Message -
From: Michael L Blood
To: Al Mitterling ; Geoff Notkin ; Meteorite List
Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article
Hi Al and all,
The fact that it was one of the largest masses
of Brenham is irrelevant
On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 10:58:47 -0700, you wrote:
Anyway, 1,500 pounds of fragments doesn't count as a single largest
meteorite.
If those 1,500 pounds were found in contact with each other in that one hole (as
the article seems to be saying) then would you not agree that it was probably a
single
Hi Geoff and Listees,
I think you have hit the nail on the head in regards to this find which
is in pieces. I am sure he wants this to be larger than Steve Arnolds
orientated specimen. How can we be sure that what is in the hole he has
found isn't other fragments from other finds? I guess if
Hi Al and all,
The fact that it was one of the largest masses
of Brenham is irrelevant. It is not now one of the largest
masses. Before it all entered the earth's atmosphere all Brenham
might all have been one mass - or, in the asteroid belt it
might all have been one mass, so, the fact
On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 13:56:27 -0700, you wrote:
The fact that it was one of the largest masses
of Brenham is irrelevant. It is not now one of the largest
masses.
snip
have been one mass in that hole at some time I just
don't see how you can get close to comparing that to
Steve's
already been
set and Steve's Brenham record is safe for now! ;-)
Cheers,
Jeff
- Original Message -
From: Michael L Blood
To: Al Mitterling ; Geoff Notkin ; Meteorite List
Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Amusing Chicago Sun-Times Article
Hi Al and all
6 matches
Mail list logo
