[meteorite-list] Franconia Irons - RFSPOD

From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_webb_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 22:45:37 -0500
Message-ID: <2117D661C2EE4330AAEF722A3A0CD38A_at_ATARIENGINE2>

Hi, Larry, List,

    After looking at the Franconia irons, I have to
admit they are weird bunch of objects, but also
that this one is an order of magnitude weirder
than the others.

    If you arrange a SEM, one quick and convincing
check would be to take along another SaW 005
that no one would doubt was a meteorite and simply
compare the results of the two for non-volatile
elements. I say "non-volatile" because the "flanger"
may have been heated more than others. The more
refractory the element the smaller the chance of
depletion.

    If it is a meteorite, it goes straight to the top of
my list of Uncontestedly Weird Rocks From Space.


Sterling K. Webb
--------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: <thetoprok at aol.com>
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 08, 2010 9:10 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Franconia Irons - RFSPOD


> Hello List,
>
> Got my computer back a couple hours ago and I'm ready for a friendly
> rebuttal ;)
>
> Ok, I snapped a few images and created a photobucket account so I
> might
> plea my case visually.
>
> I'll start by saying Phil, Warren, I like guys like you.. so
> full of it and all.. kinda like me ; )
>
> Seriously, I'm not 100% on my conclusions so take it easy guys.
> Though
> I'm confident, I can accept the fact that sometimes things are not
> what
> they seem, I hope you can do the same..
>
> Like I said, I thought it was a shoelace eyelet but it is way too
> small, there is more to this picture than meets the eye.
> There is a picture of a standard shoestring with the object on
> photobucket.
>
> This particular object is very thin. For comparisson I've made an
> image
> of the "meteorite" and two more irons from the area to show thickness
> comparisson. They are lying on their sides. I looked at some snaps on
> my old World War 2 military gas mask canvas case and they are twice
> the
> diameter, and they are oxidizing green like copper and they do not
> attract a magnet. These are not the same for sure. I doubt the
> meteorite suspect is a snap unless it was used for dolls clothes. It's
> not a
> grommet for a tarp unless we are talking Lilliputians here I don't
> think you are gonna tie much down wit one of these. A shoe
> lace will not fit through the hole let alone a rope.
> (I also need to
> mention that one of the first things I did was check it with a magnet
> and it has the same, super strong pull to my neodymium magnet that the
> other Franconias have. It is identical.
>
> I've also included a picture of the object beside another
> SaW 005 with a large pit in it. Note the similarity in size and shape
> of the pit. I dare say that if this little iron was as thin as the
> object in question it would 've blown right through.
>
> There is also a picture of it lying with a bunch of others I've found
> over the years to show relative size to the known SaW 005's.
>
> I'd like to comment on the "chondrule" hypothesis for the origin of
> the
> pits. It seems very unlikely to me due to the fact that very similar
> pits exist in Sikhote Alin, which we know to be purely an iron without
> a chondritic conection. Also, the pits are
> "splashes" as if shot with a tiny, high powered rifle, they are not
> like any chondrite I've seen that had a chondrule fall out. Those are
> completely two different things as far as I can see.
>
> I'd also like to point out that "Flanged Button" is only used in a
> descriptive manor, indicating a similar appearance. In no way do I
> believe this iron was formed in the same manner as a flanged button
> tektite; only that it has a similar appearance, due to the forces that
> punched the hole, whatever they may be.
>
> All said, the SaW 005 H-metal meteorites are a very curious group
> indeed and I believe there is much more to the story than the usual
> strewnfield scenario. Dynamics are at play that are not fully
> understood at this time but will hopefully come to light soon. I wish
> Jim Smaller was here to put in his two and half cents. Jim by the way
> was a fine man that knew a meteorite when he saw one and didn't take
> no
> for an answer when the experts said the Franconia irons were not
> meteoritic, he followed through and proved the point. I have to say I
> was one of his outspoken defenders. When you see flow lines on an
> oriented, impact pitted iron object that is found in the middle of an
> H
> chondrite strewnfield and the chondrites have huge chunks of metal
> sticking out of them on occassion, you just know it's right, and as it
> turns out, it is.
>
> That's part of why I'm sure about this thing. I've spent days on end
> in
> that field and found dozens of the irons, no two are the same. Plenty
> are oriented and many have pits. Sooner or later it's going to happen.
> I don't think it is nearly as crazy as some of you think. I believe
> that if you had it in your hands with a 10x loupe you would understand
> what I'm saying.
>
> http://s934.photobucket.com/albums/ad190/alienrockfarm/
>
> Best Regards and Happy Hunting!
> Larry
>
> PS
> I'm attempting to arrange SEM now.
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> 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 Sat 08 May 2010 11:45:37 PM PDT