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

From: Meteorites USA <eric_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:27:03 -0800
Message-ID: <4B3D5D77.8000502_at_meteoritesusa.com>

  I would say that's a good one too simply because it's a crater maker.

Craters are cool... ;)

Regards,
Eric


On 12/31/2009 5:15 PM, cdtucson at cox.net wrote:
> Jeff, List,
> Good list but, I would have to squeeze Carancas in there somewhere. Very few meteorites have posed as many questions
> while at the same time providing
> many new answers. Too many to list here but it has all the bells and whistles to go along with the Scientific interests.
> Carl
> --
> Carl or Debbie Esparza
> Meteoritemax
>
>
> ---- Jeff Grossman<jgrossman at usgs.gov> 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
>>
> ______________________________________________
> 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 09:27:03 PM PST