[meteorite-list] NYT story

From: Michael Gilmer <meteoritemike_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 12:57:47 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTikCMqzjLrT_xOUAZ3D0-nM0pMi--Q_at_mail.gmail.com>

Hi Adam, Listees, and Horrified Onlookers,

I think a couple of list-members spoke to the scientist you are
referring to, and he was misquoted or what he said was taken out of
context. It seems to me that the author of the article has an agenda
of some sort and he is looking for a dramatic story to boost his
readership. Shady characters with terrorist connections, smuggling
meteorites out of far-flung countries, bribing corrupt officials, and
intrigues make for a good story, but unfortunately the story has no
basis in fact.

Over the years, this List has witnessed a back and forth battle
between the collector community and private hunters on one side, and
"science" on the other. As Martin Altmann has eloquently and
frequently argued, the two sides are both benefiting from synergy that
emerged since the Saharan NWA "Gold Rush". There have been some
misunderstandings and mistakes made in the past, but for the most
part, the relationship between private collector/hunter and scientist
has been a mutually beneficial one.

This List has some highly-respected scientists lurking on it, and they
will tell you (off-list) that science is not being damaged by the
private collector market. But meteorites, like the rest of science,
is subject to politics, and that is where the problem resides - with
people stirring the pot in a negative manner to promote their own
personal agenda. The author of the NYT article obviously has an
agenda that includes making private meteorite collectors (and dealers)
look bad.

During all the debate about science-versus-collector, the one argument
I have heard that has a shred of merit against the collector is this :
these meteorites can lay out in the deserts for another thousand or
five thousand years unmolested and science can always come get them
when time or budget permits. Private hunters reply that the stones
can be collected, made available to science, and preserved in the
short-term to the benefit of all. Well, now with the increasing
instability, deteriorating security situation, and political
uncertainty in the Sahara, it looks like the desert is becoming more
dangerous for hunters of any kind. (official or private) In light of
this, perhaps it is best that the flood of meteorites happened when it
did. If the anti-privateer crowd had their way, most collectors
wouldn't have a howardite and most institutions wouldn't have a lunar
(or angrite, or lodranite, or olivine diogenite...)

ANSMET has been a boon to science, but it is subject to bureaucracy
and politics, just like any program funded by external interests. In
light of the positive scientific results of the Saharan NWA rush, it
can be argued that privateers have been just as beneficial to science
as any government-funded or institutional program.

Best regards and happy huntings,

MikeG

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites

Website - http://www.galactic-stone.com
Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
News Feed - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone
EOM - http://www.encyclopedia-of-meteorites.com/collection.aspx?id=1564
-----------------------------------------------------------------------






On 4/5/11, Adam Hupe <raremeteorites at yahoo.com> wrote:
> If it were me, I would not give the New York Times the time of day if asked
> to
> do an interview. They have already proven themselves unworthy of accurately
> reporting on meteorites. We do not need their input on NWA meteorites or
> any
> others as they appear already biased by a member of the Antarctic program
> who
> seems threatened by all other non-Antarctic material if the article quoted
> him
> properly. What was told to the press was uncalled for and very damaging.
> It
> appears to me, this scientist is for some reason feels threatened by
> non-Antarctic material when he should be embracing it. What would make a
> scientist feel compelled to label all other meteorites "Black Market" unless
> he
> was trying to protect the program he is involved with or was misquoted by
> the
> press? Perhaps, in the spirit of cooperation, he could clarify this for all
> of
> us. Perhaps budget cuts are on the horizon? In any case, this doesn't
> demonstrate collaboration that most of us seek. I think an apology is in
> order. A lot of good people were unfairly labeled in this biased piece.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Adam
> ______________________________________________
> 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 Tue 05 Apr 2011 12:57:47 PM PDT