[meteorite-list] Science Channel's Top Ten Meteorites Of All Time

From: Darryl Pitt <darryl_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 17:52:27 -0500
Message-ID: <963E44F8-C69E-48E9-883B-3D41DC2EDF29_at_dof3.com>

Not so fast!!

The list provided by the Science Channel was surely the result of
tremendous consideration and is BRILLIANT and SPOT ON....(and the
Macovich Collection's control of the largest privately owned specimens
of #3, #7 and #8 is purely coincidental ;-)

Seriously? The Science Channel list is...problematic.



On Dec 31, 2009, at 4:37 PM, Jeff Grossman wrote:

> My top 10 most important meteorites of the last 250 years, off the
> top of my head, in alphabetical order -
>
> Allan Hills A81005
> Allan Hills 84001
> Allende
> Canyon Diablo
> Elephant Moraine A79001
> L'Aigle
> Murchison
> Orgueil
> Semarkona
> Siena
>
> Peekskill, Sylacauga, Willamette and Hoba aren't even close, and no
> more needs to be said about Tunguska, which would make my list if
> any were actually found. I wanted to put Pribram on the list, but
> couldn't fit it into the top 10. Yamato 691 was also tempting.
>
> Jeff
>
> On 2009-12-31 3:53 PM, Galactic Stone & Ironworks wrote:
>> Hi Eric and List,
>>
>> An interesting little presentation, but I don't agree with some of
>> the
>> entries on the list.
>>
>> Let's start from #10 and work our way to the top.
>>
>> #10 - Allende. Allende certainly belongs on the list, but I think it
>> may merit a higher rank than #10.
>>
>> #9 - Murchison. This one also belongs on the list, and based on the
>> science alone, it should rank in the top 3 or top 5. Murchison has
>> taught us much and it deserves a higher rank.
>>
>> #8 - Peekskill. A fine hammer fall and a great witnessed fall. I
>> have no issues with this one, but Murchison should rank higher than
>> Peekskill.
>>
>> #7 - Orgueil. Historical falls from previous centuries opens a whole
>> new can of worms. If Orgueil is included, why not L'Aigle? Or why
>> not another type fall like Nakhla? No offense to Orgueil, but this
>> one is dubious entry on a list that is directed towards the
>> mainstream
>> lay-public audience.
>>
>> #6 - ALH 84001. This one should be #1 in my opinion. It is the Holy
>> Grail of meteorites and it contains what many scientists agree is
>> proof that life once existed on Mars. As the latest papers have
>> revealed, the evidence for Martian life contained in this meteorite
>> is
>> increasingly solid. I can't think of a more significant meteorite
>> than this one.
>>
>> #5 - Sylacauga. Mrs. Hodges would rank this one as #1. But is it
>> more significant than ALH 84001? In my opinion, no. And couldn't
>> they find a photo for it? A quick Google Image search or
>> Encyclopedia
>> of Meteorites search reveals several.
>>
>> #4 - Sikhote Alin. A great historical fall by all measures. I have
>> no issue with this one, other than the obvious one - it shouldn't
>> outrank ALH-84001.
>>
>> #3 - Willamette. Nice choice, but we are now seeing a definite bias
>> on this list towards iron meteorites. If Willamette made the list,
>> why not one (or more) of the Cape York masses? Heck, Murchison is
>> certainly more significant than this one.
>>
>> #2 - Hoba. The world's biggest iron and it certainly belongs on the
>> list. But if Hoba was selected, then why not Canyon Diablo? The
>> glaring absence of Canyon Diablo is also made more curious by the
>> inclusion of Willamette.
>>
>> #1 - Tunguska! ......a non-meteorite. This one is an odd choice.
>> First, it's not a meteorite, it's an impact event. It was probably
>> caused by a meteorite or comet, but no meteorites were recovered.
>> And
>> if we are going to include an impact event, why not Canyon Diablo?
>> CD
>> is more recognizable to the target audience of this list and there
>> are
>> tons of iron meteorites laying around to show for it. And if we are
>> going to include speculative comets like Tunguska, then why not
>> Tagish
>> Lake?
>>
>> It's a fun list, but you can tell an intern put it together and not
>> someone familiar with meteorites.
>>
>> Best regards and Happy New Year!
>>
>> MikeG
>>
>>
>> On 12/31/09, Meteorites USA<eric at meteoritesusa.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Did anyone read the Science Channel's Top Ten Meteorites of All
>>> Time list?
>>> http://science.discovery.com/top-ten/2009/meteors/meteors.html
>>>
>>> My article on MeteoriteBlog.com
>>> http://meteoriteblog.com/top-ten-meteorites-of-all-time-science-channel/
>>>
>>> Opinions?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Eric Wichman
>>> Meteorites USA
>>> Meteorite Blog
>>> Meteorite Wiki
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Jeffrey N. Grossman phone: (703) 648-6184
> US Geological Survey fax: (703) 648-6383
> 954 National Center
> Reston, VA 20192, USA
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Thu 31 Dec 2009 05:52:27 PM PST