[meteorite-list] WHO IS THE BEST AND MOST SUCCESSFUL METEORITE HUNTER OUT THERE?

From: Darren Garrison <cynapse_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:10:07 -0500
Message-ID: <m6uu55ta1ohshffmaqc59009a2dmtncb2l_at_4ax.com>

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:28:32 -0400, you wrote:

>I think everyone can agree on some general criteria of what makes a
>great hunter -

I would define a great meteorite hunter only by how many meteorites he finds.
When you start adding all sorts of arbitrary personal caveat to the term, then
you are trying to shape the definition to specific people. "Well, yes, he found
more meteorites, but they were in Antarctica, and everybody knows meteorites are
in Antarctica!" "Okay, so he found 1,000 meteorites-- but he didn't answer my
e-mail for TWO weeks!" "Well, he tracked down 5 new falls, but he wouldn't
travel 1,000 miles to talk to my Cub Scout troop unless I paid his expenses!"
People are adding "yes, buts" to the definition right and left to arbitrarily
exclude some meteorite hunters so that it gives more credit to the ones you
personally favor.

Personality has nothing to do with it. If Osama bin Laden found a dozen
meteorites in Afghanistan, he'd be a better meteorite hunter than Jesus Christ
(given that there is no mention in the bible of Jesus's meteorite hunting
skills.)

>
>1) results - number of finds and the significance of those finds.
>Obviously, whoever finds the first lunaite on US soil is going to be
>remembered more than a prolific hunter with a hundred OC finds.
>
>2) contributions to science - has the hunter put science before
>personal gain? And not just once or twice for show - but a continuing
>dedication to the science of meteoritics that results in a better
>understanding of meteoritics and planetary science.
>
>3) accessibility - is the hunter available for questions, mentoring,
>and outreach? Do they go out on their own time and educate people
>(especially kids) about meteorites?
>
>4) humility - nobody likes an arrogant person or braggart - regardless
>of how successful they are.
>
>5) longevity - how many decades has this person been hunting
>meteorites? If the answer is less than two, then it's difficult to
>argue that they are "great" - they may well be on their way to
>greatness, but IMO a minimum of 20 years in the field is required for
>"greatness". (combined with the above criteria)
>
>Beyond those criteria, other factors will surely apply. But I think
>it is shortsighted to simply make a dry tally sheet of finds and keep
>score like this is a game of darts the pub.
>
>Best regards,
>
>MikeG
>
>
>On 7/16/09, JoshuaTreeMuseum <joshuatreemuseum at embarqmail.com> wrote:
>> Isn't this a no brainer? It's Michael Farmer! If you're talking high
>> profile, non Russian, Japanese, Moroccan, Antarctic, European,etc., Mike is
>> currently the man to beat at every new fall, with a very few exceptions.
>> For better or for worse, Mike is the face of modern American meteorite
>> hunting. I would think this is common knowledge among the uninitiated, non
>> cognescenti, teeming masses. Steve Arnold is a contender, I think he beat
>> the pants off Mike at West, but didn't he have a 5 year long drought? Since
>> the torch has been passed from Bob Haag, I would have to go with the
>> populous viewpoint that Mike is currently The Man. And it's important to
>> keep in mind that he's only at mid career with a long way to go, unlike Bob
>> who's semi-retired. Of course I am probably completely wrong, but am only
>> trying to answer the question from the viewpoint of non meteorite people.
>>
>> Couldn't this question be answered objectively simply by ranking the number
>> of meteorites each of the contenders has had classified? It would be
>> interesting to see this column of figures.
>>
>> Phil Whitmer
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
Received on Thu 16 Jul 2009 03:10:07 PM PDT