meteor#video-11827352 http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.25.13.jpg http://media.nbcbayarea.com/images/640*480/2012-10-21+11.24.47.jpg http://o5.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/PATCH/resize/600x450/http://hss-prod.hss.aol.com/hss/storage/patch/f0667542b8618eb45a0b8ea59e0813cb Martin Von: karmaka karmaka-meteori...@t-online.de An: met-list meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Betreff: [meteorite-list] Novato (N1) found Datum: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 23:43:52 +0200 Apparently the first meteorite has been found: Novato (N1) , 63 g cams.seti.org/Novato-Webber-Jenniskens.jpg http://cams.seti.org/ Martin Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list Postfach fast voll? Jetzt kostenlos E-Mail Adresse @t-online.de sichern und endlich Platz für tausende Mails haben. http://www.t-online.de/email-kostenlos __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
