[meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 82, Issue 65

From: Steve Schoner <schoner_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:03:13 GMT
Message-ID: <20100624.090313.4105.0_at_webmail13.dca.untd.com>

Very interesting thread,

I have searched Holbrook from 1967 to 2003, and a few times after when one is inclined to drive me out there.

I have collected over 900 stones, ranging from .01 grams to 237 grams. The three largest stones were perfect individuals with nice flat black fusion crust.

If I did not know better I would have thought that they fell no more than a few years before. And oddly just meters away I found others that were so weathered that they easily crumbled. But the smallest "Holbrook Peas" are often very beautiful, nice fusion crusts and great grey-whitish interior matrix.

And my long admired friend, Harvey Nininger told me back when I first started searching in 1967 that he had recovered some fragments that he suspected might be from another older fall. But I wonder about that, as the weathered ones look like older falls, but upon inspection in thin section are indeed Holbrook stones.

I have wondered about this disparity, that it could be from extraterrestrial salt inclusions, like the Monahans Fall a few years ago that was intrinsically of the same type as Holbrook. It would be interesting if someone with a micro-probe and access to original 1912 collected stones woudl cut one and do an analysis.

Someday... I might have access to such an instrument, or an x-ray diffraction spectroscope as I am in the process of seeking to obtain a surplus one now. Then I can do preliminary in-depth identifications of samples.

Though due to health reasons I no longer hunt meteorites, such keeps my interest in meteorites alive--

Steve Schoner
www.petroslides.com
IMCA #4470


Message: 5
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 01:33:28 +0200
From: "Martin Altmann" <altmann at meteorite-martin.de>
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] NWA 869
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Message-ID: <008701cb132c$7c1e2430$6502a8c0 at name86d88d87e2>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Folks, please stay realistic.

That what Greg and Mike mentioned with NWA 869 applies too to any Glorieta,
Sikhote-Alin, Juancheng, Pultusk, Gao-Guenie, Nuevo Mercurio, Allende, Camel
Donga, Stannern and and and and..

Or let's take better an all-American example.

The Holbrook hunter goes in the Holbrook strewnfield, he hunts for Holbrooks
for decades, he knows how they're looking like.
He finds a stone. It looks, feels, smells, sounds, tastes like Holbrook
(because it is a Holbrook).

To fulfil the standard claimed in the 869er case,
the finder would have to let make thin sections, microprobing, isotopes ect.
by an expert scientist ect.

to be allowed to call his Holbrook "Holbrook".

Theoretically possible.

Unfortunately Melanie would have then to pay for her little Holbrook-pea not
anymore 50$ but 1000$, cause the verification is so costly.

Makes not much sense.

I rather trust in the experience of the Holbrook hunter.

Best!
Martin


____________________________________________________________
Penny Stock Jumping 2000%
Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3341/4c2373c361572e963st02duc
Received on Thu 24 Jun 2010 11:03:13 AM PDT