[meteorite-list] Reply to J. Grossman

From: Ted Bunch <tbear1_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 10:06:11 -0700
Message-ID: <C83A5E13.1307E%tbear1_at_cableone.net>

Jeff -you are correct, non-peer-reviewed abstracts are not the last
word, but the presence of chondrules in Al Haggounia clearly make it an
enstatite chondrite, not an aubrite. Works for me.

Irving et al. submitted a revised classification to the NOM COM for NWA
2828 as we did for NWA 2965 (Al-Haggounia stones), no action was taken
on either, no balls.

These "re-classifications" are available on the NAU website at:
http://www4.nau.edu/meteorites/index.html

You have stated in the past that NOM COM approved classifications are
"not official, so if the NOM COM is an official arm of the Meteoritical
Society, acting in its behalf, "approval" of a classification should
also mean that it is official.

I don't want to get into an argument over semantics/definitions, but if
approved classifications are not "official" and our re-classifications
of Al-Haggounia specimens NWA 2828 and NWA 2965 are not approved, then
may be those persons who are interested in Al-Haggounia correctness,
should consider our re-classifications as "official", by consensus.

Ted

On 6/13/10 6:11 AM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
> Abstracts NEVER put scientific issues to rest. They are preliminary
> works which have not been through scientific peer-review.
>
> Jeff
>
> On 2010-06-12 9:57 PM, Greg Hupe wrote:
>> Just a little more info to put this to rest and show competent science.
>> http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/metsoc2010/pdf/5378.pdf
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Greg
>>
>> ====================
>> Greg Hupe
>> The Hupe Collection
>> NaturesVault (eBay)
>> gmhupe at htn.net
>> www.LunarRock.com
>> IMCA 3163
>> ====================
>> Click here for my current eBay auctions:
>> http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnaturesvault
>>
>> ______________________________________________
Received on Sun 13 Jun 2010 01:06:11 PM PDT