[meteorite-list] AD: Some Auctions Ending Some Starting. All This Week...

From: Eric Wichman <eric_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:11:31 -0700
Message-ID: <20080324231128.JJTW20794.fed1rmmtao105.cox.net_at_fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>

Hi All,

I'll have lots of meteorite auctions going up
this week. I've got some 100+ gram lots and 250+
gram lots of NWA XXX starting at $9.99 Some small
lots, big lots, and some really nice individuals
of 100 grams with nice crust. Look for a few 1
kilo+ lots coming your way too. Also some nice
sliced (unpolished) pieces. I anyone wants
anything specific let me know. If I don't have it
I can probably get it, contact me off list and I'll give you a price.

http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZfreel3orn

Talk to you soon... ;)

Eric Wichman
www.MeteoriteWatch.com
www.MeteoritesUSA.com




At 02:56 PM 3/24/2008, you wrote:
>Send Meteorite-list mailing list submissions to
> meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> meteorite-list-request at meteoritecentral.com
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
> meteorite-list-owner at meteoritecentral.com
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Meteorite-list digest..."
>
>Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah (Paul)
> 2. Re: Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah
> (mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com)
> 3. AD: One cent ebay sale ending. (Michael Farmer)
> 4. Re: Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah (Ted Bunch)
> 5. AD - ebay: 20 auction: Murchison 2 g, Murray, Armel,
> Bruderheim, ... (p.marmet at mysunrise.ch)
> 6. Re: Chiang Khan differences of opinion (Michael L Blood)
> 7. Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah (Paul)
> 8. Re: Tunguska solved, dilithium found. (tracy latimer)
> 9. NWA 869 Cabochons (Gary K. Foote)
> 10. Re: LOL (Bob Evans)
> 11. WG: Chiang Khan differences of opinion (Martin Altmann)
> 12. Krasnojarsk mass at Verdansky? (mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com)
> 13. AD- NWA 5000 Slices/Fragments and Auctions! (Adam Hupe)
>
>
>From: Paul <bristolia at yahoo.com>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:35:10 -0700 (PDT)
>Message-ID: <792208.8031.qm at web36202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>Subject: [meteorite-list] Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah
>Message: 1
>
>Buchner, E., and T. Kenkmann, 2008, Upheaval
>Dome, Utah, USA: Impact origin confirmed.
>Geology. vol.36, no. 3, pp. 227-230. In part,
>this abstract stated: ???In this study, we
>document, for the first time, shocked quartz
>grains from this crater in sandstones of the
>Jurassic Kayenta Formation. The investigated
>grains contain multiple sets of decorated planar
>deformation features. ... The shocked quartz
>grains were found in the periphery of the
>central uplift in the northeastern sector of the
>crater, which most likely represents the cross
>range crater sector.???
>http://www.gsajournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1130%2FG24287A.1
>Yours, Paul
>H.
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all
>with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
>now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
>
>
>
>From: mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: "Paul" <bristolia at yahoo.com>,
>meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com,
> meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>References: <792208.8031.qm at web36202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>In-Reply-To: <792208.8031.qm at web36202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:51:16 +0000
>Reply-To: mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com
>Message-ID:
><2054412986-1206377830-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1559332697- at bxe032.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah
>Message: 2
>
>really makes me wonder how much shocked quartz
>could be found as "background". I am not saying
>that about this study, but from a curiosity.
>
>Matt
>----------------------
>Matt Morgan
>Mile High Meteorites
>http://www.mhmeteorites.com
>P.O. Box 151293
>Lakewood, CO 80215 USA
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul <bristolia at yahoo.com>
>
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:35:10
>To:meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>Subject: [meteorite-list] Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah
>
>
>Buchner, E., and T. Kenkmann, 2008, Upheaval
>Dome, Utah, USA: Impact origin confirmed.
>Geology. vol.36, no. 3, pp. 227-230. In part,
>this abstract stated: ???In this study, we
>document, for the first time, shocked quartz
>grains from this crater in sandstones of the
>Jurassic Kayenta Formation. The investigated
>grains contain multiple sets of decorated planar
>deformation features. ... The shocked quartz
>grains were found in the periphery of the
>central uplift in the northeastern sector of the
>crater, which most likely represents the cross
>range crater sector.???
>http://www.gsajournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1130%2FG24287A.1
>Yours, Paul
>H.
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all
>with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
>now.
>http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>______________________________________________
>http://www.meteoritecentral.com Meteorite-list
>mailing list Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>From: Michael Farmer <meteoriteguy at yahoo.com>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
>Message-ID: <582808.7416.qm at web33108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>Subject: [meteorite-list] AD: One cent ebay sale ending.
>Message: 3
>
>http://www.meteorite.com/farmer/
>
>
>See the link above, that Paul Harris was kind enough
>to work on for me, linking all of my auctions from
>both of my ebay usernames.
>
>I have some wonderful pieces ending this week,
>oriented Sikhote-Alin, multi-kilo Toluca, 300 gram
>sphere, so many goodies, take a look, many are still
>at one cent.
>
>Michael Farmer
>
>
>
>From: Ted Bunch <tbear1 at cableone.net>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: <mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com>, Paul <bristolia at yahoo.com>,
> <meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com>,
> <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>In-Reply-To:
><2054412986-1206377830-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1559332697- at bxe032.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:28:15 -0700
>Message-ID: <C40D32BF.57DA%tbear1 at cableone.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="ISO-8859-1"
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah
>Message: 4
>
>Matt - In a study we did several years ago, we found one shocked quartz
>grain per 7000-12000 grains in various sedimentary rocks and glacial
>tillites.
>
>Ted
>
>
>On 3/24/08 9:51 AM, "mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com" <mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com>
>wrote:
>
> > really makes me wonder how much shocked
> quartz could be found as "background".
> > I am not saying that about this study, but from a curiosity.
> >
> > Matt
> > ----------------------
> > Matt Morgan
> > Mile High Meteorites
> > http://www.mhmeteorites.com
> > P.O. Box 151293
> > Lakewood, CO 80215 USA
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paul <bristolia at yahoo.com>
> >
> > Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:35:10
> > To:meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > Subject: [meteorite-list] Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah
> >
> >
> > Buchner, E., and T. Kenkmann, 2008, Upheaval Dome, Utah, USA:
>Impact origin
> > confirmed. Geology. vol.36, no. 3, pp. 227-230.
>
>In part, this abstract
> > stated:
>
>?In this study, we document, for the first time, shocked
>quartz
> > grains from this crater in sandstones of the
>Jurassic Kayenta Formation. The
> > investigated grains
>contain multiple sets of decorated planar deformation
> >
>features. ... The shocked quartz grains were found in
>the periphery of the
> > central uplift in the northeastern
>sector of the crater, which most likely
> > represents the
>cross range crater
> > sector.?
>
>http://www.gsajournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.113
> > 0%2FG24287A.1
>
>Yours,
>
>Paul H.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> ______________________________________________________________________________
> > ______
>Be a better friend, newshound, and
>know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
> > Try it now.
> > http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
>__________________
> > ____________________________
>http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>Meteorite-list
> > mailing
> > list
>Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listi
> > nfo/meteorite-list
>______________________________________________
>http://www.m
> > eteoritecentral.com
>Meteorite-list mailing
> > list
>Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listi
> > nfo/meteorite-list
>
>
>
>
>
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>From: p.marmet at mysunrise.ch
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:40:17 +0100 (MET)
>Message-ID: <14884403.1206380417947.JavaMail.tomcat4 at webmail-be-06.sunrise.ch>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>Subject: [meteorite-list] AD - ebay: 20 auction:
>Murchison 2 g, Murray, Armel,
> Bruderheim, ...
>Message: 5
>
>Hello All,
>
>I have 20 auctions ending in about one day:
>
>http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZpema9
>
>Thank you, Peter
>http://www.marmet-meteorites.com/
>
>
>
>_____________________________________________________________
>Mitnehmen. Einstecken. Lossurfen. T at KE AWAY ist
>das mobile Internet von sunrise. Damit surfen
>Sie im Internet so einfach und schnell wie noch
>nie. Mehr Infos unter www.sunrise.ch/takeaway
>
>
>
>From: Michael L Blood <mlblood at cox.net>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: Martin Altmann <altmann at meteorite-martin.de>,
> Meteorite List <Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>In-Reply-To: <004b01c88da7$ace0d610$177f2a59 at name86d88d87e2>
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:28:52 -0700
>Message-ID: <C40D40F4.15377%mlblood at cox.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="ISO-8859-1"
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chiang Khan differences of opinion
>Message: 6
>
>The Meteoritical Bulletin obviously feels differently, as do the
>Primary field collectors - and so do I.
> Best wishes, Michael
>
>on 3/24/08 5:07 AM, Martin Altmann at altmann at meteorite-martin.de wrote:
>
> > Well, technically, I'd say,
> > as long as the 2-fall-hypothesis isn't established, and it doesn't happen
> > that often, that within short time in the same place two meteorite falls,
> > we have to count all pieces found there to Chiang Khan.
> > Best,
> > Martin
> >
> >
> > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Michael L Blood [mailto:mlblood at cox.net]
> > Gesendet: Montag, 24. M?rz 2008 04:49
> > An: Martin Altmann; Meteorite List
> > Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Chiang Khan differences of opinion
> >
> > Hi Martin,
> > To me, the important question is how much of this material is
> > The same fall.
> > Michael
> >
> > on 3/23/08 4:41 PM, Martin Altmann at altmann at meteorite-martin.de wrote:
> >
> >> In fact, there is also an inconsistency in the last Catalogue of
> > Meteorites
> >> itself.
> >> In the header of the entry the tkw of Chiang Khan is listed as 367g
> >> but in the distribution of the specimens in the same entry are listed
> > pieces
> >> in a total weight of 3279grams. (Largest amount at UCLA with 2588.4g
> > there,
> >> and the piece of 800g in the University of Bangkok isn't mentioned).
> >> So together with the Ex-Haag-piece and Oliver's finds - he's moving at the
> >> moment, will ask him as soon as he has an Internet access again, how many
> >> grams in total - we have at least 6kg.
> >>
> >> Best!
> >> Martin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> >> Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
> >> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von
> > Michael
> >> L Blood
> >> Gesendet: Montag, 24. M?rz 2008 00:25
> >> An: dave at fallingrocks.com; mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com; Martin Altmann;
> >> Meteorite List
> >> Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Chiang Khan differences of opinion
> >>
> >> Hi Dave & all,
> >> Regarding your post below....
> >> My information regarding TKW of the Chiang-Khan fall is from
> >> The primary finder and author of the web page cited by Martin Altmann:
> >>
> >> http://www.meteorite-oliver.com/About_Chiang_Khan/about_chiang_khan.html
> >>
> >> Of particular interest is the comment therein:
> >>
> >> " Nobody was able anymore to give precise indications as to the exact
> > date
> >> of the event. Some 20 years ago it was, so they say, in the month of
> >> November, without doubt - that's what I was told in the villages of the
> >> strewn field.
> >> Whatever it was that happened then - one is led to presume a second
> >> meteorite fall on the same day or on the day after. According to recent
> >> research (isotope analysis), the two large specimens, which are in
> > private
> >> Collection and in Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, do not originate
> > from
> >> the Chiang-Khan fall. They are believed to have been transported into
> >> Thailand from Laos. Two small pieces from Thailand were analyzed, one is
> > H4
> >> tending to H5; one was determined to be H5 in Japan, whereas the large
> >> pieces are H6. Most of all, the noble gas contents of the large specimens
> >> differ extremely from those of the Chiang-Khan pieces!"
> >>
> >> Please note that this is also weighted by the comments by Jeff
> >> Grossman Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 11:58 PM
> >> To: Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] More on Chiang Khan
> >>
> >> "The Meteoritical Bulletin does publish
> >> announcements of new masses when they are
> >> significant. Submit the report to the
> >> editor. You will need good evidence that the
> >> additional mass is really part of same fall."
> >>
> >> Please also note that I have every reason to believe that both Bob
> >> Haag and Matt Morgan believe the piece in reference is part of the
> >> Chiang-Khan fall. However, this believe might be weighted against
> >> The above comments (and I acknowledge I could be wrong on this).
> >> I recognized your reference of source for purchase as "a dealer"
> > was
> >> Almost certainly intended to protect me from any perception of shenanigans
> >> In this matter - and I thank you for your intent. However, I was fully
> > aware
> >> Of all of the above comments and felt confident the major finder and the
> >> Meteoritical Bulletin were correct in their assessment of related falls,
> >> just as I am confident there is no intention to deceive, whatsoever, on
> > the
> >> part of Bob Haag or Matt Morgan and that their belief in the authenticity
> > of
> >> the stone mentioned is both sincere and reasonable. People will have to
> >> decide for themselves whom is correct and whom is in error. I sided with
> > the
> >> primary finders and the Meteoritical Bulletin. I see no way to resolve
> > this
> >> without individually typing the stone, but even that, like the Baygoria
> >> cluster.... Er... controversy .... will not be conclusive if this (other?)
> >> fall was also submitted and originally included as part of the Chiang-Khan
> >> fall, anyway - but the Meteoritical Bulletin does not see it as such.
> >> Sincerely, Michael Blood
> >>
> >>
> >> on 3/22/08 6:39 PM, Dave Gheesling at dave at fallingrocks.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> Matt & List,
> >>>
> >>> First, Matt, thanks for the info and congrats on having that terrific
> >>> specimen in your already spectacular collection...simply superb.
> >>>
> >>> This prompts a second question, which is "Why is there not a means to
> >>> 'officially' correct the record when a fall or find turns out to have a
> >>> dramatically different TKW at some point after the formal classification
> >> has
> >>> cleared?" I'm not talking about confusion in the early stages of mining
> > a
> >>> strewn field, but rather about falls and/or finds where in many cases
> >>> decades have passed since the initial discoveries and, for all intents
> > and
> >>> purposes, everything that will ever be found has been found (a slippery
> >>> slope of a generalization, but hopefully this makes sense). There are
> >> many,
> >>> many such examples, and I'll post a link to only one below (read Remarks
> >> in
> >>> my Djermaia listing):
> >>>
> >>> http://www.fallingrocks.com/Collections/Djermaia.htm
> >>>
> >>> I purchased my Chiang-Khan from a dealer without much research, which was
> >>> completely my responsibility, to be clear. That said, it was marketed as
> >>> representing something approaching 5% of the recovered material from that
> >>> fall (which, again, is officially recorded as 367 grams when we know that
> >>> there is one stone of almost twice that size and speculation on the list
> >> is
> >>> that the TKW is actually likely to be near 7 kilograms). We had some
> >> banter
> >>> about the finer points of orientation a couple of weeks ago and how that
> >> has
> >>> an impact in the marketplace, and it seems to me that this is at least as
> >>> large an issue. And, forgetting the market altogether, shouldn't there
> >>> perhaps be a more focused effort to "get the record straight" for the
> >>> benefit of history? I'm probably missing something out of ignorance
> >> here...
> >>>
> >>> Thanks in advance for thoughts and comments...always trying to learn
> >>> something new.
> >>>
> >>> Dave
> >>
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> >> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> >> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From: Paul <bristolia at yahoo.com>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:37:25 -0700 (PDT)
>Message-ID: <519118.26360.qm at web36205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>Subject: [meteorite-list] Shocked Quartz Found at Upheaval Dome, Utah
>Message: 7
>
>Dear Ted, What is the citation for this study?
>(Where was it published?) Ted Bunch on Mon March
>24 wrote: ???Matt - In a study we did several
>years ago, we found one shocked quartz grain per
>7000-12000 grains in various sedimentary rocks
>and glacial tillites.??? On 3/24/08 9:51 AM,
>"mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com" asked: ???really
>makes me wonder how much shocked quartz could be
>found as "background".??? Yours, Paul
>H.
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all
>with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
>now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
>
>
>
>From: tracy latimer <daistiho at hotmail.com>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: <cynapse at charter.net>, <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>References: <DIIE.000000A700002824 at paulinet.de>
> <sekfu3tc3lmsbir18hq3bvj39rmq04uh1c at 4ax.com>
>In-Reply-To: <sekfu3tc3lmsbir18hq3bvj39rmq04uh1c at 4ax.com>
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:59:43 +0000
>Message-ID: <BAY115-W4038B2CF7FFD13E413AA69CAFD0 at phx.gbl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Tunguska solved, dilithium found.
>Message: 8
>
>
>Are we sure this article didn't make its first appearance in The Onion?
>
>Tracy Latimer
>
> > From: cynapse at charter.net
> > To: Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:09:46 -0500
> > Subject: [meteorite-list] Tunguska solved, dilithium found.
> >
> >
> http://newsfromrussia.com/science/mysteries/24-03-2008/104631-tunguska_meteorite-0
> >
> > Aliens downed Tunguska meteorite to save Earth
> > Front page / Science / Mysteries
> >
> > Aliens downed Tunguska meteorite to protect
> our planet from devastation, stated
> > Russian scientist Yuriy Lavbin. He showed 10
> quartz crystals that he found at
> > the place of the meteorite?s crash. Several of the crystals have holes in
> > between, so they can be united in a chain.
> >
>_________________________________________________________________
>Test your Star IQ
>http://club.live.com/red_carpet_reveal.aspx?icid=redcarpet_HMTAGMAR
>
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
>From: "Gary K. Foote" <gary at webbers.com>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:54:56 -0400
>Message-ID: <47E7CED0.16777.21799D4 at gary.webbers.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Subject: [meteorite-list] NWA 869 Cabochons
>Message: 9
>
>Hello Listoids,
>
>I have a fairly simple project in mind that requires
>the precision cutting and polishing of three
>separate, rectangular cabs. Width of each would be
>about 4mm. Length of the long one would be about
>3cm and the two shorter ones would be 1cm each.
>
>Anyone with the skill and tools to do this please
>email me offlist. Put the word 'meteorite' in the
>topic to trigger my email color filters.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Gary in VT
>
>
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>From: "Bob Evans" <bobe5531 at comcast.net>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Cc: Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>To: "Pete Shugar" <pshugar at clearwire.net>
>References: <000501c88d6a$14db5f30$b4835d4b at laptop>
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:01:48 -0500
>Message-ID: <006601c88de9$e6119ef0$0201a8c0 at yourae066c3a9b>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=response
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] LOL
>Message: 10
>
>Heres one worth reading through the description.
>The meteorite was still hot the day after it fell.
>I guess if they cant even spell meteorite then
>thats a sign they sure dont know what one is.
>Thanks to the fact that the cattle need to be
>fed this gem becomes available to you.
>http://cgi.ebay.com/Brown-Iron-Metorite-fell-on-Clermont-County-Ohio-1974_W0QQitemZ360034554553QQihZ023QQcategoryZ3239QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQ_trksidZp1638.m118.l1247QQcmdZViewItem
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Pete Shugar" <pshugar at clearwire.net>
>To: <Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 11:46 PM
>Subject: [meteorite-list] LOL
>
>
>>How about this one?!!!!!???
>>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=260222533908&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=016
>>______________________________________________
>>http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>>Meteorite-list mailing list
>>Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
>
>
>
>From: "Martin Altmann" <altmann at meteorite-martin.de>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: <Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:07:52 +0100
>Message-ID: <007101c88dea$be60ae90$177f2a59 at name86d88d87e2>
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Subject: [meteorite-list] WG: Chiang Khan differences of opinion
>Message: 11
>
>Then, supposedly only, they would have 2 entries, Chiang Khan (a) & Chiang
>Khan (b) ?
>
>-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Michael L Blood [mailto:mlblood at cox.net]
>Gesendet: Montag, 24. M?rz 2008 19:29
>An: Martin Altmann; Meteorite List
>Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Chiang Khan differences of opinion
>
>The Meteoritical Bulletin obviously feels differently, as do the
>Primary field collectors - and so do I.
> Best wishes, Michael
>
>on 3/24/08 5:07 AM, Martin Altmann at altmann at meteorite-martin.de wrote:
>
> > Well, technically, I'd say,
> > as long as the 2-fall-hypothesis isn't established, and it doesn't happen
> > that often, that within short time in the same place two meteorite falls,
> > we have to count all pieces found there to Chiang Khan.
> > Best,
> > Martin
> >
> >
> > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Michael L Blood [mailto:mlblood at cox.net]
> > Gesendet: Montag, 24. M?rz 2008 04:49
> > An: Martin Altmann; Meteorite List
> > Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Chiang Khan differences of opinion
> >
> > Hi Martin,
> > To me, the important question is how much of this material is
> > The same fall.
> > Michael
> >
> > on 3/23/08 4:41 PM, Martin Altmann at altmann at meteorite-martin.de wrote:
> >
> >> In fact, there is also an inconsistency in the last Catalogue of
> > Meteorites
> >> itself.
> >> In the header of the entry the tkw of Chiang Khan is listed as 367g
> >> but in the distribution of the specimens in the same entry are listed
> > pieces
> >> in a total weight of 3279grams. (Largest amount at UCLA with 2588.4g
> > there,
> >> and the piece of 800g in the University of Bangkok isn't mentioned).
> >> So together with the Ex-Haag-piece and Oliver's finds - he's moving at
>the
> >> moment, will ask him as soon as he has an Internet access again, how many
> >> grams in total - we have at least 6kg.
> >>
> >> Best!
> >> Martin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> >> Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
> >> [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von
> > Michael
> >> L Blood
> >> Gesendet: Montag, 24. M?rz 2008 00:25
> >> An: dave at fallingrocks.com; mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com; Martin Altmann;
> >> Meteorite List
> >> Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Chiang Khan differences of opinion
> >>
> >> Hi Dave & all,
> >> Regarding your post below....
> >> My information regarding TKW of the Chiang-Khan fall is from
> >> The primary finder and author of the web page cited by Martin Altmann:
> >>
> >> http://www.meteorite-oliver.com/About_Chiang_Khan/about_chiang_khan.html
> >>
> >> Of particular interest is the comment therein:
> >>
> >> " Nobody was able anymore to give precise indications as to the exact
> > date
> >> of the event. Some 20 years ago it was, so they say, in the month of
> >> November, without doubt - that's what I was told in the villages of the
> >> strewn field.
> >> Whatever it was that happened then - one is led to presume a second
> >> meteorite fall on the same day or on the day after. According to recent
> >> research (isotope analysis), the two large specimens, which are in
> > private
> >> Collection and in Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, do not originate
> > from
> >> the Chiang-Khan fall. They are believed to have been transported into
> >> Thailand from Laos. Two small pieces from Thailand were analyzed, one is
> > H4
> >> tending to H5; one was determined to be H5 in Japan, whereas the large
> >> pieces are H6. Most of all, the noble gas contents of the large specimens
> >> differ extremely from those of the Chiang-Khan pieces!"
> >>
> >> Please note that this is also weighted by the comments by Jeff
> >> Grossman Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 11:58 PM
> >> To: Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] More on Chiang Khan
> >>
> >> "The Meteoritical Bulletin does publish
> >> announcements of new masses when they are
> >> significant. Submit the report to the
> >> editor. You will need good evidence that the
> >> additional mass is really part of same fall."
> >>
> >> Please also note that I have every reason to believe that both
>Bob
> >> Haag and Matt Morgan believe the piece in reference is part of the
> >> Chiang-Khan fall. However, this believe might be weighted against
> >> The above comments (and I acknowledge I could be wrong on this).
> >> I recognized your reference of source for purchase as "a dealer"
> > was
> >> Almost certainly intended to protect me from any perception of
>shenanigans
> >> In this matter - and I thank you for your intent. However, I was fully
> > aware
> >> Of all of the above comments and felt confident the major finder and the
> >> Meteoritical Bulletin were correct in their assessment of related falls,
> >> just as I am confident there is no intention to deceive, whatsoever, on
> > the
> >> part of Bob Haag or Matt Morgan and that their belief in the authenticity
> > of
> >> the stone mentioned is both sincere and reasonable. People will have to
> >> decide for themselves whom is correct and whom is in error. I sided with
> > the
> >> primary finders and the Meteoritical Bulletin. I see no way to resolve
> > this
> >> without individually typing the stone, but even that, like the Baygoria
> >> cluster.... Er... controversy .... will not be conclusive if this
>(other?)
> >> fall was also submitted and originally included as part of the
>Chiang-Khan
> >> fall, anyway - but the Meteoritical Bulletin does not see it as such.
> >> Sincerely, Michael Blood
> >>
> >>
> >> on 3/22/08 6:39 PM, Dave Gheesling at dave at fallingrocks.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> Matt & List,
> >>>
> >>> First, Matt, thanks for the info and congrats on having that terrific
> >>> specimen in your already spectacular collection...simply superb.
> >>>
> >>> This prompts a second question, which is "Why is there not a means to
> >>> 'officially' correct the record when a fall or find turns out to have a
> >>> dramatically different TKW at some point after the formal classification
> >> has
> >>> cleared?" I'm not talking about confusion in the early stages of mining
> > a
> >>> strewn field, but rather about falls and/or finds where in many cases
> >>> decades have passed since the initial discoveries and, for all intents
> > and
> >>> purposes, everything that will ever be found has been found (a slippery
> >>> slope of a generalization, but hopefully this makes sense). There are
> >> many,
> >>> many such examples, and I'll post a link to only one below (read Remarks
> >> in
> >>> my Djermaia listing):
> >>>
> >>> http://www.fallingrocks.com/Collections/Djermaia.htm
> >>>
> >>> I purchased my Chiang-Khan from a dealer without much research, which
>was
> >>> completely my responsibility, to be clear. That said, it was marketed
>as
> >>> representing something approaching 5% of the recovered material from
>that
> >>> fall (which, again, is officially recorded as 367 grams when we know
>that
> >>> there is one stone of almost twice that size and speculation on the list
> >> is
> >>> that the TKW is actually likely to be near 7 kilograms). We had some
> >> banter
> >>> about the finer points of orientation a couple of weeks ago and how that
> >> has
> >>> an impact in the marketplace, and it seems to me that this is at least
>as
> >>> large an issue. And, forgetting the market altogether, shouldn't there
> >>> perhaps be a more focused effort to "get the record straight" for the
> >>> benefit of history? I'm probably missing something out of ignorance
> >> here...
> >>>
> >>> Thanks in advance for thoughts and comments...always trying to learn
> >>> something new.
> >>>
> >>> Dave
> >>
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> >> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> >> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
>
>
>
>From: mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:06:15 +0000
>Reply-To: mmorgan at mhmeteorites.com
>Message-ID:
><426972924-1206393129-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1240258968- at bxe032.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
>Content-Type: text/plain
>Subject: [meteorite-list] Krasnojarsk mass at Verdansky?
>Message: 12
>
>Does anyone know how much Krasnojarsk is left at
>the Verdansky Institute? I cannot locate an exact figure.
>Thanks,
>Matt
>----------------------
>Matt Morgan
>Mile High Meteorites
>http://www.mhmeteorites.com
>P.O. Box 151293
>Lakewood, CO 80215 USA
>
>
>
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>From: Adam Hupe <raremeteorites at yahoo.com>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: Adam <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 14:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
>Message-ID: <81660.76391.qm at web30701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>Subject: [meteorite-list] AD- NWA 5000 Slices/Fragments and Auctions!
>Message: 13
>
>Dear List Members,
>
>Please have a look at the below listed slices of
>Northwest Africa 5000. These represent the smallest
>rated slices we have in inventory and come with
>individualized portfolios. All of the largest pieces
>are now on hold pending institutional and corporate
>negotiations. I am offering all of these at a 25%
>discount below the listed appraised value. We would
>like to see some of this fantastic lunar meteorite end
>up in private collections so will also entertain
>reasonable offers.
>
>I was unaware until recently that this luniate is the
>only gabbro from the lunar highlands ever found
>including those brought back on Apollo and Luna
>missions putting it into a class of its own. The more
>reports I get back from laboratories, the more
>impressive this gorgeous meteorite becomes and
>interest is now intense.
>
>Also, the last of the remaining fragments can be found
>on eBay at this link:
>http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZraremeteorites
>
>
>Specimen #1-S36, 1.75g end cut, 31mmX17mmX5mm, Rating
>2, Value $2,100.00
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice36-Top.jpg
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice36-Bottom.jpg
>
> Specimen #2-S35, 1.8g part slice, 25mmX22mmX2mm,
>Rating 5, Value $2,700.00
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice35-Top.jpg
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice35-Bottom.jpg
>
> Specimen #3-S34, 1.9g part slice, 24mmX21mmX1.5mm,
>Rating 5, Value $2,850.00
>
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice34-Top.jpg
>
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice34-Bottom.jpg
>
>Specimen #4-S19, 1.94g part slice, 23mmX23mmX2mm,
>Rating 7, Value $3,298.00
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice19-Top.jpg
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice19-Bottom.jpg
>
>Specimen #5-S21, 1.96g part slice, 23mmX23mmX2mm,
>Rating 6+, Value $3,186.00
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice21-Top.jpg
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice21-Bottom.jpg
>
>Specimen #6-S20, 2.02g part slice, 22mmX21mmX2mm,
>Rating 5+, Value $3,080.00
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice20-Top.jpg
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice20-Bottom.jpg
>
>Specimen #7-S17, 2.19g part slice, 23mmX23mmX2mm,
>Rating 5, Value $3,285.00
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice17-Top.jpg
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice17-Bottom.jpg
>
>Specimen #8-S29, 2.46g part slice, 24mmX23mmX2mm,
>Rating 6+, Value $3,554.00
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice29-Top.jpg
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice29-Bottom.jpg
>
>Specimen #9-S16, 2.77g part slice, 24mmX23mmX2.5mm,
>Rating 6+, Value $4,482.00
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice16-Top.jpg
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice16-Bottom.jpg
>
>Specimen #10-S30, 3.43g part slice, 25mmX22mmX2.5mm,
>Rating 7+, Value $5,881.00
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice30-Top.jpg
>http://themeteoritesite.com/AreaC-Section2-Slice30-Bottom.jpg
>
>Portfolio which comes with each of these slices:
>http://themeteoritesite.com/Portfolio.jpg
>
>Thank you for looking,
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Adam
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Mon 24 Mar 2008 07:11:31 PM PDT