[meteorite-list] CALIFORNIA-REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGIST - Final

From: Norm Lehrman <nlehrman_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2007 19:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <375322.80052.qm_at_web81003.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Ken,

Congrats to you for pursuing this to a conclusion.
They aren't always this receptive to dissenting
opinions. Once in a while, it works, and helps to
restore a bit of our confidence.

Thanks,
Norm
http://TektiteSource.com

--- ken newton <magellon at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Norm and others,
> I asked Mr. Rant to examine the specimen for growth
> rings. He replied:
>
> "Due to the interest by others and the quandary it
> presents (experts are
> puzzled!) I have removed the item from eBay until a
> qualified expert
> evaluates the stone.
>
> "It never occurred to me that a local petrified wood
> expert lives four
> houses down from me. I called him up and asked if
> he would give me his
> professional opinion to a problem stone in my
> possession. I just
> returned from a visit with him.
>
> "He not only instantly recognized this specimen as
> petrified wood but
> was able to give a close approximation of the type
> of hardwood it was.
> He believes my specimen is from American Chestnut or
> Giant Chinkapin.
> He described the cell structures as the reasons why
> he believes that is
> what it is.
>
> "I asked him if there was any doubt whatsoever in
> his opinion, even one
> or two percent doubt. Zero doubt--it is petrified
> wood with 100 percent
> certainty! The only doubt is the type of tree;
> could certainly be wrong
> in that area of his opinion.
>
> "So, you were persistent and hung in there. Thank
> you so much for
> helping me with this auction. I will relay similar
> information to those
> others who were also puzzled. I was totally fooled
> on this one, which
> will make me more aware next time.
>
> "I will stick to selling what I am more comfortable
> with from now
> on--you know, stuff with a label on it. :-) Best
> regards, Kenneth Rank"
>
> Norm, Thanks for solving this and restoring the
> credibility of geologist
> worldwide (or until the next non-List geologist
> deems an obvious 'wrong'
> to be a genuine meteorite :>)
>
> Best,
> ken
>
>
>
> Norm Lehrman wrote:
>
> >Ken and list,
> >
> >This image:
> >http://i7.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/94/59/e4ce_3.JPG
> >
> >looks highly silicous, which could explain the lack
> of
> >streak. Am I imagining it, or can you detect some
> >concentric banding, convex towards the upper left
> >(opposite the saw marks)? If that's real, this may
> >well be petrified wood! Surely the seller would've
> >recognized that---
> >
> >Norm
> >http://tektitesource.com
> >
> >--- ken newton <magellon at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Hi Norm and others,
> >>Thanks for your reply.
> >>The photos do not show up well in the little ebay
> >>viewer so here are
> >>three urls.
> >>http://i7.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/94/59/e4ce_3.JPG
> >>http://i2.ebayimg.com/01/i/000/94/59/e233_3.JPG
> >>http://i1.ebayimg.com/01/i/000/94/6b/a18e_3.JPG
> >>
> >>I asked about a streak test, Mr. Rank replied:
> >>"No, I did not do a streak test, but I did one
> just
> >>now per your request.
> >>The finding is negative for any color
> whatsoever--no
> >>blacks, rust,
> >> hematitic, ochre, or yellows present. Thank you
> for
> >>the interest."
> >>
> >>Very curious reply (in my opinion) when looking at
> >>the red interior of
> >>the photos.
> >>Best,
> >>Ken
> >>
> >>
> >>Norm Lehrman wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Ken and all,
> >>>
> >>>How embarassing for geologists everywhere and
> >>>
> >>>
> >>another
> >>
> >>
> >>>general downer for serious meteorite people.
> This
> >>>stuff is frustrating and sad. I hate seeing
> people
> >>>ripped off.
> >>>
> >>>My bristles go up everytime someone says: "I know
> >>>
> >>>
> >>it's
> >>
> >>
> >>>real 'cause I had a geologist look at it---"
> >>>
> >>>As a career practicing geologist with over
> 10-years
> >>>college-level teaching on the side, I can assure
> >>>
> >>>
> >>you
> >>
> >>
> >>>that most geology curricula do not include ANY
> >>>significant training or information regarding
> >>>meteorites, much less, their identification.
> >>>
> >>>It is true that we geologists see a lot of earth
> >>>
> >>>
> >>rocks
> >>
> >>
> >>>and are in a generally advantageous position to
> >>>recognize something out of the ordinary when we
> see
> >>>it, but I have described to this list before that
> >>>
> >>>
> >>in
> >>
> >>
> >>>well-intentioned nievete, I used to pass around
> >>>
> >>>
> >>some
> >>
> >>
> >>>fine SLAG pieces as examples of meteorites.
> >>>
> >>>Everyone, please be advised that, in general,
> >>>professional geologists and geological
> academicians
> >>>know less about meteorites than list members!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Anyone
> >>
> >>
> >>>reading this has been exposed to more meteorite
> >>>information on this list than any geologist gets
> in
> >>>multi-degree training unless they are involved in
> a
> >>>course of study specifically involving
> meteorites!
> >>>
> >>>Cheers,
> >>>Norm
> >>>(http://tektitesource.com)
> >>>
> >>>--- ken newton <magellon at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Hi,
> >>>>Check out this professional geologist's
> 'Ureilite
> >>>>meteorite with diamonds.'
>
=== message truncated ===
Received on Sat 24 Mar 2007 10:23:30 PM PDT