[meteorite-list] Elma material - the "problem" if it IS a meteorite

From: Adam Hupe <adamhupe_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:16:36 2004
Message-ID: <010301c36c48$9d0fa840$b4dbe60c_at_attbi.com>

Dear Robert and List,

I take great offense with this post because it is obvious that previous
posts regarding this subject where not read.

A few points I would like to make:

1.) From the beginning we stated that the Elma material did not look
meteoritic.
2.) The scientist asked us to collect material for them.
3.) Three other individual laboratories studied this material on there own.
4.) We provided material only to the UW who requested it.
5.) We persuaded no one to study this material.
6.) We never tried to convince any one that it was meteoritic.

Points research groups made on there own without our contact.

1.) Sandia Laboratories in New Mexico, a DOD contractor, proposed that it
could be a transient event, a meteoritic (atmospheric) phenomenon.
2.) A Russian researcher suggested it could be a "geometeorite".
3.) The UW has yet to make a public official announcement.

Other points:

1.) Anytime witnesses report a huge fireball sighting do you not think it is
worth investigating?
2.) When strange material is discovered at the scene are scientist supposed
to ignore that it exists?
3.) Should an assumption be made without testing the material?
4.) Should people including scientists have a closed mind when things are
not as one would expect?
5.) Should we not put forth the effort in order to prove whether something
is false or real
 when we where asked to do so by our peers?
6.) Are we not responsible for reporting our findings regardless of where
they may lead when a public interest has been expressed?

Some simple advice, If you do not like a particular thread simply hit
delete. This takes about 50ms, writing a reply may take 15 minutes. Which
sounds the easiest?

All the best,

Adam



----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Verish" <bolidechaser_at_yahoo.com>
To: "Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral" <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 3:38 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Elma material - the "problem" if it IS a meteorite


> Question #1:
>
> Is this material a meteorite, or is it not?
>
> And the corollary questions:
>
> Why is it so hard to decide whether it is a meteorite,
> or not?
> and
> What is it specifically that makes anyone think that
> this material is meteoritic-related?
>
> If it turns out that this material is
> meteorite-related, then kudos are certainly in order
> for all those involved in its identification, and
> specifically to the Hupes for being able to convince
> the researchers to take a second look at this stuff.
> Seriously, if I were to go to a university dragging in
> some "material" that looked like this and suggest that
> they should analyze it, I would be laughed at, and if
> I insisted, I could count on being ridiculed.
>
> If THIS is a meteorite, then I find this very
> problematic, because so many meteor-wrongs look just
> like this material. And every finder of a piece of
> vesicular slag that thinks it is a meteorite, will
> point to this Elma material and say, "Well it looks
> just like that material, and ITS a meteorite!"
>
> When "anything" can be a meteorite, identification of
> meteor-wrongs will be impossible. When trying to
> identify whether a specimen is a meteor-wrong or a
> meteorite, by visual means, it will become impossible
> to convince the finder that he has a meteor-wrong.
>
> I should look at the bright-side.
> This will free up a lot of bandwidth on this List!
>
> ;-)
> Bob V.
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Tue 26 Aug 2003 11:09:21 PM PDT