[meteorite-list] Re: New Lunar? New Continent

From: ken newton <magellon_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Feb 2 00:33:38 2006
Message-ID: <43E199AF.7030206_at_earthlink.net>

Hi Doug,
If I may focus on actions, past and present. His 'lunar' abstract was
clear also: " A new vesicular meteorite ... was found ... the specimen
is compositionally within the achondrite group meteorites; particularly
of the lunar Mare rock suite...Trace element chemistry analysis yields
values (ppm) consistent with a lunar origin...the appearance of orange
glass spheres is similar to those present in samples obtained from the
Apollo 17 mission... Analysis of this rock suggests a lunar origin,
potentially from the lunar Mare rock suite. However, future study
involving cosmic ray exposure (4He/20Ne) and U/Pb radiometric dating is
necessary before final conclusions can be made."
(http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2004AM/finalprogram/abstract_76183.htm) Sound
familiar?

Now, how would you feel if you paid 10K/gram for this 'lunar' with a COA
only to discover it wasn't what you were told. You also find your
purchase had a disclaimer saying "like any other rational theory it is
subjected to change as future research is presented. As such, we can
offer no warranty to the results of future findings, should they
prove/disprove a [lunar] origin." What good is the COA if it is a
theory? It is a lunar meteorite if you buy it, but after you buy it, it
is a theory. That is what I perceive Mr. Ray to be offering with his
Granada slag material.

Mr. Ray's auction (6601599997) states: "Chicxulub meteorite (0.116 g)
comes with COA/ guarantee - very rare, meteorite that wiped out the
dinosaurs, NR!" Where is the meteorite? Mr. Ray claims your purchase
contains "as well as greater than 10% of the original chondrite meteor!"
Is that so??? Let's check out the Nickel content of that 'greater than
10%'. One might expect to find 0.1-1.0% Ni, however the data shows only
49 ppm of Ni. (http://www.chicxulubmeteorite.com/4.pdf) What kind of
'chondrite meteor' was Chicxulub if had virtually no Nickel? Too many
assumptions in the Chicxulub/Getafe theory! Occam's razor - There is no
meteoritic content because the Granada specimen is slag. (Even if it
did contain +10% meteorite, it should be labeled 'meteoritic' rather
than 'meteorite'. {my opinion})

I am no expert and I may have interpreted the data incorrectly. Perhaps
the more enlightened will share their insights.

best,
Ken



MexicoDoug_at_aol.com wrote:

>Ken, Actually I read the entire thesis back in November and wrote to the
>Faculty about the importance of this work if it were indeed genuine. The thesis
>is quite clear, that there is much work remaining to be done, which is also
>mentioned in the promotion of the material, so technically, until something
>further is published in this material...well you know... It appears that it is a
>real thesis, the small university exists, but the dean nor advisor didn't
>bother to answer me back about my concerns.
>
>Saludos, Doug
>
>
>Ken escribe:
>
><< Asunto: Re: [meteorite-list] Re: New Lunar? New Continent
> Fecha: 02/01/2006 5:44:09 AM Mexico Standard Time
> From: magellon_at_earthlink.net (ken newton)
> Sender: meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com
> To: meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>
> In Nov 2004 the news of potential new Colorado lunar was published to
> the List. Checking the chemical analysis from the abstract
> (http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2004AM/finalprogram/abstract_76183.htm)
> Allan Treiman quickly alerted the List that there was a problem. (see
> email below) Allan was right. Randy Korotev added that not only was it
> not a lunar meteorite, "I suspect that this object is a piece of
> industrial slag."
> (http://epsc.wustl.edu/admin/resources/meteorites/granada.htm) On one of
> his websites, Neil Ray apologized for "for any misunderstanding or
> confusion that my published abstract has brought about." You would
> think this would be the end of the matter, but it is not.
>
> Perhaps you have seen the eBay auctions "Chicxulub meteorite (0.xxx g)
> comes with COA/ guarantee
> very rare, meteorite that wiped out the dinosaurs, NR!" (ex.
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=6601599997) Well
> guess what? It is the same 'lunar' material (Granada) resurrected by Mr.
> Ray to a new and more prosperous life.
>
> Initially I wrote Mr. Ray about his use of the the term 'meteorite' in
> his eBay auction title.
> (http://home.earthlink.net/~ebaywrong/auction/Chicxulub.html ) He
> refuses to change "Chicxulub meteorite" while at the same time admitting
> it is not a meteorite? (more 'misunderstanding or confusion') I thought
> he was legit, and then I looked at his research conclusions.
> (http://www.chicxulubmeteorite.com/) Making this short, I disagree with
> his conclusions.
>
> And what would Allan Treiman have to say about the new theory? Well, I
> asked him. He said, "The simplest explanation, with the data I have, is
> that Mr. Ray's rock is a piece of EAF slag." (EAF stands for Electric
> Arc Furnace).
> best,
> Ken Newton
> IMCA #9632
>
>
> Treiman, Allan wrote:
>
> >Hi, Meteorite list --
> >
> > From the data in that abstract, I'd be very cautious
> >this rock.
> >
> > First, the data in the abstract are not consistent with
> >themselves. For isntance the rock is cited as 45% anorthite,
> >but only 3.7% Al2O3. Anorthite contains ~36% Al2O3, so a
> >rock that is 45% anorthite must contain at least 45% of 36%
> >Al2O3, or 16% Al2O3. Only a factor of four off!!!
> >
> > Second, the chemical analysis is far off any known a moon rock.
> >It shows 26.15% SiO2, which is not even enough if the rock were
> >all olivine. The rock has 5.38% MnO, which is way more than any
> >lunar rock. An earth rock with that much MnO would be mined as
> >ore! The analysis has CaO of 39.6%, which is way higher than
> >any moon rock -- lunar anorthosite has ~19% CaO, and mare basalts
> >have ~8-12% CaO.
> >
> > If it is lunar, its like nothing else.
> >
> > Allan
> >
> >
> >Allan H. Treiman
> >Senior Staff Scientist
> >Lunar and Planetary Institute
> >3600 Bay Area Boulevard
> >Houston, TX 77058-1113
> > 281-486-2117
> > 281-486-2162 (FAX)
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com
> >[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com]On Behalf Of
> >Mikestockj_at_aol.com
> >Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 2:16 PM
> >To: meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com; COMeteoriteClub@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [meteorite-list] Re: New Lunar? New Continent
> >
> >
> >Hi All
> >Just wanted to let the word out about the new possible Lunar meteorite. It
>is
> >a 3200 gram beauty from.........and no it is not the dry deserts of Africa
>or
> >Antarctica..... a little hint it's the first North American Lunar.....drum
> >roll please....Colorado. How exciting is that. I guess it is good/lucky to
>be in
> >Colorado (two achondrites in one year).
> >It is from Granada near Lamar for all of you Coloradans. That would be the
> >south eastern side of the state near Kansas for everybody else or about 200
> >miles SE of Denver.
> >Again it is only a possible Lunar.....but I'll keep you posted.
> >I have included an abstract to the upcoming Geological Society of America
> >meeting in Denver about the meteorite.
> >
> >PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF A NEW ACHONDRITE (MARE BASALT?) OF POSSIBLE LUNAR
> >ORIGIN FROM NEAR GRANADA, COLORADO, USA
> >
> >http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2004AM/finalprogram/abstract_76183.htm
> >
> >Time to go hunt......anyone want to go. Oops I'm half way there. :)
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >
> >Mike Jensen IMCA 4264
> >Bill Jensen IMCA 2359
> >Jensen Meteorites
> >16730 E Ada PL
> >Aurora, CO 80017-3137
> >303-337-4361 >>
>______________________________________________
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
>
Received on Thu 02 Feb 2006 12:33:35 AM PST