[meteorite-list] Is Shirokovsky a meteorite?
From: Charlie Devine <moonrock25_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:25:46 2004 Message-ID: <28935-3ED67C87-767_at_storefull-2357.public.lawson.webtv.net> --WebTV-Mail-17833-415 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Gregory and list: In fact I informed the seller about a month ago that the status of Shirokovsky was questionable. At the time the seller was running an ebay auction for the same 0.64g slice. He replied that he would "look into it" and ended the auction. When I saw that he had relisted the slice last night, I first checked to see if he was still an IMCA member, as he had stated that he was the first time the slice was listed, but did not state as much in his current listing. Since the listing clearly states that Shirokovsky is a rare pallasite, and since the seller understands that status is questionable (why else sell it "as is"?), I felt this auction was an attempt by the seller to simply pass his loss on to someone else. While I am not myself a member of the IMCA, I do understand the goals of that group, and this seller would seem to be less then forthright in his description. Regards, Charlie --WebTV-Mail-17833-415 Content-Disposition: Inline Content-Type: Message/RFC822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Received: from smtpinvite-2001-6.public.lawson.webtv.net (172.16.213.206) by storefull-2358.public.lawson.webtv.net with WTV-SMTP; Thu, 29 May 2003 11:15:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imo-m05.mx.aol.com (imo-m05.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.8]) by smtpinvite-2001-6.public.lawson.webtv.net (WebTV_Postfix+sws) with ESMTP id 7ACDBFE05 for <moonrock25_at_webtv.net>; Thu, 29 May 2003 11:15:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Sharkkb8_at_aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v36.3.) id 2.17c.1baa769f (4584); Thu, 29 May 2003 14:15:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Sharkkb8_at_aol.com Message-ID: <17c.1baa769f.2c07a835_at_aol.com> Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:15:17 EDT Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Is Shirokovsky a meteorite? To: moonrock25_at_webtv.net, meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_17c.1baa769f.2c07a835_boundary" X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 6014 X-Brightmail: Message tested, results are inconclusive --part1_17c.1baa769f.2c07a835_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > The seller is IMCA member #8645. In an earlier auction of this material > he was informed that the jury was still out on this material. The > description states that it IS a pallasite classified by the Vernadsky > Institute of Moscow. At the same time he states it is being sold "as > is". > A number of meteoritical scientists at the very top of the classification food-chain have stated (unofficially, not yet published) that their analyses establish that Shirokovsky is NOT a meteorite, and to my knowledge a number of dealers have been making refunds. The Meteoritical Society has not issued a final report to make it absolutely official and close the case, but it seems to be only a question of time. This seller is going to have to refund this piece anyway, so I would think that the IMCA would be well within its rights to insist (or at least strongly advise) that the seller add a sentence or two to his auction text (there's still plenty of time), essentially saying what I just did. It technically is not deemed a meteorwrong but apparently it will be soon enough, and surely the seller would want to see the big picture and be forthright here, if for no other reason than to be able to maintain credibility in the future. Gregory --part1_17c.1baa769f.2c07a835_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE= =3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"> <BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT= : 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">The seller is IMCA member #8645= . In an earlier auction of this material<BR> he was informed that the jury was still out on this material. The<BR> description states that it IS a pallasite classified by the Vernadsky<BR> Institute of Moscow. At the same time he states it is being sold "as<B= R> is".<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> A number of meteoritical scientists at the very top of the classification fo= od-chain have stated (unofficially, not yet published) that their analyses e= stablish that Shirokovsky is NOT a meteorite, and to my knowledge a number o= f dealers have been making refunds. <B>The Meteoritical Society</B> ha= s not issued a final report to make it absolutely official and close the cas= e, but it seems to be only a question of time. This seller is going to= have to refund this piece anyway, so I would think that the <B>IMCA</B> wou= ld be well within its rights to insist (or at least strongly advise) that th= e seller add a sentence or two to his auction text (there's still plenty of=20= time), essentially saying what I just did. It technically is not deeme= d a meteorwrong but apparently it will be soon enough, and surely the seller= would want to see the big picture and be forthright here, if for no other r= eason than to be able to maintain credibility in the future. <BR> <BR> Gregory</FONT></HTML> --part1_17c.1baa769f.2c07a835_boundary-- --WebTV-Mail-17833-415-- Received on Thu 29 May 2003 05:32:55 PM PDT |
 StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit Yahoo MyWeb
|