[meteorite-list] Dry Lake Stewnfields??

From: Tom aka James Knudson <knudson911_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:17:48 2004
Message-ID: <006c01c3c3ea$00eb73a0$ddd143d8_at_malcolm>

Hello List, Bob V. wrote;

"By now everyone knows that Tom isn't really flattering
me. Tom has discovered a way to get me to post to the
List, and he uses it most effectively. He knows that
I can't resist the opportunity to prove him wrong!"

 Oh contraire , I think the world of Robert Verish and his opinions!!!!!
Yes, I know how to get him to post and I do this when and only when I want
to the correct answer to a particular question! So, I am just killing two
birds with one stone, complimenting a man I respect and ensuring we get the
correct answer! : )

Thanks, Tom
Peregrineflier <><
Yea, that's right,
The proudest member of the IMCA # 6168

----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Verish <bolidechaser_at_yahoo.com>
To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 1:49 AM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Dry Lake Stewnfields??


> Tom wrote:
> >I wonder how many GB finds are actually where they
> >landed? I bet, not many?
> >I know Bob V. will have these answers!
>
> By now everyone knows that Tom isn't really flattering
> me. Tom has discovered a way to get me to post to the
> List, and he uses it most effectively. He knows that
> I can't resist the opportunity to prove him wrong!
> ;-)
>
> Not that I have to work hard to prove that I DON'T
> "have all the answers", but I will jump at any
> opportunity to give proper credit to all of my
> colleagues and team members who have worked hard at
> recording the surface conditions at all of their find
> localities, and for sharing their observations with
> me.
>
> But for all of those who would simply accept the
> "answers" of a self-described "expert", I have some
> bad news for you. There ain't no experts, and there
> are no simple answers. Hell! We're still trying to
> figure out how to word sensible questions!
>
> But I do like to give myself credit for being one of
> the first to question whether any "good" strewn field
> data could be obtained from documenting meteorite
> finds on dry lakes. Of course, since much of the talk
> about strewn fields on dry lakes came from my very own
> web pages, it is only fair that I am now a vocal
> advocate for the "NO GOOD Strewn Fields on Dry Lakes"
> school of thought.
>
> I tend to agree with Doug that Dry Lake Strewn Fields
> are in the eye of the beholder. But after conferring
> with my dry-lake-meteorite-searching colleagues, all
> of our observations tend to say the same thing, and
> semantics aside, there is a whole lot of movement of
> objects occurring on these "dry" lakes.
>
> So the short answer is:
> on dry lakebeds, we prefer to call these -
> accumulation zones, or recovery fields - versus,
> "strewn fields".
>
> But keep in mind which "camp" I belong.
> I'm squarely in the middle of the "don't have all the
> answers" school of thought!
> ;-)
> Bob V.
>
>
> [meteorite-list] Dry Lake Stewnfields??
> Tom aka James Knudson knudson911_at_frontiernet.net
> Mon, 15 Dec 2003 21:52:06 -0700
>
> Hi John and list, now this is the type of questions
> that should be on our list!!! I to want to hear the
> answers to John's questions too. I never quite
> thought about it! Having hunted GB many times, I have
> to wonder if any of the strewn fields data is strewn
> field data or nothing more than rock movement data?
>
> I wonder how many GB finds are actually where they
> landed, I bet, not many? I know Bob V. will have these
> answers!
> Thanks, Tom
> Peregrineflier <><
> Yea, that's right,
> The proudest member of the IMCA # 6168
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <j.divelbiss_at_att.net>
> To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 9:14 PM
> Subject: [meteorite-list] Dry Lake Stewnfields??
>
>
> > To Rob, Bob, Adam, and others:
> >
> > Recent finds from the Nevada dry lakes were grouped
> in a small area within a dry lake. The finding of
> three apparent pieces from same fall created a
> description by Adam that these finds might constitute
> a new strewnfield.
> >
> > Questions/observations in regards to desert
> strewnfields.
> >
> > 1. Obvious groupings of fallen masses would make the
> likelihood of the
> area
> > being a meteorite stewnfield. Do multiple finds in
> desert locale usually
> get
> > described as a stewnfield?
> >
> > 2. Does the fact that many rocks get moved around in
> these environments take the strewnfield idea down a
> notch with rocks being scattered?...or does their
> proximity within the bounds of normal surface
> movements qualify them to be still within the original
> strewnfield?
> >
> > 3. Is the idea of stating a location has a new
> strewnfield more about this location being a new place
> to find more than one meteorite of the same
> apparent fall?...and not so much about the actual fall
> characteristics?
> >
> > I guess I'm just curious about the use of word
> strewnfield in this case?
> >
> > Yearning to be set straight,
> >
> > John
> >
> > ______________________________________________
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
> http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Tue 16 Dec 2003 10:33:47 AM PST