[meteorite-list] [ebay] ending in about 2 days

From: stan . <laser_maniac_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun Oct 15 05:54:08 2006
Message-ID: <BAY121-F12E5F796DA8F159140FACCF0080_at_phx.gbl>

>
>It is obvious you want it both ways. You base your Brachinite

Brachnite? i thought we were talking about angrites. In any event i am not
basing the potential pairing on anything i see - as i said i am just
relaying information provided to me by my sources. researchers and
moroccains alike

>pairing visually yet your Acap looks identical to 12 kilograms of material
>the Aaronson's were selling over the last year. You are in touch with Dr.
>Bunch, ask him about NWA 1839/3133 as this has already been addressed on
>the List in some detail and as usual you came out on the short side of the
>stick.

I did? from what i recall you claimed there was new data that argued against
the 1839/3133 pairing.

I also recall Jeff Grossman posting to the list saying something to the
effect that based on the data avalible currently a claim of pairing wasnt
unreasonable.

you claim there is new data that argues against this - i have asked you to
provide the data 4 times now in the last few hours and yet you dont offer
anything to support your claim other than tales of this mysteryous 'new
data'. I fail to see how i'm the one comming up short either then or now on
this issue. I'm not the one going on about 'new data' that i cant produce.

>Ask Dr. Bunch if your new Acap is paired to all of the other 12 kilograms
>unless you are using another Aaronson number in which case he will not
>report back to you.

I'll be sure to ask next time I speak with Dr. Bunch. in the mean time if
you look at http://www4.nau.edu/meteorite/Meteorite/PrimitiveAchondrite.html
you will see the minerology of the paired stones all are virtually
identical, whereas the data for nwa 2775 is nowhere near close.
Received on Sun 15 Oct 2006 05:54:04 AM PDT