[meteorite-list] AD: METEORITE CLASSIFICATION SERVICE
From: stan . <laser_maniac_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri Jul 14 07:18:50 2006
>*I see no evidence of this quote in the article that you sent a link for.
>I'd like to know where you found it. Because it wasn't in that article. *
sorry i took the quote from a source that listed that as a source
>In any case, it's true for the most part. I've seen many unlabeled estate
>sale specimens up on ebay with no history to speak of, and no useful
>information to identify them. It's true that many collections are
>in a correct fashion at the time of the collectors' deaths, but vast
>of material are lost as well.
a 'vast' amount of material? I'd wager that this is a TINY fraction of all
> A good portion
>will quite simply be tossed, and you know it.
i doubt that. anyone who spends any signifigant sum of money is likely to
keep meticulous records, specimin cards, ect. the kids arent likely to toss
a thumbnail of rock that has a 200$ price tag on it. especially in this day
and age when you can punch up google and see meteorites selling for
thousands of $ or more.
>*> Dealers are buying meteorites at prices the scientific
>community cannot match and cutting them into small pieces for sale to
>bidders in a flooded market. *
>Undeniable, in any way, shape, or form.
and this helps recover even MORE meteorites.
>>"The whole point of what we're doing is to prevent people from cutting
>every rare meteorite into tiny, little pieces," said Marvin Killgore of
>= > Anti-collector? I think not.
I disagree. if we are tlaking about rare stuff, what fraction of collectors
can afford anything but 'tiny little pieces'?
>Why have a tray of tiny bits when one could focus their funds and purchase
>single spectacular specimen? If something's worth doing, it should be done
>well...no brainer in my opinion. Micros fill a human urge to make a
>collection of something I guess, but it takes some of the fun - and all of
>the awe - out of collecting. I, for example, find it much more exciting to
>hold, say, a ten kilo iron, than a few tiny lunar micros, but maybe that's
I agree for the most part yet i see nothing wrong with micro collecting. I
have much admiration for guys like david weir who tries to get some of every
sort of meteorite or Norber Classen who tries to get some of every sort of
My own collecting habits tend towards the large display worthy specimins but
quite simply there are not enough of these to go around.
>Well, they can, but would the University of Arizona do a better job under
>Marvin's supervision? I think yes, at least more than the average
I think they would do an equal job, while still allowing maximum exposure of
the public to meteorites.
>*>essentially all unusual meteorites get classified. that means type
>of all the 'good stuff' are being curated already, protecting the
>Well that's a nice, broad, and untrue statement.
>Hmmm. I wonder how many carbonaceous, rumuruti, kakangari, and primitive
>chondrites are sitting in boxes somewhere gathering dust.
Very few I'd wager.
>Hell, ureilites were being discovered in Tucson by the tens of kilos, mixed
>in with ordinary material and being sold for pennies per gram.
tens of KG? i've hurd of 100's of grams here and there buit never 10's of
this is a slip up on the part of the people selling meteorites and the SWMC
would not stop this from hapening.
>Furthermore, this U of A program will not simply focus on rare types. It
>will also need common material - the same stuff you deem worthless still
I never said it is worthless, but i dont think anyone is going to argue that
there is some danger of running out of common weathered chondrites for
research any time soon.
>Major chunks, eh? Sounded like they'd take what they could get.
their goal is to raise 10 million in 10 years. dont know how much of that
is going to go in to buying meteorites, but that kind of money is enough to
soak up a very large amount of the neat new stuff comming out of the
deserts. Their activities today I dont think are much of a concern for the
average collector. their activities if and when they get this kind of
funding however would be.
>Are you saying that it's wrong when a collector buys a main mass and
>cut it up to divide it into pieces for all of his fellow collectors?
>what you seem to be implying....
if it's a rare specimin that is underrepresented in collections then I would
If I were to find a specimin of a type that is not readily avalible on the
market I would cut a portion of it up to offer to collectors - even though
my general philosophy is to buy large individuals and remove the smallest
amount of material possible to produce a large cut face.
Received on Fri 14 Jul 2006 07:18:40 AM PDT