[meteorite-list] [meteorite-list?????] [IMCA] Update 2 - Wilbur Wash (correction)

From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2010 17:46:30 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTin3U-=rwKTimyDd2ZBM0TaVCQT46sWQJEhNzJQ8_at_mail.gmail.com>

Greg,
1) I'm not a member of the IMCA by choice
2) I, in theory, cannot see IMCA emails
3) The message I responded to was, itself, posted to the list (it was
part of the discussion "there")
I suppose there's something else you can get angry at Ted for, now.
Regards,
Jason



On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Greg Catterton
<star_wars_collector at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Why was this IMCA email taken to the meteorite list? Was this not a private IMCA list discussion?
> Why did you take this to the Metlist when it was never part of discussion on there?
>
> Greg Catterton
> www.wanderingstarmeteorites.com
> IMCA member 4682
> On Ebay: http://stores.shop.ebay.com/wanderingstarmeteorites
> On Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WanderingStarMeteorites
>
>
> --- On Sun, 12/19/10, Jason Utas <meteoritekid at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] [IMCA] Update 2 - Wilbur Wash (correction)
>> To: "Meteorite-list" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>> Date: Sunday, December 19, 2010, 7:28 PM
>> Hello All,
>> I'd like to reply to a few of the points made in the below
>> messages;
>> while I would prefer to stay out of the mechanics of the
>> classification/submission part of it, several other points
>> were made
>> that apply to the majority of people currently getting
>> specimens
>> analyzed and named that should be addressed.
>>
>> Anne said:
>> >>> The lack of a proper find location is not
>> enough to
>> >>> prevent a meteorite from being classified.
>> ?All the
>> >>> SAHXXXXX meteorites, from the Labennes, lack
>> complete
>> >>> coordinates and they have been classified and
>> published.
>>
>> The Labennes promised to release their data.? Using
>> this as a
>> justification for a statement like "meteorites don't need
>> coordinates
>> in order to become official" doesn't make sense.? No
>> one knew ahead of
>> time that the Labennes would lie.? They did not keep
>> their word.
>> In light of that fact alone, I would suggest that the
>> meteorites be
>> renamed as NWA, since all we know is that they came from
>> somewhere in
>> North (West?) Africa.? But changing the nomenclature
>> of meteorites
>> that have already been published in numerous papers and
>> books is not
>> usually done.
>> Nowadays, everyone knows that "Sahara XXxxx" is just
>> another name for
>> a homeless African meteorite, and that's what the name has
>> come to
>> represent.? Is it ideal?? No.? Is it worth
>> changing the accepted names
>> of hundreds of meteorites just because their names don't
>> fit to an
>> ideal nomenclature system?? Maybe.? That's not my
>> call, though.? And
>> it's not a clear-cut issue.
>>
>> G. Catterton said:
>> >>> To use the claim that it was to keep the
>> location
>> >>> secret is not a valid excuse, Jack and
>> Whetstone clearly
>> >>> showed that location is not needed to get
>> approval.
>>
>> We've gone over this on the list countless times.? The
>> coordinates for
>> Whetstone Mountains are on file with the nomenclature
>> committee.? The
>> information is there, but has not yet been made public.
>>
>> So the only recent case in which meteorites have been
>> submitted and
>> made official is with the 'Sahara XXxxx' stones, and that's
>> because a
>> 'reputable dealer' did not keep his word.? And it's a
>> tough issue,
>> because I would trust the Labennes in a trade or purchase
>> -- the name
>> hasn't been sullied like those of...a few others on this
>> list.
>>
>> And why is that?? Probably because withholding
>> promised find
>> information isn't viewed as a transgression comparable with
>> something
>> like switching an NWA L3 with Zulu Queen, or something
>> along those
>> lines.
>>
>> And yet, when you look at the difference between an NWA L3
>> and Zulu
>> Queen, the only differentiating factor is provenance.
>> Where the stone
>> came from, how much was found, etc.? Kind of like the
>> difference
>> between a named stone in general versus a 'Sahara XXxxx' or
>> NWA stone.
>>
>> But people know what they're getting when they buy 'Sahara
>> XXxxx'
>> stones.? I don't know if the Labennes will ever
>> release their data,
>> but I very much doubt that they will, ever.? I'd like
>> to be pleasantly
>> surprised in the near future, but it's probably not going
>> to happen.
>> -Why would they?
>>
>> [Cue the long reply from M***** about how coordinates are
>> all
>> overrated and irrelevant...if it happens, I'll step out of
>> this as
>> well.? Enough of that.]
>>
>> The last point I'd like to make addresses the nature of our
>> little
>> meteorite market and how it interacts with the scientific
>> sphere.
>>
>> We collectors and dealers seem to feel *entitled* to the
>> services of
>> the people working in the field of meteoritics.? It's
>> one thing to
>> criticize someone who's being lazy and clumsy, losing
>> samples left and
>> right.? It's another thing entirely to jump on the
>> back of researchers
>> who are simultaneously trying to do real scientific
>> research -- and
>> analyze hundreds, if not thousands, of stones for folks
>> like us on the
>> side.? I can understand the indignation of someone who
>> has a sample go
>> missing -- it's happened to me as well.
>>
>> But what I don't do is get angry at the person who has
>> analyzed ten or
>> twenty or a hundred meteorites for me, and who happens to
>> misplace a
>> sample or two.? Especially if it's a common NWA
>> chondrite.? I haven't
>> heard of any rare material going missing, but...things
>> rarely get
>> truly lost.
>>
>> The best way to go about things is to remember that these
>> scientists
>> are doing you an expensive service that they are not
>> obligated to do.
>> Be thankful that they do as good a job as they do.
>>
>> The reason we have so many meteorites available and
>> classified today
>> is because of them, and it's because of them that many
>> people on this
>> list have been able to literally pay their bills.? In
>> many cases,
>> they're not getting paid anything extra to do that work for
>> *you (and
>> me).*
>>
>> So it can be a pretty thankless job.
>>
>> But, if Eric Twelker is right, and there is more than meets
>> the
>> eye...and someone has been consistently doing a shoddy job
>> of keeping
>> records, samples, and submissions up to date, then it seems
>> to me that
>> such a person should be cut from the path to a meteorite's
>> approval.
>>
>> Transparency with regards to the issue would be nice as
>> well.? Money's
>> at stake, after all.
>>
>> If anyone has any more questions about Wilbur Wash, I'd be
>> more than
>> willing to supply the information I have, though it seems
>> as though
>> some of you IMCA folk did a better job of tracking down the
>> stone's
>> analytical history than I was able to.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jason
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Ted Bunch <tbear1 at cableone.net>
>> wrote:
>> > Dear Greg and Eric--Your stones were classified and
>> submitted and we have
>> > discussed this problem. Greg your stone is NWA 5511;
>> Eric, your stones are
>> > NWA 5440 and 5441, this you already know. These are
>> part of MIA III or
>> > missing in action. As an example of the problems
>> classifiers have had and to
>> > some degree still have, I give below the MIA II list
>> (names of individuals
>> > are deleted). Most of these were finally cleaned up by
>> the present Editor,
>> > Mike Weisberg, whose efforts in this matter are
>> greatly appreciated. With
>> > respect to the N. American classifications, those in
>> question, in addition
>> > to at least 10 others, were sent off to the Editor in
>> charge a long time
>> > ago. Inquires were made several times with no
>> response. After significant
>> > time has pasted, I no longer inquire or re-submit.
>> >
>> > We do not get paid for classifications, any monies
>> received go to the
>> > University for instrument time. You, Greg and Eric,
>> were never charged. I do
>> > not submit an invoice until official approvals are
>> received. The Editor,
>> > members of the NOM COM, and most classifiers that I
>> know do not receive
>> > compensation either. We have rather thankless jobs and
>> put up with
>> > inefficiencies and abuses.
>> >
>> > Because of these problems, we posted on our NAU web
>> site that we do not
>> > classify any more for the general public. ?Many of
>> you,
>> > ?make money from classifier's efforts, It costs me
>> about $3K per year to
>> > classify meteorites.
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> November 12, 2008
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Some ?missing? submissions that have occurred
>> over the last couple of
>> >> years and are still MIA and I am NOT HAPPY! I have
>> addressed these issues
>> >> several times.
>> >>
>> >> 1. Originally submitted in Nov. 2006, then again
>> in Jan. 2007: NWA 2682,
>> >> 2683, 2684, ?2685, 2686, 2687, 2688, 2689, 2691,
>> 2692, 2693, 2694, 2695,
>> >> 2696, 2095. Our original submission in Nov. was
>> not put into the ?proper?
>> >> format that was posted on Oct. 26.
>> >>
>> >> 2. April 2007 submissions: NWA 4650 through NWA
>> 4664
>> >>
>> >> 3. Others: NWA 4551, 4541, 4284, 4448, 4544, 4545,
>> 4549. 4409, 4410, 4411,
>> >> 4412,
>> >> ? ?4413, 4414, 4284, 2909.
>> >>
>> >> 5. Submitted in Nov. 2006, again in Jan. 2007:
>> Dhofar 1127, 1128, 1130,
>> >> ? ?1131, 1136, 1139, 1144, 1148, 1154, 1156,
>> 1168, 1170, 1176, 1178, 1181,
>> >> 1226, 1232,
>> >> ? ?1243, 1250, 1251, 1261, 1272, 1429, 1430,
>> 1431. 1432. ?Same as for #1.
>> >> Now official.
>> >>
>> >> 6. And most amazing of all ? I submitted an
>> EXCEL sheet of those listed
>> >> below, some are on Jeff?s web site (blue),
>> >
>> > ?others are not (red) and only some are on the
>> tracking list (blue).
>> >>
>> >> ? ? ? ?Jeff?s & tracking sites: NWA
>> 4429, 4431, 4432, 4433, 4434, 4436,
>> >> 4437, 4440, ? ?4443.
>> >>
>> >> ? ? ? ?Missing everywhere: NWA 4430, 4435,
>> 4438, 4439, 4441, 4442, 4444,
>> >> ? ? ? ?4445, 4446.
>> >>
>> >> 7. One lunar, Jiddat al Harasis (#1004) ? now
>> official as 348.
>> >>
>> >> 8. And, 12 submitted for N. America a couple of
>> years ago and one NEA
>> >> submitted long ago before your tenure.
>> >>
>> >> These were sent directly to either BLANK. BLANK or
>> to you at the ?and
>> >> copied to at least one other.
>> >
>> > The N. American items went to BLANK, several times.
>> >>
>> >> Ted
>> >
>> >>
>> > Eric and Greg, if you want to continue discussion
>> about your stones, please
>> > do it off line. I have seen enough pissing contests on
>> the LIST and do not
>> > want to be part of one. My apology to you and others
>> who are in a
>> > "neglected" position, we are not perfect and have made
>> mistakes, but I do
>> > not apologize for issues out of my control. FYI, I
>> have prepared another MIA
>> > list and will send it to Mike after critical
>> classifications for LPSC
>> > abstracts have been handled by Mike and the NOM COM,
>> i. e., after 1-10-11.
>> > These classifications have priority over the general
>> public requests at this
>> > time and I do not want to clog up Mike any more than
>> he already is.
>> >
>> > You might inquire to Tony Irving, Allan Rubin, Randy
>> Korotev, among other
>> > classifiers, about problems they had/have. The system
>> is not perfect and
>> > improvements have been made, more should and can be
>> made.
>> >
>> > Ted Bunch
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > On 12/19/10 10:47 AM, Greg Catterton wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Seeing as how this was mentioned... Ted has also
>> lost 2 samples of mine.
>> >> A very unusual black chondrite? and another LL5/6
>> Polymict breccia.
>> >> Its been over 18 months. I was told the thin
>> sections were lost... I know
>> >> of two others who have had issues with him losing
>> material. I too have had
>> >> little or no email replies.
>> >>
>> >> Greg Catterton
>> >> www.wanderingstarmeteorites.com
>> >> IMCA member 4682
>> >> On Ebay: http://stores.shop.ebay.com/wanderingstarmeteorites
>> >> On Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WanderingStarMeteorites
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --- On Sun, 12/19/10, Eric Twelker<twelker at alaska.net>
>> ?wrote:
>> >> ?551
>> >>>
>> >>> From: Eric Twelker<twelker at alaska.net>
>> >>> Subject: Re: [IMCA] Update 2 - Wilbur Wash
>> (correction)
>> >>> To: impactika at aol.com
>> >>> Cc: star_wars_collector at yahoo.com,
>> imca at imcamail.de
>> >>> Date: Sunday, December 19, 2010, 12:41 PM
>> >>> Hi IMCA
>> >>>
>> >>> ? ? This reply will divert a bit from the
>> >>> Wilber Wash issue, but I think it is related.
>> ?Lamesa,
>> >>> Tahoka, and Wellman (f) have all been
>> mentioned in this
>> >>> thread and their lack of publication may be
>> related to
>> >>> Wilbur Wash. ?A large number of meteorites
>> (including
>> >>> the prior three) that were classified by Ted
>> Bunch have
>> >>> "gone missing." ?This includes some of mine
>> and a much
>> >>> larger number of other meteorites--perhaps
>> approaching a
>> >>> hundred--from other dealers. ?The inclination
>> in the
>> >>> dealer community has been to blame Ted Bunch.
>> ?Because
>> >>> Ted has been mostly unresponsive or erratic in
>> replies to
>> >>> inquiries, he seems a likely party to blame.
>> >>>
>> >>> ? ? That said, McCartney did manage to get
>> >>> one response out of Ted. ?He blamed a
>> researcher from
>> >>> the University of New Mexico that used to sit
>> on
>> >>> NomCom. ?I asked Jeff Grossman about the
>> accusation,
>> >>> but he declined to answer. ?Something's going
>> on here
>> >>> and some people know about it but are
>> unwilling to
>> >>> share. ?Apparently a large number of
>> classifications
>> >>> and samples have been lost and this fact is
>> being swept
>> >>> under the rug or worse. ?It doesn't seem that
>> anything
>> >>> is being done. ?In the meantime collectors
>> and others
>> >>> are incorporating pieces into their
>> collections. ?I
>> >>> will add that this is the IMCA's business as
>> at least some
>> >>> of the people involved are IMCA members and
>> may be acting in
>> >>> ways that are questionable.
>> >>>
>> >>> ? ? ?Eric Twelker
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Dec 18, 2010, at 10:54 PM, impactika at aol.com
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> I agree.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The lack of a proper find location is not
>> enough to
>> >>>
>> >>> prevent a meteorite from being classified.
>> ?All the
>> >>> SAHXXXXX meteorites, from the Labennes, lack
>> complete
>> >>> coordinates and they have been classified and
>> published.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So, what else?
>> >>>> The expert who did the classification, Dr.
>> Karner,
>> >>>
>> >>> knows his job, he is not new at this and the
>> Un. of New
>> >>> Mexico has done classification for a very long
>> time, so I
>> >>> would not expect problems with the
>> classification process
>> >>> itself.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So what else?
>> >>>> Anne Black
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>>> From: Greg Catterton<star_wars_collector at yahoo.com>
>> >>>> To: IMCA Mail List<imca at imcamail.de>
>> >>>> Sent: Sat, Dec 18, 2010 8:38 am
>> >>>> Subject: Re: [IMCA] Update 2 - Wilbur
>> Wash
>> >>>
>> >>> (correction)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> That does not sound too proper, or correct
>> from my
>> >>>
>> >>> experience and sounds like the "story"
>> provided by Joe about
>> >>> his Mifflin find (which the facts there were
>> not accurate
>> >>> also)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> While it may just be a name, I dont
>> personally like
>> >>>
>> >>> the fact that data was lied about or corrupted
>> by the
>> >>> finder. To use the claim that it was to keep
>> the location
>> >>> secret is not a valid excuse, Jack and
>> Whetstone clearly
>> >>> showed that location is not needed to get
>> approval. There is
>> >>> no ?rule concerning "No exact location, no
>> >>> classification" that I have been made aware of
>> - again, see
>> >>> Whetstone as the location has still not been
>> made available
>> >>> and its official.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Most likely, the type deposit was not
>> provided
>> >>>
>> >>> therefor the material remains unofficial.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Just my thoughts and opinions from my
>> experience with
>> >>>
>> >>> testing and classification... for the record,
>> I had NWA 5799
>> >>> tested, approved and published in less then 4
>> months and
>> >>> know of many others whos material did not take
>> the time
>> >>> this, Tahoka or Zunhua has taken.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Perhaps there is more going on, but to get
>> an official
>> >>>
>> >>> name, its not really that hard - even if it is
>> just
>> >>> provisional.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hope everyone is doing well!
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Greg Catterton
>> >>>> www.wanderingstarmeteorites.com
>> >>>> IMCA member 4682
>> >>>> On Ebay: http://stores.shop.ebay.com/wanderingstarmeteorites
>> >>>> On Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WanderingStarMeteorites
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --- On Sat, 12/18/10, Davio L.
>> Ribeca<fishsealevel at comcast.net>
>> >>>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> From: Davio L. Ribeca<fishsealevel at comcast.net>
>> >>>> Subject: [IMCA] Update 2 - Wilbur Wash
>> (correction)
>> >>>> To: "IMCA Mail List"<imca at imcamail.de>
>> >>>> Date: Saturday, December 18, 2010, 6:18
>> AM
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> *Posted w/ permission
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hi Anne,
>> >>>> That's pretty much all that I know. I can
>> tell you
>> >>>
>> >>> that after the analysis the meteorite laid
>> around for a long
>> >>> while because of personnel changes at the
>> University. Also,
>> >>> Wilbur Wash was first name given because the
>> discoverer did
>> >>> not want to reveal the exact location of the
>> find. It took
>> >>> some time (after the discoverer thoroughly
>> searched the true
>> >>> location area) before the true find location
>> (ranchland in
>> >>> Lochiel) was given to the University. No exact
>> location, no
>> >>> classification procedures is the rule, I
>> guess. The exact
>> >>> coordinates were eventually given to the
>> University.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The return of the paper work to the
>> University, and
>> >>>
>> >>> whatever else the University sends to the name
>> givers
>> >>> (naming committee), and the new name may
>> occur
>> >>> simultaneously, I don't know. Anyway, I'm
>> somewhat satisfied
>> >>> with the update. I'll keep my eyes wide open
>> to see if all
>> >>> this comes to pass. I plan on contacting Dr.
>> Karner after
>> >>> the holidays to secure more information. I'm
>> an old retired
>> >>> mathematics/science admin. educator, maybe
>> he'll take the
>> >>> time to help me. The finder is Carl Esparza,
>> who was very
>> >>> helpful and kind. He sold the meteorite main
>> mass to Michael
>> >>> Cottingham. The main mass now resides with a
>> person named
>> >>> Jason Utas, who I also plan on contacting. If
>> you find out
>> >>> more please share. This was an interesting
>> investigation.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thank you for all your help and concern.
>> I'm hoping my
>> >>>
>> >>> wife, Frances, and I can meet you in person
>> someday, soon.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ciao,
>> >>>> Davio R.
>> >>>> IMCA Member 4050
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> IMCA mailing list
>> >>>> IMCA at imcamail.de
>> >>>> http://lists.imcamail.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imca
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> IMCA mailing list
>> >>>>
>> >>>> IMCA at imcamail.de
>> >>>> http://lists.imcamail.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imca
>> >>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> IMCA mailing list
>> >>>> IMCA at imcamail.de
>> >>>> http://lists.imcamail.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imca
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> IMCA mailing list
>> >> IMCA at imcamail.de
>> >> http://lists.imcamail.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imca
>> >>
>> > ______________________________________________
>> > Visit the Archives at
>> > http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> > Meteorite-list mailing list
>> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>> >
>> ______________________________________________
>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>
>
>
>
Received on Sun 19 Dec 2010 08:46:30 PM PST