[meteorite-list] Dam Hammer

From: Michael Blood <*mlblood_at_meteoritecentral.com*> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:00:04 -0700 Message-ID: <C5E6BCF4.1B2E%mlblood_at_cox.net> · mlblood_at_meteoritecentral.com

---
        This issue is a sad one to me. I recently lost a
Good friend over it - at least I think it was over this
Issue, I have a hard time telling because he emailed
Me he disapproved of my business practices and
didn't want to talk to me, and this was the topic
Under discussion at the time. So, I can only assume
It is over this very issue.
--
        It's real simple folks: if it has meaning for you,
Great, if it doesn't have meaning for you, no problem.
The problem comes when people tell others what
SHOULD be considered this or that and whether
It SHOULD cost more or not, etc. If it costs more
Than it is worth to you, don't buy it. You do not have
To make up a scenario in your head about the dealer
Trying to rip you off.
        I like hammers. Not everything another person
Has called a hammer seemed like a hammer to me and
Some things that are a hammer to me are not a hammer
To others. 
        To me, a "hammer" is a fall wherein one or more
Individual meteorites strikes a man made artifact, animal
Or human. Not just the one, two or more stones in that
Fall that strike things (those are "hammer stones") - but
The entire fall.
        Many will see it this way - others obviously see it
As only those individual meteorites that struck the
Artifact/animal/person. I have never met a hammer collector
That did not value the specific "hammer stone(s)" more than
Other individuals in that fall, but there are many falls wherein
The hammer stone was "lost." ie: Chiang-Khan  where many
Stones landed in a boat on the river. The fisherman, feeling
They were "evil" threw them overboard. A hammer collector
Can get one of the other individuals of that fall, but not one
Of the stones that fell into the boat (I only know of 2 falls that
Involve landing on a boat).
        Anyway, this could go on forever. Embrace what has meaning
For you. Do not embrace what does not hold meaning for you -
But it would be nice if you didn't rain on the parade others are
Enjoying.
        Best wishes, Michael
> From: Darren Garrison <cynapse at charter.net>
> Reply-To: <cynapse at charter.net>
> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:33:49 -0500
> To: Meteorite List <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Dam Hammer
> 
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:24:45 -0700, you wrote:
> 
>> Suppose a meteorite fragment struck the Hoover Dam and was recovered?
>> Would that be considered a hammer or no?
> 
> See, that's the problem with a nebulous term.  There are lots of ways to build
> a
> dam-- pile up dirt, use field stones (with some sort of sealant/mortar in the
> gaps), use sand bags, use bricks, use logs (again, with a sealant), use poured
> concrete...
> 
> Let's say, for the sake of argument, hitting a poured concrete dam (like the
> Hoover) DOES make a hammer-- but hitting an earthen dam DOES NOT make a
> hammer.
> Okay, that has established upper and lower limits of hammerdom-- but at what
> point in the grade from dirt to concrete does the artificially-built dam
> become
> "artificial enough" to be concidered a hammerable object?  When does the bloom
> become Michael's tomato?
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list