[meteorite-list] Dry Lake Stewnfields in Proud Toms back yard?

From: David Freeman <dfreeman_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:17:49 2004
Message-ID: <3FDF514E.9080104_at_fascination.com>

Is Mr. V. Proud Tom?

Dave F. (not proud tom)

Tom aka James Knudson wrote:

>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
>>
>
>
>
>______________________________________________
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
Received on Tue 16 Dec 2003 01:39:10 PM PST