[meteorite-list] Seeking Knowledge and Dealing with Meteorwrong Owners was Classification Q

From: Norm Lehrman <nlehrman_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue May 23 19:15:12 2006
Message-ID: <20060523145442.47402.qmail_at_web81002.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Elton and all,

Well said. I too have been holding back on this
subject, but I agree strongly that to send a certain
meteor-wrong in to be examined by our small and
over-taxed group of classifiers is unconscionable.

The vision rock is a nice rock and has value as a
landscape boulder. Most of the typical cost for such
boulders is associated with their transport costs. I
agree with Elton: why in the world would anyone
assume that this rock has any value beyond that?

Gary, please rethink the idea of wasting the time of
any reputable lab. You are being a nice guy and are
very charitable towards a scam artist. They all seem
sincere. That's how their business works. It is
wrong to represent such a rock as a meteorite, let
alone a Martian. These guys hurt the credibility of
the entire meteorite community.

Deep enough,
Norm
http://TektiteSource.com

--- E J <jonee_at_epix.net> wrote:

> Hello Gary, Pete, List
>
> I've held back discussing this again as I am not the
> one on the "vision
> quest". However, you've raised the issue of getting
> this classified aka
> lab tested--at a meteorite lab amongst other things.
> You think he can
> sell this for a sum and rebuild his failing
> ministry. He'll make more
> in bake sales. For Pete's sake...and mine , please
> tell us why you
> remain convinced that this is "valuable specimen"
> beyond a that of
> landscaping boulder? "Interesting" doesn't equate
> to rare and valuable.
> If it were, my collection would be worth millions.
> I also want to say I
> loathe going out on a limb especially working with
> photographs--there
> will always be someone near by with pruning shears
> and they have a long
> memory for when you made a bad call.
>
> Old Man's ambush of the whipper snapper:
> There are 3 straight up reasons not requiring lab
> work that show this
> can't be a Martian meteorite-- name one?
>
> How to Beef Up your Knowledge Base:
> In a nut shell, a way to improve your identification
> knowledge is to get
> out and see all the rocks you can, So when one does
> come up that you
> haven't seen before, you'll have a better basis to
> judge if it is rare
> or if it is just interesting. Additionally: read,
> read, read. Google is
> your friend. Get Norton's "Cambridge Encyclopedia
> of Meteorites" and
> McSween's "Meteorites and their Parent Bodies" Read
> them three times.
> Study your own collection, practice describing each
> specimen to your self.
>
> Advice from the Good Ole Boy& Girl Network:
> As far as seeking classification(?) Trust me on
> this , your credibility
> is on the line every time you refer a specimen for
> "meteorite "
> identification and that credibility slips down the
> toilet when you send
> in an obvious meteorwrong. The way I see it is, you
> owe a duty to the
> astro-geologist you contact to not waste his/her
> time. If you do a
> field accessment and are unable to eliminate/
> exclude an object as a
> meteorite, only then do you start considering
> recommending it to a
> meteorite lab and that only after you've floated it
> to your other
> colleagues for their input. If you hold yourself
> out as a meteorite
> expert then you better be able to back it up with
> several the reasons it
> is not likely a meteorite or these meteorwrong
> owners will eat your
> lunch and send you packing with your tail twixed
> your legs--Because you
> did not confirm their rock as a meteorite--They
> obviously know more than
> you do!. I re-learn the following lesson each day:
> You should not
> interfere with another's right to remain ignorant.
> No matter how much
> wishing, hoping, or praying it isn't going to turn
> this "water into
> wine". No matter how sincere you believe this
> pastor is--his hidden
> agenda is to keep this dream alive until he can
> explain it away and face
> the reality that this was not a God send. I assure
> you it has nothing
> to do with mineralogy. Some churches die on the vine
> for good reasons!
> Check out Luke's Gospel?--it has been a while since
> I did any church
> preaching. I feel for you but your Dutch Uncle
> would likely advise you
> to get away from this situation as soon as you can
> extract yourself
> honoring whatever commitments you've made. Read
> what Randy Korotev has
> to say after dealing with 1000's of meteorwrong
> owners
>
<http://epsc.wustl.edu/admin/resources/meteorites/what_to_do.html>
>
> The Quest
> New Hampshire isn't a large state(nor is Vermont )
> and seems you would
> have scoured the state by now if not in person via
> google. Google the
> Chlorite mineral group (esp. Clinochlore) and the
> rock types
> greenschist , blueschist, and syenite. (See the
> links way below) I only
> have state for location, cursory description and
> photos(needing a
> reference object--coin, ruler, etc.) which you've
> taken down to go on.
>
> The new photo makes me go back to
> Actenolite-Tremolite as I can see
> large crystals and to me this looks like other
> occurrences I have seen.
> The "flaky" granules point to Clinochlore or any of
> several Chlorite
> group minerals. I think this rock is not
> homogeneous but a mix of
> parents because Chlorite and Tremolite aren't
> usually associated but
> they are found in adjacent deposits. If just going
> by casual
> appearances I would note that a cut face of Bilinga
> also shows some
> crystal faces as so do some Eucrites.
>
> You must have wondered where the depressions in the
> Vision rock came
> from if not "regmaglypts". Well remember the furry
> over human foot
> prints found inside dinosaur foot prints in soft
> shale in Texas by some
> "Creation"(sic) Scientists? When conventional
> scientist went to the
> location they found the heals of the dinosaur
> tracks had been doctored
> to human shape during "clean out". The Creationists
> were cleaning out
> the tracks until their foot would fit in the
> depression. Well... you
> see where this is going.
>
> Options:
>
> 1. Port this over to the Rockhound's List at
> Drizzle.com. There are
> world class mineralogist there and this is their
> forte. Avoid telling
> them what you think it is and ask them what it might
> be based on
> location and physical appearance. To treat this
> objectively we really
> must get this discussion uncoupled from "meteorite"
> for the time
> being. Talk to these folks:
>
<http://groups.msn.com/NewHampshireRocks/_whatsnew.msnw>.
>
> 2. Contact John Creasy below and see where he refers
> you-- Or the NH
> state geologist
>
> 3. The Pegmatie Workshop is meeting this soon in
> Maine at Poland Mining
> Camp <http://homepage.mac.com/rasprague/PegShop/> I
> don't think this is
> a real pegmatite but these folks spent a lot of time
> with New England
> rocks and might know where it comes from.
>
> 4. If you want to pay for it at around $50+ a pop
> contact Excalibur
> Minerals in Peekskill, NY.
> <http://www.excaliburmineral.com/analysis.htm> for a
> non destructive
> test which may reveal mineral compositions.
>
> I truly hope this helps and you can run this issue
> to ground. If you
> want to believe I am full of hot air that is your
> choice and no foul.
> However when you keep coming to the list--where
> there is probably
> 200-300 man/woman years of meteorite expertise,
> hinting in the back of
> your mind that you yourself are holding out hope
> that this is a
> meteorite then this is way off the radar. We all
> learned by doing and
> by studying but how many miles must you travel down
> a dead end road do
> you have to go to prove it is a dead end like the
> last 15 signs said?
>
> Sincerely,
> Elton
>
> The rest is specifics on NH rocks and on
> metamorphism so only read if
> you are curious.
>
=== message truncated ===
Received on Tue 23 May 2006 10:54:42 AM PDT