[meteorite-list] presentation material?

[gray_beard]

 I have an opportunity to make an educational meteorite presentation to a 
local metal detector club and a rock hound club.  I do not want to reinvent the 
wheel.  Please send me or direct me to presentation resources.

John
Eugene, OR
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30 (Scho ner's theory)

[Steve Schoner]

-- Norm Lehrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Steve,

Everything sounds fine till that last couple of
paragraphs where every other proposal also stumbles.
Just where is all this silicate material in our oceans
or atmosphere?  I still see a mass balance problem. 

I'm open for a good answer, but if you just described
it, I didn't understand.

Regards,
Norm

Norm,

Could the answer be in the total number of tektites that lie in those clay 
beds?  How about the micro-tektites that are scattered all over the oceans 
sediments?  What are the total mass estimates for these?  As for the 
atmospheric silicates, these would fall as dust over a few months or years.  
The question now is, how small are the smallest tektites?  Does anyone know?

Dirk Ross... Do you know?

I suspect that the total tonnage of tektites is quite high, certainly within 
the possibility as having come from comets.

As for comets, what is the percentage of silicates vs hydrocarbons, and water?

I suspect that the percentage of silicates vs water is small, certainly smaller 
than is found in the carbonaceous chondrites which are basically silicates, 
hydrocarbons and a very small percentage of water.

Steve Schoner
#4470


http://tektitesource.com 

--- Steve Schoner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> My theory on tektite formation:
> 
> Go back to the impacts of cometary material on
> Jupiter in July of 1994.  I think in this there is a
> clear demonstration of how tektites are formed. 
> There were huge plumes of plasma extending out into
> space, and large dark clouds of re-condensed dust
> from the impacts after-wards.
> 
> Now, I remember seeing an abstract regarding those
> plumes put out by I think Dr. Shoemaker.  In this
> abstract it was posited that the plasma cloud
> achieved temps at nearly a million or more, such
> that water molecules and all organic molecules were
> disrupted so that hydrogen separated from its oxygen
> bonds.  Now, it was stated in this abstract that the
> hydrogen escaped out into space but the free oxygen
> remained and fell back with the remnants of the
> plasma plume.  In other words, the hydrogen was
> "fractionated" from the oxygen and ejected away from
> the plume.
> 
> Now consider this.  Tektites are virtually free of
> water.  The remaining cometary plasma was mostly
> vaporized silicates and oxygen, and both were in a
> environment with a paucity of hydrogen which had
> escaped out into space.  The rock vapor latched onto
> free oxygen.  The result would be a glass with very
> little if any water.  And that would explain the
> huge dust clouds (micro-tektites)remaining. 
> But I wonder if any large tektites condensed from
> those plasma plumes and fell into Jupiter's depths.
> 
> No craters were produced, yet huge dust clouds
> floated in Jupiter's atmosphere for months. 
> 
> I ran this by Dr. Shoemaker sometime before his
> untimely death, and shortly later he was taken from
> us, thus I never got a response.
> 
> Could such happen here on earth?  
> 
> Just imagine a huge cometary impact into our
> atmosphere.  A complete disruption, with a plume of
> cometary plasma erupting out into space.  Hydrogen
> fractionated from the plasma cloud, the remaining
> silicate material and oxygen re-combining to form a
> glass, and the glass then falling back to earth in
> some cases several thousands of miles form the
> impact point. 
> 
> No crater produced because the impact may have
> happened over the ocean, or simply because the comet
> disrupted in the air and never reached the ground. 
> 
> Steve Schoner
> #4470
> 
> 
> 
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30 (Schoner's theory) Tektites

[drtanuki]

Dear Steve, Norm and List Members,
   I posed a question to D. Futrell some 10 years ago
concerning comet formation of tektites.  I asked him
if it was possible that a comet could have entered
Earth`s atmosphere and left behind glass from melted
silicates from both the comet and Earth entrained dust
plasma ( I and others have found Ni/Fe spherules in
tektite as well as Earth? zircons). At the time I was
studying glassy fusion crusts found on high silicate
meteorites.  He basically said that this was total
nonsense.
  Another point, the tektites must have cooled at a
relatively slow rate because the glass is free of
stress.  Glasses cooled rapidly contain internal
stresses that lead the glass to shatter easily; thus
man-made glasses require being kept at a slow cooling
rate to eliminate internal stress and breakage.
  Enigma! Dirk Ross..Tokyo

--- Norm Lehrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> Steve,
> 
> Everything sounds fine till that last couple of
> paragraphs where every other proposal also stumbles.
> Just where is all this silicate material in our
> oceans
> or atmosphere?  I still see a mass balance problem. 
> 
> I'm open for a good answer, but if you just
> described
> it, I didn't understand.
> 
> Regards,
> Norm
> http://tektitesource.com 
> 
> --- Steve Schoner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > My theory on tektite formation:
> > 
> > Go back to the impacts of cometary material on
> > Jupiter in July of 1994.  I think in this there is
> a
> > clear demonstration of how tektites are formed. 
> > There were huge plumes of plasma extending out
> into
> > space, and large dark clouds of re-condensed dust
> > from the impacts after-wards.
> > 
> > Now, I remember seeing an abstract regarding those
> > plumes put out by I think Dr. Shoemaker.  In this
> > abstract it was posited that the plasma cloud
> > achieved temps at nearly a million or more, such
> > that water molecules and all organic molecules
> were
> > disrupted so that hydrogen separated from its
> oxygen
> > bonds.  Now, it was stated in this abstract that
> the
> > hydrogen escaped out into space but the free
> oxygen
> > remained and fell back with the remnants of the
> > plasma plume.  In other words, the hydrogen was
> > "fractionated" from the oxygen and ejected away
> from
> > the plume.
> > 
> > Now consider this.  Tektites are virtually free of
> > water.  The remaining cometary plasma was mostly
> > vaporized silicates and oxygen, and both were in a
> > environment with a paucity of hydrogen which had
> > escaped out into space.  The rock vapor latched
> onto
> > free oxygen.  The result would be a glass with
> very
> > little if any water.  And that would explain the
> > huge dust clouds (micro-tektites)remaining. 
> > But I wonder if any large tektites condensed from
> > those plasma plumes and fell into Jupiter's
> depths.
> > 
> > No craters were produced, yet huge dust clouds
> > floated in Jupiter's atmosphere for months. 
> > 
> > I ran this by Dr. Shoemaker sometime before his
> > untimely death, and shortly later he was taken
> from
> > us, thus I never got a response.
> > 
> > Could such happen here on earth?  
> > 
> > Just imagine a huge cometary impact into our
> > atmosphere.  A complete disruption, with a plume
> of
> > cometary plasma erupting out into space.  Hydrogen
> > fractionated from the plasma cloud, the remaining
> > silicate material and oxygen re-combining to form
> a
> > glass, and the glass then falling back to earth in
> > some cases several thousands of miles form the
> > impact point. 
> > 
> > No crater produced because the impact may have
> > happened over the ocean, or simply because the
> comet
> > disrupted in the air and never reached the ground.
> 
> > 
> > Steve Schoner
> > #4470
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> >
>
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > 
> 
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> 

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30 (Schoner's theory)

[Norm Lehrman]

Steve,

Everything sounds fine till that last couple of
paragraphs where every other proposal also stumbles.
Just where is all this silicate material in our oceans
or atmosphere?  I still see a mass balance problem. 

I'm open for a good answer, but if you just described
it, I didn't understand.

Regards,
Norm
http://tektitesource.com 

--- Steve Schoner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> My theory on tektite formation:
> 
> Go back to the impacts of cometary material on
> Jupiter in July of 1994.  I think in this there is a
> clear demonstration of how tektites are formed. 
> There were huge plumes of plasma extending out into
> space, and large dark clouds of re-condensed dust
> from the impacts after-wards.
> 
> Now, I remember seeing an abstract regarding those
> plumes put out by I think Dr. Shoemaker.  In this
> abstract it was posited that the plasma cloud
> achieved temps at nearly a million or more, such
> that water molecules and all organic molecules were
> disrupted so that hydrogen separated from its oxygen
> bonds.  Now, it was stated in this abstract that the
> hydrogen escaped out into space but the free oxygen
> remained and fell back with the remnants of the
> plasma plume.  In other words, the hydrogen was
> "fractionated" from the oxygen and ejected away from
> the plume.
> 
> Now consider this.  Tektites are virtually free of
> water.  The remaining cometary plasma was mostly
> vaporized silicates and oxygen, and both were in a
> environment with a paucity of hydrogen which had
> escaped out into space.  The rock vapor latched onto
> free oxygen.  The result would be a glass with very
> little if any water.  And that would explain the
> huge dust clouds (micro-tektites)remaining. 
> But I wonder if any large tektites condensed from
> those plasma plumes and fell into Jupiter's depths.
> 
> No craters were produced, yet huge dust clouds
> floated in Jupiter's atmosphere for months. 
> 
> I ran this by Dr. Shoemaker sometime before his
> untimely death, and shortly later he was taken from
> us, thus I never got a response.
> 
> Could such happen here on earth?  
> 
> Just imagine a huge cometary impact into our
> atmosphere.  A complete disruption, with a plume of
> cometary plasma erupting out into space.  Hydrogen
> fractionated from the plasma cloud, the remaining
> silicate material and oxygen re-combining to form a
> glass, and the glass then falling back to earth in
> some cases several thousands of miles form the
> impact point. 
> 
> No crater produced because the impact may have
> happened over the ocean, or simply because the comet
> disrupted in the air and never reached the ground. 
> 
> Steve Schoner
> #4470
> 
> 
> 
> __
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> 

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30 (Schoner's theory)

[Steve Schoner]

My theory on tektite formation:

Go back to the impacts of cometary material on Jupiter in July of 1994.  I 
think in this there is a clear demonstration of how tektites are formed.  There 
were huge plumes of plasma extending out into space, and large dark clouds of 
re-condensed dust from the impacts after-wards.

Now, I remember seeing an abstract regarding those plumes put out by I think 
Dr. Shoemaker.  In this abstract it was posited that the plasma cloud achieved 
temps at nearly a million or more, such that water molecules and all organic 
molecules were disrupted so that hydrogen separated from its oxygen bonds.  
Now, it was stated in this abstract that the hydrogen escaped out into space 
but the free oxygen remained and fell back with the remnants of the plasma 
plume.  In other words, the hydrogen was "fractionated" from the oxygen and 
ejected away from the plume.

Now consider this.  Tektites are virtually free of water.  The remaining 
cometary plasma was mostly vaporized silicates and oxygen, and both were in a 
environment with a paucity of hydrogen which had escaped out into space.  The 
rock vapor latched onto free oxygen.  The result would be a glass with very 
little if any water.  And that would explain the huge dust clouds 
(micro-tektites)remaining.  But I wonder if any large tektites condensed 
from those plasma plumes and fell into Jupiter's depths.

No craters were produced, yet huge dust clouds floated in Jupiter's atmosphere 
for months. 

I ran this by Dr. Shoemaker sometime before his untimely death, and shortly 
later he was taken from us, thus I never got a response.

Could such happen here on earth?  

Just imagine a huge cometary impact into our atmosphere.  A complete 
disruption, with a plume of cometary plasma erupting out into space.  Hydrogen 
fractionated from the plasma cloud, the remaining silicate material and oxygen 
re-combining to form a glass, and the glass then falling back to earth in some 
cases several thousands of miles form the impact point. 

No crater produced because the impact may have happened over the ocean, or 
simply because the comet disrupted in the air and never reached the ground. 

Steve Schoner
#4470



__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Titan Movie

[Larry Lebofsky]

All:

Thought that you might be interested in this movie. Go to the site below and
click on "Movie Details"


Recently, Jason Barnes (Lunar and Planetary Lab) completed 
an animated gif using VIMS imagery
gathered during the last three Titan flybys.  It is posted on the JPL
website and is quite fascinating. It can be found at

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/home/index.cfm

Larry

-- 
Dr. Larry A. Lebofsky
Senior Research Scientist
Co-editor, Meteorite  "If you give a man a fish,   
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory   you feed him for a day.
1541 East University   If you teach a man to fish,
University of Arizonayou feed him for a lifetime."
Tucson, AZ 85721-0063 ~Chinese Proverb
Phone:  520-621-6947
FAX:520-621-8364
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Signs update again...

[Martin Horejsi]

Hello,

A couple folks have emailed me that they did not see their sign
posted. Please click on the link in the upper left titled "Meteorite
Signs - by Martin Horejsi"

This will take you to the full gallery of sign images. If yours is
still missing, let me know.

Thanks again.

Martin
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] AD: ESTHERVILLE PART-SLICE

[RYAN PAWELSKI]

Sorry for the double post, but I forgot to mention that this piece features 
some very nice olivine crystals as well!

Ryan

-Original Message-
>From: RYAN PAWELSKI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Feb 13, 2006 7:51 PM
>To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>Subject: [meteorite-list] AD: ESTHERVILLE PART-SLICE
>
>Good Evening Everyone...
>
>Might anyone be interested in purchasing a 125g part-slice of the Estherville 
>meso? It's a very fresh slice from the interior of a very large individual; no 
>oxidation whatsoever, and it has some large metal blebs.  I can let it go for 
>six bucks a gram if anyone wants it. Please email off list for a photo. Thanks.
>
>Ryan
>__
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Meteorite Signs Update

[Martin Horejsi]

Hi All,

I think I finally am caught up on all the sign pics and links that
came in over the weekend. If you have any more, please send them in.
Also if you notice any errors, omitions, etc., please email me.

There is also the Meteorite Hunting Gallery that Paul is running, and
I know there are many pics for that gallery as well since I remember
seeing them in Tucson.

Cheers,

Martin

http://www.meteoritetimes.com/meteorite-gallery.htm
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] A Comet's Tale (Stardust)

[Ron Baalke]

http://www.nature.com/news/2006/060213/full/060213-2.html

A comet's tale 
Mark Peplow 
nature.com
13 February 2006

Scientists are just beginning to examine the pieces of a comet brought
back to Earth by NASA's Stardust mission. Mark Peplow tagged along to
one lab to watch researchers examine their prize catch.

It's not every day you get to play with a comet's tail. And for Phil
Bland, an expert on meteorites and space dust at Imperial College
London, UK, it's like having all his birthdays come at once. "I keep
having flashbacks to being a nine-year-old, dreaming about space," he grins.

"This is comet dust," he exclaims, brandishing an anonymous-looking
cardboard box. "How cool is that?"

The box has just arrived from NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston,
Texas, but its contents have rather more distant origins. When the
Stardust probe swooped low over the comet Wild 2 on 2 January 2004, it
scooped up samples from the stream of dust that forms the comet's tail.

Embedded safely in a lightweight foam called aerogel, thousands of the
tiny grains were parachuted back to Earth on 15 January after travelling
more than a billion kilometres from the comet (see 'Comet dust delivered
to Earth ' ).

Stardust's scientists are wont to remind us, in hushed tones, that these
grains are the first geological samples returned from space for 20
years. "It's also the first time we've ever got material from a comet,"
says Bland. Stardust skimmed just 240 kilometres above the
5-kilometre-wide comet nucleus, picking up dust that had blown off the
comet's surface just minutes before.

Because comets are thought to be frosty leftovers from the Solar
System's formation, that dust has a lot of history that could help to
reveal where the Earth's oceans came from, and more besides.

Bland is one of the first scientists in the United Kingdom to get his
hands on some of these grains, each just a few micrometres, or
millionths of a metre, across. With so much precious dust to study, more
than 150 teams around the world are making a preliminary analysis to
find out what the probe brought back, and single out the most
interesting samples for further research.

What's in the box?

Jittery with excitement, Bland opens up the box to reveal the objects of
his affection, buried in bubble wrap. His team has received two types of
randomly selected sample dust grains, prepared for them by staff at NASA
to suit their analysis techniques. Both of these are the
'non-destructive' type: for the moment scientists are only allowed to
look at the samples without altering them, saving them for further
analyses down the line.

Bland's first sample is a credit-card-sized slab of plastic, which
appears to be dotted with 50 poppy seeds arranged in a rectangular grid.
Each of these grains, no bigger than the full stop at the end of this
sentence, is a fraction of a dust particle.

The second sample is made of epoxy resin and shaped like a small bullet.
A single grain is embedded in the very tip, which has been sliced and
polished to give a clean face. This is destined for the Natural History
Museum's scanning electron microscope (SEM).

Electron scan

SEMs can resolve tiny structural details by watching how a stream of
electrons bounce off a surface. But it can also reveal the presence of
different chemical elements from the characteristic X-rays given off as
the electrons collide with different atoms. So it should give Bland a
first glimpse of the minerals inside the grain.

We take the sample to the SEM laboratory, followed by a gaggle of
Bland's PhD students and resident SEM expert, Anton Kearsley. I expected
clean-room conditions, with white paper suits and airlocks to prevent
the samples becoming contaminated. How wrong I was. For these
experiments, air exposure doesn't significantly affect the mineral
chemistry, says Bland, which means that it's a lot easier to work with
the samples.

That's just as well, as Bland is getting impatient. "Come on, let's have
a look at it," he says, bouncing on his seat like a restless schoolboy.

"Three billion miles to get that?"

Kearsley cradles the epoxy bullet on a small mound of aluminium foil and
places it delicately inside the machine, which is the size of a small
refrigerator. He then manoeuvres the sample into precise position using
twin joysticks, while an internal camera relays magnified images of the
operation to a monitor. On screen, the bullet looks enormous, like a
missile rolling into place in a Bond villain's underground silo.

With ten of us crowded into the small room, and the lights dimmed to
avoid reflections on the screens, palpable tension steals over the group
as we crane forward to see the SEM images as they rise out of a static fog.

And there, behold, a series of smooth, interconnected surfaces that look
like a section from a geodesic dome: a perfect crystal. I'm impressed,
until Kearsley explains that this is merely the tip of the

[meteorite-list] AD: ESTHERVILLE PART-SLICE

[RYAN PAWELSKI]

Good Evening Everyone...

Might anyone be interested in purchasing a 125g part-slice of the Estherville 
meso? It's a very fresh slice from the interior of a very large individual; no 
oxidation whatsoever, and it has some large metal blebs.  I can let it go for 
six bucks a gram if anyone wants it. Please email off list for a photo. Thanks.

Ryan
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] Dag 998 co3

[Mike / flattoprocks]

Hello everyone, I just wanted a little info on Dag 998 it is a CO3. I know 
almost nothing about it and I picked up a small piece in Tucson. Thanks for 
your help

Mike Miller  //  E-Bay  flattoprocks
Website // www.meteoritefinder.com

Mike Miller 230 Greenway Dr.. Kingman AZ 86401 



__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30

[Sterling K. Webb]

Norm,

   That's a wonderful piece of data (and I can't
dare say "it's hard to swallow...").
   Darwin had first described the Australites
in his account of the voyage of the Beagle in
1844, with a very nice illustration of a classic
flanged button. Darwin assumed they were
volcanic obsidian but couldn't explain the
surface features.
   Temporarily lost the reference, but shortly
thereafter, this geologist wrote that the "wrinkles
and ridges" of tektites were emu gizzard wear.
So he was right about the emus but wrong about
the origin of the surface features...
   I've seen lots of dead critters on Illinois
backroads, but never a dead emu, so no
chance of picking up a nice australite that way...


Sterling K. Webb
--
- Original Message - 
From: "Norm Lehrman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Steve Schoner" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 

Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 8:57 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30



Sterling,

I too got drawn into tektites by the mystery.  They
often tell their individual stories plainly, but we
still can't get the big picture out of them!

One comment on your comments though.  Tektites
(australites) ARE very often emu gizzard stones.  In
the dry lakes where they are most abundant there are
typically only two rock types surviving.  Sharply
angular little bits of quartz shattered by halite
growth and the relatively smooth and conspicuous
little australites.  The latter are selectively picked
by the emus.  The aboriginees always check the
gizzards of emus taken hunting for australites---and I
always checked emus killed on the roadways!  That
theory is not a theory.

Best regards,
Norm
http://TektiteSource.com


--- "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:


Steve, List,

It's why I love tektites, as a puzzle.
Every theory explains some features;
no theory explains all the features of
those little devils.
I regard them as still a wide open
mystery, the only scientific mystery
still going strong after more than 200
years of hypothesis. (The first tektite
theory was published in 1788, long
before the first scientific theory of
meteorites, which had not even been
accepted as real yet.)
I keep a table of all the theories of
tektites, ancient and modern, and I have
39 listed, including the one that assays
that they are the gizzard stones of emus!
There are several lunar theories. Nininger
(at one time) believed them to be Lunaites, or
ejecta from lunar meteoroid impact. Chapman
suggested that they were the material that
makes up the bright "rays" that a few young
lunar craters display, ejected all the way to the
Earth, thinking this would account for their
terrestrial distribution pattern (it doesn't).
Lunar vulcanism of the ordinary
volcanic variety has been suggested
several times, the last time by John
O'Keefe, who refined it to a suggestion of
deep hydrogen volcanoes with hypersonic
hot gas plumes, before moving on to another
theory.
I am not, BTW, denigrating O'Keefe
for changing theories in mid-stream.  O'Keefe
put forward FIVE theories by my count, which
gives him more theories than any one else on
my list. He spent his not inconsiderable talents
on the problem, but all the theory buckets have
holes in them and leak like crazy, not just his,
but all of them.
Today, we have the impact "consensus"
theory, which is actually not a consensus at
all, because every impact theorist of note
has a tektite impact origin theory of his own
which is not compatible with any other
impact theorist's tektite theory!
But it's called a consensus because the
real consensus is that there is no point in
wasting any more time on tektites. We've
done them to death, performed every test;
it's time to move on and just accept the least
whacky answer by (unspoken) default.
Don't get me started; I wrote that post
chewing over the impact theories a long
time ago... I even have a pet theory of
my own (I call him Bruno and feed him
regularly) that manages to explain a lot of
tektite puzzles that the other 39 theories
don't, but --- guess what? My pet theory
has different but glaringly obvious flaws
all its own, so it's DOA, just like all the
other tektite theories.
They're a paradox. They're a problem.
They're like the jigsaw that seems to going
so well until somebody holds up a piece
you'd forgotten about and innocently says,
"Where's this go?"


Sterling K. Webb
--
- Original Message - 
From: "Steve Schoner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 2:41 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest,
Vol 26, Issue 30


As Sterling Webb wrote, if the reasoning he posited
follows then there is no
way that tectites came from the moon.  The
distribution on the earth, the
ablation shapes, stretch forms, and lack of cosmic
ray exposure pretty much
eliminate the moon as the source

Re: [meteorite-list] Re: Tektites continued...Dirk Ross...Tokyo

[drtanuki]

Dear Norm, Steve, Sterling and List,
  Thank you for your posts on tektites.  The fact is
we know very little about the formation of tektites
and where the mystery crater(s), if any, are.  I have
spent almost 20 years searching Thailand, Laos,
Cambodia and the Philippines.  So far, the theories
presented leave more questions and NONE of them have
led us to solving the mystery.
  My working hypothesis is that they were created by
multiple impacts...but no craters directly linked to
their formation have been found to date.
  I can accept that small Australites may have
traveled at high velocities and perhaps long
distances; but when it comes to Indochinites, some
150-200+grams with delicate tails (in drop forms) and
being glass, I cannot understand how they survived
landing on hard rocky surfaces even at free fall
velocity.  Most of the tektites that I have collected
are from lateritic soils or eroded lateritic soils.
The laterites are comprised of clays, sand,large
pebbles to cobbles.  In some areas the laterite is a
breccia and not a conglomerate.  Other areas there is
laterite of only very fine particles and what appears
to be accreationary lapilli; yet other areas only
lateritic soils void of any tektites. The find
location and fall location in my opinion is not a long
distance apart.  Glass does not withstand fluvial
transport without breakage and abrasion. Also at the
locations that I have collected in Thailand there are
populations of distinct shapes from area to area (my
paper presented in 2003 at the international symposium
held at Yamaguchi University, Japan; unpublished). 
The sample size of the population was approximately
3000 tektites with a total weight of about 55kgs).
  I am convinced this puzzle can only be solved with
someone well-versed in physics and aerodynamics.
  I have done aerodynamic modeling on shape formation
and have been able to duplicate all of the splashform
shapes found in the field, at freefall formation 
velocities. 
  If anyone has any clues please feel free to comment.
Thank you in advance. Enigma sums up tektites.  
Sincerely, Dirk Ross...Tokyo

PS: I am not addressing Muong Nong (layered tektites)
in the above, only splashform tektites. MNs have their
own separate set of problems in explanation. dr 

--- Norm Lehrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Sterling,
> 
> I too got drawn into tektites by the mystery.  They
> often tell their individual stories plainly, but we
> still can't get the big picture out of them!
> 
> One comment on your comments though.  Tektites
> (australites) ARE very often emu gizzard stones.  In
> the dry lakes where they are most abundant there are
> typically only two rock types surviving.  Sharply
> angular little bits of quartz shattered by halite
> growth and the relatively smooth and conspicuous
> little australites.  The latter are selectively
> picked
> by the emus.  The aboriginees always check the
> gizzards of emus taken hunting for australites---and
> I
> always checked emus killed on the roadways!  That
> theory is not a theory. 
> 
> Best regards,
> Norm
> http://TektiteSource.com
> 
> 
> --- "Sterling K. Webb"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> 
> > Steve, List,
> > 
> > It's why I love tektites, as a puzzle.
> > Every theory explains some features;
> > no theory explains all the features of
> > those little devils.
> > I regard them as still a wide open
> > mystery, the only scientific mystery
> > still going strong after more than 200
> > years of hypothesis. (The first tektite
> > theory was published in 1788, long
> > before the first scientific theory of
> > meteorites, which had not even been
> > accepted as real yet.)
> > I keep a table of all the theories of
> > tektites, ancient and modern, and I have
> > 39 listed, including the one that assays
> > that they are the gizzard stones of emus!
> > There are several lunar theories. Nininger
> > (at one time) believed them to be Lunaites, or
> > ejecta from lunar meteoroid impact. Chapman
> > suggested that they were the material that
> > makes up the bright "rays" that a few young
> > lunar craters display, ejected all the way to the
> > Earth, thinking this would account for their
> > terrestrial distribution pattern (it doesn't).
> > Lunar vulcanism of the ordinary
> > volcanic variety has been suggested
> > several times, the last time by John
> > O'Keefe, who refined it to a suggestion of
> > deep hydrogen volcanoes with hypersonic
> > hot gas plumes, before moving on to another
> > theory.
> > I am not, BTW, denigrating O'Keefe
> > for changing theories in mid-stream.  O'Keefe
> > put forward FIVE theories by my count, which
> > gives him more theories than any one else on
> > my list. He spent his not inconsiderable talents
> > on the problem, but all the theory buckets have
> > holes in them and leak like crazy, not just his,
> > but all of them.
> > Today, we have the impact "consensus"
> > theory, which is actually not a consensus at
> > all, b

RE: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30

[Anita D. Westlake]

Maybe those should be called "emuites" to convey their unique journey?
Anita

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Norm
Lehrman
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:58 AM
To: Sterling K. Webb; Steve Schoner; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30

Sterling,

I too got drawn into tektites by the mystery.  They
often tell their individual stories plainly, but we
still can't get the big picture out of them!

One comment on your comments though.  Tektites
(australites) ARE very often emu gizzard stones.  In
the dry lakes where they are most abundant there are
typically only two rock types surviving.  Sharply
angular little bits of quartz shattered by halite
growth and the relatively smooth and conspicuous
little australites.  The latter are selectively picked
by the emus.  The aboriginees always check the
gizzards of emus taken hunting for australites---and I
always checked emus killed on the roadways!  That
theory is not a theory. 

Best regards,
Norm
http://TektiteSource.com


--- "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Steve, List,
> 
> It's why I love tektites, as a puzzle.
> Every theory explains some features;
> no theory explains all the features of
> those little devils.
> I regard them as still a wide open
> mystery, the only scientific mystery
> still going strong after more than 200
> years of hypothesis. (The first tektite
> theory was published in 1788, long
> before the first scientific theory of
> meteorites, which had not even been
> accepted as real yet.)
> I keep a table of all the theories of
> tektites, ancient and modern, and I have
> 39 listed, including the one that assays
> that they are the gizzard stones of emus!
> There are several lunar theories. Nininger
> (at one time) believed them to be Lunaites, or
> ejecta from lunar meteoroid impact. Chapman
> suggested that they were the material that
> makes up the bright "rays" that a few young
> lunar craters display, ejected all the way to the
> Earth, thinking this would account for their
> terrestrial distribution pattern (it doesn't).
> Lunar vulcanism of the ordinary
> volcanic variety has been suggested
> several times, the last time by John
> O'Keefe, who refined it to a suggestion of
> deep hydrogen volcanoes with hypersonic
> hot gas plumes, before moving on to another
> theory.
> I am not, BTW, denigrating O'Keefe
> for changing theories in mid-stream.  O'Keefe
> put forward FIVE theories by my count, which
> gives him more theories than any one else on
> my list. He spent his not inconsiderable talents
> on the problem, but all the theory buckets have
> holes in them and leak like crazy, not just his,
> but all of them.
> Today, we have the impact "consensus"
> theory, which is actually not a consensus at
> all, because every impact theorist of note
> has a tektite impact origin theory of his own
> which is not compatible with any other
> impact theorist's tektite theory!
> But it's called a consensus because the
> real consensus is that there is no point in
> wasting any more time on tektites. We've
> done them to death, performed every test;
> it's time to move on and just accept the least
> whacky answer by (unspoken) default.
> Don't get me started; I wrote that post
> chewing over the impact theories a long
> time ago... I even have a pet theory of
> my own (I call him Bruno and feed him
> regularly) that manages to explain a lot of
> tektite puzzles that the other 39 theories
> don't, but --- guess what? My pet theory
> has different but glaringly obvious flaws
> all its own, so it's DOA, just like all the
> other tektite theories.
> They're a paradox. They're a problem.
> They're like the jigsaw that seems to going
> so well until somebody holds up a piece
> you'd forgotten about and innocently says,
> "Where's this go?"
> 
> 
> Sterling K. Webb
> --
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Steve Schoner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 2:41 PM
> Subject: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest,
> Vol 26, Issue 30
> 
> 
> As Sterling Webb wrote, if the reasoning he posited
> follows then there is no 
> way that tectites came from the moon.  The
> distribution on the earth, the 
> ablation shapes, stretch forms, and lack of cosmic
> ray exposure pretty much 
> eliminate the moon as the source.
> 
> Steve Schoner
> IMCA #4470
> 
> 
> Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 03:00:46 -0600
> From: "Sterling K. Webb"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Orbital debris
> watching radar
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Meteorite List"
> 
> Message-ID:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed;
> charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
> 
> Hi, Darren,
> 
> I gather from the phrase about having their
> orbits decay,
> that by "Earth orbit," you mean "in orbit about t

Re: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30

[Norm Lehrman]

Sterling,

I too got drawn into tektites by the mystery.  They
often tell their individual stories plainly, but we
still can't get the big picture out of them!

One comment on your comments though.  Tektites
(australites) ARE very often emu gizzard stones.  In
the dry lakes where they are most abundant there are
typically only two rock types surviving.  Sharply
angular little bits of quartz shattered by halite
growth and the relatively smooth and conspicuous
little australites.  The latter are selectively picked
by the emus.  The aboriginees always check the
gizzards of emus taken hunting for australites---and I
always checked emus killed on the roadways!  That
theory is not a theory. 

Best regards,
Norm
http://TektiteSource.com


--- "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Steve, List,
> 
> It's why I love tektites, as a puzzle.
> Every theory explains some features;
> no theory explains all the features of
> those little devils.
> I regard them as still a wide open
> mystery, the only scientific mystery
> still going strong after more than 200
> years of hypothesis. (The first tektite
> theory was published in 1788, long
> before the first scientific theory of
> meteorites, which had not even been
> accepted as real yet.)
> I keep a table of all the theories of
> tektites, ancient and modern, and I have
> 39 listed, including the one that assays
> that they are the gizzard stones of emus!
> There are several lunar theories. Nininger
> (at one time) believed them to be Lunaites, or
> ejecta from lunar meteoroid impact. Chapman
> suggested that they were the material that
> makes up the bright "rays" that a few young
> lunar craters display, ejected all the way to the
> Earth, thinking this would account for their
> terrestrial distribution pattern (it doesn't).
> Lunar vulcanism of the ordinary
> volcanic variety has been suggested
> several times, the last time by John
> O'Keefe, who refined it to a suggestion of
> deep hydrogen volcanoes with hypersonic
> hot gas plumes, before moving on to another
> theory.
> I am not, BTW, denigrating O'Keefe
> for changing theories in mid-stream.  O'Keefe
> put forward FIVE theories by my count, which
> gives him more theories than any one else on
> my list. He spent his not inconsiderable talents
> on the problem, but all the theory buckets have
> holes in them and leak like crazy, not just his,
> but all of them.
> Today, we have the impact "consensus"
> theory, which is actually not a consensus at
> all, because every impact theorist of note
> has a tektite impact origin theory of his own
> which is not compatible with any other
> impact theorist's tektite theory!
> But it's called a consensus because the
> real consensus is that there is no point in
> wasting any more time on tektites. We've
> done them to death, performed every test;
> it's time to move on and just accept the least
> whacky answer by (unspoken) default.
> Don't get me started; I wrote that post
> chewing over the impact theories a long
> time ago... I even have a pet theory of
> my own (I call him Bruno and feed him
> regularly) that manages to explain a lot of
> tektite puzzles that the other 39 theories
> don't, but --- guess what? My pet theory
> has different but glaringly obvious flaws
> all its own, so it's DOA, just like all the
> other tektite theories.
> They're a paradox. They're a problem.
> They're like the jigsaw that seems to going
> so well until somebody holds up a piece
> you'd forgotten about and innocently says,
> "Where's this go?"
> 
> 
> Sterling K. Webb
> --
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Steve Schoner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 2:41 PM
> Subject: [meteorite-list] Re: Meteorite-list Digest,
> Vol 26, Issue 30
> 
> 
> As Sterling Webb wrote, if the reasoning he posited
> follows then there is no 
> way that tectites came from the moon.  The
> distribution on the earth, the 
> ablation shapes, stretch forms, and lack of cosmic
> ray exposure pretty much 
> eliminate the moon as the source.
> 
> Steve Schoner
> IMCA #4470
> 
> 
> Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 03:00:46 -0600
> From: "Sterling K. Webb"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Orbital debris
> watching radar
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Meteorite List"
> 
> Message-ID:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed;
> charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
> 
> Hi, Darren,
> 
> I gather from the phrase about having their
> orbits decay,
> that by "Earth orbit," you mean "in orbit about the
> Earth."
> Orbits around the Earth only "decay" because the
> orbit
> touches the uppermost atmosphere enough to cause
> drag
> which, however minute, reduces orbital velocity. It
> may seem
> logical that materials kicked off the Moon would
> easily and
> immediately end up in an orbit around the Earth, or
> at least
> some of them would.
> 
> But the truth 

[meteorite-list] Seeking leftover nwas

[Gary K. Foote]

Ill be giving a presentation on meteorites for a 4th grade class and want to 
give each 
student a small piece of meteorite.  Nothing special - chipped fragments will 
do.  
Anybody got a couple of dozen I could pick up cheap?  Maybe 20 grams or so each?

Thanks,

Gary

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list