[meteorite-list] More on London Clay Microtektites

From: Norm Lehrman <nlehrman_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 20:56:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <73749.2496.qm_at_web81015.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Sterling & all,

You are excessively kind with your reasoned comments.


When someone says "But the people that found
difficulty with such a composition, in my view, simply
had an inability in grasp that some things
in heaven and earth are literally beyond the powers of
human understanding."

Aubrey, I am embarrassed for you. How could you
endorse (by mere repetition) such mindless drivel?
Your stock just went way down.

Good grief!

Norm




--- "Sterling K. Webb" <sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Addresing not Aubrey, but his informant... Why
> is this
> so familiar? Is there a Mystery Object Protocol that
> demands
> that things be presented obliquely, incompletely,
> and
> confusingly?
>
> > The tektites have a high Ca content and this
> factor
> > through [THROWS?] those who expect them to
> > show substantial silica in their make up. But the
> people
> > that found difficulty with such a composition, in
> my view,
> > simply had an inability in grasp that some things
> in heaven
> > and earth are literally beyond the powers of human
> understanding.
>
> So, they have been analysed for bulk
> composition, then?
>
> Calcium is high. How high? Provide percentages,
> please.
>
> They don't show "substantial" silica? How much
> silica?
>
> NUMBERS, please.
>
> In fact, how about the entire bulk composition
> results?
>
> What is their chief constituent?
>
> If they're "glass" as claimed, they must contain
> a more than
> measurable amount of silicon dioxide. That's what
> glass is. If
> they're tektites, it is inconceivable that they
> would be silica-free.
>
> The only thing that's beyond my "powers of human
> understanding" is what he thinks he's doing with
> this idiotic
> babble about dataless compositions and vague
> mysticism.
> Does he have data or not?
>
> Sounds like a complete flake. I suppose another
> source can
> be added to the list of possible origins: a night in
> the lab with
> bunsen and pipette and some nice glass stock.
>
> Shame. If they were real and from the beginning
> of the
> Eocene (55 mya) instead of the end of the Eocene (35
> mya),
> they might be evidence from an enigmatic event:
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene-Eocene_Thermal_Maximum
>
> Aubrey, why don't you ask him if he actually has
> any real
> data, how he got it (who did the tests), and such
> like questions,
> as, would he show it to you or let you put it on
> your website?
>
> And, finally, despite the visual resemblance to
> microtektites,
> there is one other substance which these objects
> could be:
> Amber. Amber was formed largely 50+ mya, is often
> found in
> early Eocene deposits, is suitably durable, is
> extensively transported
> by water, assumes fluid forms, and so forth. Amber
> can absorb
> considerable calcium (buried with bird bones you
> said). If the
> chief element of its composition is Carbon, you
> might have amber...
>
>
> Sterling K. Webb
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Aubrey Whymark
> To: britishandirishmeteoritesociety at yahoogroups.com
> ;
> meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:51 PM
> Subject: [meteorite-list] More on London Clay
> Microtektites
>
>
> Hi
>
> Michael Daniels, who discovered the London Clay
> tektites has recently
> emailed me a little more information, which I'd like
> to pass on:
>
> When it comes to your correspondent's doubts, which
> they are fully entitled
> to submit,
> particularly suspicions raised about the possibility
> of contaminates,
> origins connected
> with fly-ash and power stations, volcanics, yes,
> they are all familiar
> observations con-
> cerning the particles.
>
> And, as before, I just make the suggestion that for
> those more doubtful,
> they come down
> here and I will gladly conduct them to the Naze when
> I shall be more than
> appreciative to
> hear their explanations as to where I may have, in
> my enthusiasm, become a
> little
> adventurous in my concept and having unquestioning
> belief in the antiquity
> of the little
> glassy objects. That might be for me an acid test,
> but actually I think
> when they have
> better appreciation of the conditions prevailing at
> this lower London Clay
> locality, I think I
> can win over a few potential critics.
>
> Just to deal with a couple of questions raised by
> those who have written.
>
> I have today once more checked the particles and
> none show any magnetic
> properties.
> Some do have voids and there is a little evidence of
> impurities, but if that
> is confirmed
> then just might be tiny specs of dirt or plant
> debris.
>
> As for their pristine state, no sign of them
> suffering any ablation. Many
> of the fossil bird
> bones that I have collected from the Walton site are
> in such a remarkable
> condition
> that I have had to be careful when comparing them
> with modern avian
> elements, so
> perfect are they that confusion over which is which
> could arise. This is
> because once
> the relics came to rest on the sea bed and were fast
> covered with sediment,
> there they
> remained down 55 (not 35!) million years until they
> were caused to emerge
> when I dug
> up the pocket, composed mainly of plant material, in
> which they were lodged
> and so
> reveal them once more to the light of day!
>
> The tektites have a high Ca content and this factor
> through those who expect
> them to
> show substantial silica in their make up. But the
> people that found
> difficulty with such
> a composition, in my view, simply had an inability
> in grasp that some things
> in heaven
> and earth are literally beyond the powers of human
> understanding.
>
> Have a pleasant weekend
>
> Sincerely
>
> Michael
>
> Thanks for all the feedback, Aubrey (out of contact
> for a bit in the Middle
> East, so apologies if I don't reply)
>
> www.tektites.co.uk
>
>
>
>
>
>
=== message truncated ===
Received on Sat 26 May 2007 11:56:28 PM PDT