[meteorite-list] Takysie Lake
From: Treiman, Allan <Treiman_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 09:42:00 2004
I'd be interested in examining and analyzing Takysie Lake.
Anyone have a sample or thin section?
Allan H. Treiman
Lunar and Planetary Institute
3600 Bay Area Boulevard
Houston, TX 77058-1113
> -----Original Message-----
> From: meteorites_at_space.com [SMTP:email@example.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 11:37 PM
> To: meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> Subject: Fwd: Re: [meteorite-list] Takysie Lake
> ------- Start of forwarded message -------
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Takysie Lake
> To: ase_at_planet-interkom.de, firstname.lastname@example.org,
> From: meteorites_at_space.com
> Date: 16 Jan 2001 21:29:10 -0800
> On Tue, 16 January 2001, Alexander Seidel wrote:
> > "Darryl S. Futrell" wrote:
> > >
> > > Back in 1968 I traded for a 10 gram slice of Takysie Lake, BC, Canada.
> > > had been written up in the Dec. 1967 issue of Meteoritics (which I
> don't see
> > > on my bookshelf) by Nininger, Huss, or both. They weren't sure if the
> > > stones Nininger or both found were meteoritic or not, but Nininger was
> > > convinced they all had fusion crusts. It was suggested that they
> might be
> > > lunar, which aroused my curiosity. My slice doesn't look like
> > > lunar to me, but then, I haven't seen a full variety of Apollo rock
> > > My slice has a light brownish stain for a crust. If it originally had
> > > of a fusion crust, it didn't survive the slicing.
> > >
> > > I never heard another word about it, except that some tests had been
> > > inconclusive. Has anyone ever heard of these Takysie Lake stones and
> > > they turned out to be?
> > Hi Darryl and List,
> > In the MetBase remarks section I found the following information:
> > "The brecciated material collected, H.H.Nininger and G.I.Huss,
> > Meteoritics, 1967, 3, p.169, is probably a conglomerate or breccia,
> > A.L.Graham et al., Cat. Met., London, 1985."
> > Literature with keywords on Takysie:
> > Huss G.I. (1967) "Field investigation of the Takysie stones", 1966
> > (abs.) Meteoritics 3(3), 113.
> > Huss G.I. (1977) "Significance of the Yamato meteorites" Meteoritics
> > 12(2), 141-144
> > Nininger H.H. (1967) "Discovery of the Takysie, B.C., stone", 1965
> > (abs.) Meteoritics 3(3), 121
> > Nininger, Huss (1967) "The Takysie Lake, B.C., Stones: Meteorites or
> > Moon Rock?" Meteoritics (3(4), 169-178
> > There seems to be no more recent info on this one.
> Many years ago. 1975 to 1978, I had a series of conversations with Harvey
> Nininger, and G. Huss about this very strange material. I also obtained
> from them several pieces after I asked for samples with the so called
> "fusion crust" Sure enough, the surface appears to have a fusion crust,
> but it more of a light tan, like that which one would see on Norton
> County. More striking is the weathering zone on the larger piece. This
> weathering zone extends several mm into the matrix.
> In my discussions over the phone with Nininger, he was convinced that it
> was a new type of meteorite. His conclusion was based upon several facts
> that he ascertained regarding the distribution of the samples that he
> recovered and the nature of the finds themselves.
> 1) In his visits to the site, he had made collections of the rocks in
> question noting that they had a distribution that was consistent with that
> of known meteorite falls. In fact, according to him he told me that the
> distribution was a "classical one"-- that is small one at one end, and
> larger ones several miles at the other end.
> 2) The rocks in question have a "weathering rind" below a crust that is in
> most of the samples flaking off of the masses.
> (Nininger was of the opinion that this alone indicated that the rocks were
> not terrestrial)
> 3)The type of rock was out of place with all the other rocks found in the
> area. In other words, if one went beyond the boundaries of the known
> distribution field, (strewnfield) then they would not be found.
> Nininger was so perplexed by the nature of these rocks that he looked to
> the moon as the origin. And in 1967 he was almost certain that they were
> lunar meteorites, blasted off the moon by meteoroid impacts. (In this he
> was ahead of his time as it was not till years that the first actual
> Lunite was found.)
> Lunar possibilites aside, Nininger was certain in his convictions that the
> Takysie Lake stones were meteorites of a new type. And he was aware that
> they were not like the moon rocks that later were returned from the moon.
> But in one of the last conversations that I had with him we talked about
> Takysie Lake stones, and he remained firm in his belief, despite the fact
> that they are so different from any known meteorite, that they are
> He mentioned that they could not have been on the ground for long, as the
> ones that he recovered years later after the first finds were more
> weathered than the ones first found in 1967.
> A mystery indeed.
> Subsequent tests have been inconclusive.
> But many years ago, 1990 (?), I gave a slice of it to Ron Farrell (when we
> were on better terms) for analysis by a Lab that he was dealing with. He
> gave it to them blind-- that is he did not tell the what it was. And the
> lab was familiar with and had first hand experience with lunar samples
> brought back from the moon in the Apollo missions.
> According to Mr. Farrell, "the reasearcher was visibly excited by the
> nature of this rock, and asked 'where did you get this?' "
> Ron would not say.
> But the tests done by the lab did not confirm that the Takysie Lake stones
> were lunar. They lacked certain elements that were found in all of the
> Lunar rocks.
> So, when I look at the three pieces that I have, from 15 to 60 grams with
> their apparent fusion crusts, and weathering rind, I am perplexed.
> Could these be a new, and very rare, and unique type of meteorite?
> Could they be lunar?
> Or maybe Martian?
> We are finding that Mars is a very dynamic planet, and as such it could,
> and probably does produce rocks that are much more variable than those
> that we know to have come from that planet.
> The only way to resolve the question of the Takysie Lake stones once and
> for all is to perhaps send a sample to the Labs that examine known Martian
> and Lunar meteorites and make more detailed comparisons.
> Age dating has never been done on Takysie Lake stones.
> Nor has neutron activation analysis.
> Noble gas ratios.
> These, and a whole host of tests could further resolve the question that
> surround these very odd rocks.
> And more importantly-- are there more of them yet to be found, and what is
> their condition after an additional 30 years in the elements?
> My feeling is--
> Until they are written off as meteorites, I would not write them off yet.
> (Either I just made a big fool of myself, or maybe someone knows some who
> can further study these enigmatic rocks)
> Steve Schoner,
> American Meteorite Survey
> Join the Space Program: Get FREE E-mail at http://www.space.com.
> ------- End of forwarded message -------
> Join the Space Program: Get FREE E-mail at http://www.space.com.
> Meteorite-list mailing list
Received on Wed 17 Jan 2001 09:01:23 AM PST