[meteorite-list] Water, not wind. (was,"Nice Chondrules")

From: DiamondMeteor <DiamondMeteor_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 09:53:58 2004
Message-ID: <OE38mTIVvLVKi3s1wsX00000753_at_hotmail.com>

Dear Robert, Allan, David and All;

Thanks for your comments.
Do you think water or wind lines would run on both sides of the rock and
almost continuously? Can these also form thumbprints?
Please see these more detailed pictures of the flow lines:
http://pages.britishlibrary.net/mhy10/meteor/fl2.htm

About the chonrules: they are glassy, they dont contain any carbonates.

About the ones with fusion crust: David is quite right about the layers.
However, I strongly believe that I have got the first sedementary
meteorites!!! I know you will lough at that but I have gathered lots of
evidences. One Japanese professor of meteorites agreed with this preliminary
observations, besides; one of the rocks I showed you earlier has been
identified as planetary meteorite (by one famous meteorite Lab) but it is
still under other tests.
In fact I was hesitant to show you some peculiar "sedementary meteorite"
pictures, but here if you want to see, so you have something fun to talk
about at Tucson:
http://pages.britishlibrary.net/mhy10/meteor/sd.htm
Notice that I would not lift these rocks off the ground if they dont have
very clear fusion crust (not desert varnish nor anything else; seeing is
believing).

Dear Tim and Allan;
You are welcome to use any images in your sites, however, please allow me
about two weeks till I get final lab results that they are meteowrongs. If
they prove to be wrongs I promise to send you very high resolution images.

Best Regards
Mohamed
==============================================


----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Verish" <bolidechaser_at_yahoo.com>
To: "Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral" <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Cc: "Allan Treiman" <treiman_at_lpi.usra.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 1:41 AM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Water, not wind. (was,"Nice Chondrules")


> I agree with Allan Treiman. These are great looking
> meteor-wrongs. In fact, no meteor-wrong web site
> would be complete without a link to this stunning,
> geologically uninformed "britishlibrary" web site.
> Even if you forgive the misidentification of
> meteorites due to a lack of an acquired expertise,
> their lack of interest in learning about the rocks
> common to their local area is what stuns me.
>
> To me, the quality of these meteor-wrongs suggests
> that there is a very high probability that a meteorite
> CAN be found in this area (if one hasn't been found
> already;-). What I wouldn't give to live near a
> desert pavement like the one pictured in the
> background of these images. So forgive my suspicion,
> but those people that have suggested that this web
> site might be "a prank" may be on to something.
>
> But then again, this may become the classic example of
> the impossibility of educating the general public, no
> matter how many quality images are available on all
> the excellent meteorite and meteor-wrong web sites. I
> am continually dismayed by all the meteor-wrongs
> brought to me by finders who say, "It looks just like
> a meteorite that I saw on [enter any meteorite dealers
> name here] web site"! Then when I go to that web
> site, I usually end up saying, "You think THAT
> meteorite image looks like THIS piece of iron ore?"
>
> Another "impossibility" is getting 3 geologists to use
> the same name when identifying a meteor-wrong. Not an
> actual problem, but to the lay-person, the variation
> in geologic terms applied to a meteor-wrong by
> different examiners is often perceived as varying
> opinions.
>
> Another tip-of-the-hat to Allan for his concise
> evaluation of the latest "Diamondmeteorite.com"
> images. More importantly, the descriptions are
> understandable to the lay-person. But then, I should
> also give credit to Graham Christensen for pointing
> out that the "flow lines" on the 3rd wrong are
> "oriented upwards" and are "probably formed by rain".
> Granted, we don't know for sure the original
> orientation in the ground for these fine-grained,
> layered white rocks, but on their surface these
> finely-spaced rills are more typical of dissolution
> features on limestone than the product of windblown
> sand. It has been my observation that rocks like
> limestone have difficulty developing ventifacted
> surfaces. Even if there is very minimal precipitation
> (or even condensation), dissolution will always
> outpace ventification.
>
> Bob V.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> [meteorite-list] Nice Chondrules
> Treiman, Allan Treiman_at_lpi.usra.edu
> Thu, 31 Jan 2002 08:18:19
>
> Beautiful and educational meteor-wrongs!
>
> ++++++
> The third rocks are ventifacts, carved by windblown
> sand. By their color, they are probably limestone.
> Behind the rocks is a nice desert pavement, which is
> consistent with lots of wind.
> ++++++
> Geologically yours
> Allan
>
> Allan H. Treiman
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> [meteorite-list] Nice Chondrules
> Graham Christensen majorvoltage_at_hotmail.com
> Thu, 31 Jan 2002 01:43:02 -0700
>
> Hello Mohammed,
> Very interesting but I think your identification is
> wrong.
> ++++++++
> And finally, your 'flow lines' are probably formed by
> rain. Notice how they all seem to be oriented upwards.
> Also, flow lines are only seen on fresh fusion crust
> and most fusion crust is dark except on some
> achondrite.
> ++++++++
>
> Happy hunting.
> Graham Christensen
>
> *******************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
> http://auctions.yahoo.com
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Fri 01 Feb 2002 01:08:17 AM PST