[meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info

From: David Freeman <dfreeman_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue May 17 14:43:21 2005
Message-ID: <000501c55b10$38f19d10$0200a8c0_at_your8ha884kyon>

Tom said: "just thought it was interesting that it may turn out I am
not as stupid after all."
And that would be where on a scale of one to ten?


David W. Freeman


-----Original Message-----
From: meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Tom
Knudson
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 12:39 PM
To: Bob Holmes; Robert Woolard; meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info

Hi Bob,

"The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine."

I know, sorry if I made it sound like you said it. I wanted to know if
it
was laziness or what that stopped the study and labeled PV as an
ordinary
chondrite.

"Perhaps there was an error in the initial classification, but
obviously
many people realized the need for clarification and were quite diligent
in
their pursuits."

And that is such great news, PV deserves it!!!

" This is an ongoing process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for
standing
up and explaining what the process was. "

I agree, Jeff's post was very enlightening!

"You complain about all the negativity on the list, but here you are
again
(the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing negativity.

I did not bring up the pope, there was no reason for news about him to
be on
the list. If someone brings up the pope, I am going to respond.
Barringer,
yes I brought him up, but I can not help myself, when I hear that name,
it
brings out my bad side.
  But, I am not espousing negativity with this PV stuff. I think this is
very positive, my favorite meteorite getting recognized for what it is,
a
truly great meteorite!
  I was insulted by many list members being told that I was not smart
enough
to question the classification, the "Lazy" thing did not go over very
well,
but I was told, "who do you think you are, to think that the scientist
made
a mistake". I just thought it was interesting that it may turn out I am
not
as stupid after all.

Thanks, Tom
peregrineflier <><

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Holmes" <bobholmes_at_cox.net>
To: "Tom Knudson" <peregrineflier_at_npgcable.com>; "Robert Woolard"
<meteoritefinder_at_yahoo.com>; <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info


> Tom,
>
> The word 'lazy' came from your post, not mine. Perhaps there was an
error
in
> the initial classification, but obviously many people realized the
need
for
> clarification and were quite diligent in their pursuits. This is an
ongoing
> process. I for one, thank Jeff Grossman for standing up and explaining
what
> the process was. You complain about all the negativity on the list,
but
> here you are again (the Pope, Barringer, remember?), espousing
negativity.
>
> What is it you want from 'them'?
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Knudson" <peregrineflier_at_npgcable.com>
> To: "Bob Holmes" <bobholmes_at_cox.net>; "Robert Woolard"
> <meteoritefinder_at_yahoo.com>; <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
>
>
> > Hi Bob,
> >
> > " I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for
> > reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory
remarks
> > about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV.
AND as
> > you
> > can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their
hands,
> > doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new type
of
> > class and wanted to be sure of their results."
> >
> >
> >> >> now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an "
> >> >> H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite)",
> >> >> with the case made for a new meteorite type
> >> >> designation of "Portalesite" due to this metallic-melt
> >> >> breccia characteristic.
> >
> > If this proposed reclassification happens, what does this say about
the
> > original classification? Was it wrong? Was it a rush to judgment?
Did
> > they
> > not want to take the time out to study it enough to properly
classify it
> > (lazy)? How could it go from an H6 ordinary chondrite to a
"Portalesite,
> > H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite)" Did it experience
a
> > metamorphous between studies.
> > I did not call anyone "working" on it lazy, I asked why the original
group
> > did not make up a new classification for this unique meteorite.
Apparently
> > Alex Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc Fries
among
> > others I am sure, could see this meteorite needed to be studied
further
> > and
> > thought it needed to be something more than an H6 ordinary
chondrite.
> > If this reclassification does happen, I think my question back in
March
> > of
> > 2004 is a fair and valid question, why was PV called a H6 ordinary
> > chondrite?
> > Astronomers are always being reprimanded for telling us a killer
> > asteroid
> > is going to strike the Earth next year. They come out and say it
before
> > they
> > get all the information and when they finally do get all the
information,
> > they look bad for jumping the gun. A scientist came out and said PV
was
> > an
> > H6 ordinary chondrite. Now it looks like all the info might be in
and
> > someone had jumped the gun. Do these two branches of science have to
play
> > by
> > the same rules, find out all the info before you talk?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks, Tom
> > peregrineflier <><
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Bob Holmes" <bobholmes_at_cox.net>
> > To: "Tom Knudson" <peregrineflier_at_npgcable.com>; "Robert Woolard"
> > <meteoritefinder_at_yahoo.com>; <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:52 AM
> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
> >
> >
> >> Tom ,
> >>
> >> I don't believe you were ever chided for questioning the need for
> >> reclassifying, I believe the problem stemmed from your derogatory
remarks
> >> about those working (or not working, lazy, as you assert), on PV.
AND
as
> > you
> >> can see now, work was being done, they were not sitting on their
hands,
> >> doing nothing. Further, it seems to me as though they had a new
type of
> >> class and wanted to be sure of their results.
> >>
> >> That PV was not an ordinary H6 is not an opinion that was yours
alone,
> >> and
> >> you were part of a vast majority. Instead of patting yourself on
the
> >> back,
> >> why don't you apologize for your derisive insinuations about those
who
> > have
> >> put much time and effort into the study of PV.
> >>
> >> Bob Holmes
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Tom Knudson" <peregrineflier_at_npgcable.com>
> >> To: "Robert Woolard" <meteoritefinder_at_yahoo.com>;
> >> <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:11 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
> >>
> >>
> >> > Hi List, back in March of 2004, I made a lot of enemies on the
list
for
> >> > asking;
> >> >
> >> > " I have to ask, was Portales Valley classified as a H6 ordinary
> >> > chondrite because "they" were to lazy to make up a new
classification?
> > It
> >> > would seem to me that this unique meteorite deserves it's own
group
> >> > instead
> >> > of being shoved into an already existing group.
> >> > I do not feel like we have found every type of meteorite yet, are
"they
> >> > going do this with all of them, just sticking them in existing
> > categories,
> >> > or will they make a new one if need be?"
> >> >
> >> > I was called everything from an idiot to a stupid mother $#*&^#
by a
> > lot
> >> > of
> >> > people on the list for questioning the classification. I was put
in
my
> >> > place, never question the scientists, if they said it was a H6
ordinary
> >> > chondrite, then it was!
> >> >
> >> > Just thought it was interesting . : )
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thanks, Tom
> >> > peregrineflier <><
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Robert Woolard" <meteoritefinder_at_yahoo.com>
> >> > To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
> >> > Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:21 PM
> >> > Subject: [meteorite-list] Portales Valley Classification Info
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Hello List,
> >> >>
> >> >> Well for years now, I know a lot of us were puzzled
> >> >> by the classification of Portales Valley as an " H6
> >> >> ordinary chondrite". (See my article in the May 2001
> >> >> issue of Meteorite, titled " Portales Valley - A Not
> >> >> So Ordinary (Ordinary Chondrite??)! " In the recent
> >> >> past, the classification was modified a bit, being
> >> >> changed to read as an " H6 Impact Melt Breccia ".
> >> >>
> >> >> I am excited to be able to say that there is a
> >> >> distinct chance the true uniqueness of PV may soon be
> >> >> reflected in a possible new moniker for this
> >> >> intriguing meteorite. David Weir was kind enough to
> >> >> make me aware of a new and comprehensive paper by Alex
> >> >> Ruzicka, Marvin Killgore, David Mittlefehldt, and Marc
> >> >> Fries in the current MAPS. In this detailed work, we
> >> >> now have the proposed reclassification of PV as an "
> >> >> H7, metallic-melt breccia (primitive achondrite)",
> >> >> with the case made for a new meteorite type
> >> >> designation of "Portalesite" due to this metallic-melt
> >> >> breccia characteristic.
> >> >>
> >> >> You can read David's updated description of PV on
> >> >> his excellent website here:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.meteoritestudies.com
> >> >>
> >> >> Many thanks to David for news of this exciting
> >> >> paper, and to the authors of the paper as well.
> >> >>
> >> >> Sincerely,
> >> >> Robert Woolard
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> __________________________________
> >> >> Do you Yahoo!?
> >> >> Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
> >> >> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> >> >> ______________________________________________
> >> >> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> >> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> >> >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > ______________________________________________
> >> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> > Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> >> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> >> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date:
5/17/2005
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 5/17/2005
>

______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Tue 17 May 2005 02:42:43 PM PDT