[meteorite-list] RE: A meteorite within a meteorite

From: Darren Garrison <cynapse_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun Feb 27 12:00:28 2005
Message-ID: <bdv321h96tk5mngaa7q9bflk68q10arhi2_at_4ax.com>

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 11:40:25 -0500, "Charles Viau" <cviau_at_beld.net> wrote:

>Hi List,
>
>Not trying to be picky about terminology, but would not "meteor within a
>meteorite" be the scientifically correct statement here? OR, just the fact
>that it was encapsulated still makes it a meteorite, since it made it to the
>ground.

That's even a scarier thought than the recent debate about not calling Heat Sheild Rock a meteorite
because it didn't hit Earth. Do we REALLY need a different name for each and every body that a
meteroid hits? (If so, I look forward to the names for meteorids that hit the asteroid recently
named DouglasAdams. I propose "pangalacticgargleblasterites" or
"theravenousbugblatterbeastoftraalites".)
Received on Sun 27 Feb 2005 12:08:22 PM PST