[meteorite-list] Moon Dust

From: Michael Gilmer <*meteoritemike_at_meteoritecentral.com*> Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 11:20:20 -0400 Message-ID: <BANLkTi=0G7f6dhJjkxbaiAEqyEe3Ui9MWQ_at_mail.gmail.com> · meteoritemike_at_meteoritecentral.com

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Meteorites & Amber (Michael Gilmer)
Website - http://www.galactic-stone.com
Facebook - http://tinyurl.com/42h79my
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 6/25/11, MexicoDoug <mexicodoug at aim.com> wrote:
> JG wrote to MG:
> "What law are you talking about?"
>
> Ditto! A fact-supported discussion would be so much nicer.
>
> It is my understanding that when Apollo lost its funding, oodles of
> relics entered the private domain and there wasn't much ado about it -
> rather, a tacit acceptance and a party atmosphere pervaded in the wake
> of Moonphoria and non had any scientific value at the time. Where are
> the retroactive vigorous sting operations hunting down these national
> treasures? I am sure the same "laws", whatever they might be, cover
> them.
>
> Post-facto contrived rules are a violation which seems to date to the
> Magna Carta and any remotely civilized society. All material loaned or
> provided in exchange for analyses to be done which is covered by modern
> agreements (as Jeff alludes to) has a clear paper trail, but there are
> the nonsensical cases like tape on the Hasselblad magazines demonstrate
> how ludicrous things can become for reasons foreign to science and
> domestic to collectors willingness to pay. I take my place behind the
> line of those who have already pointed this out.
>
> Moon specimens that were incidental and innocuous gifts of questionable
> or no value at the time seem to have taken a special place. But, there
> are other exceptions as well. As I peruse the aisles of the gift shop
> at KSC I am tempted to buy a Space Shuttle heat tile. Yet NASA has
> allegedly gone on record saying that it will not dispose of them by
> sale to the public (reason: we could be liable for unintended harm they
> might cause). Rumor has it that the Soviet Buran tiles are more
> interesting to collect and Russia has no such hang ups over them, so
> I'll hold out for one of them. If I had an American one it would not be
> satisfying in present company. I couldn't freely share it with my
> international friends without risking being thrown in jail for
> providing sensitive military secrets to other nations... at least that
> is the rumor on how it was for a long time ...
>
> There is a clear demonstration of double standard and a willingness to
> invent retroactive laws, which should be prohibited constitutionally,
> but the American system separates the judicial and that makes
> legislation from the bench a convenient option in cases like this. How
> frustrating for Mr. Rosen, the guy who bought the gifted moon rock from
> a Honduran official for a large sum of money. The government simply
> snatched it from him and it was not because the Hondurans filed a
> claim. If he had been compensated for his recovery of the specimen it
> would be different in my view. But the way it went down, there is
> reason to be wary of the court's freeloading and arbitrary mindset in
> these cases. It is quite removed from science and boils down to
> politics and setting cruel and unusual precedents at the expense of
> citizens for prior shoddy control practices. Mr. Rosen, the owner at
> the time of the Moon rock was never charged with any criminal activity
> - they just took the rock plaque and left him to brood. If they could
> have charged him I sort of think they would have given the zest to make
> examples out of people. But they got what they wanted - a precedent of
> no-ownership when before there was none to my knowledge.
>
> I would point out that this nonsensical legal gymnastic that seems to
> have developed ought to be applied to each and every scientist in the
> United States that is on any payroll or grant for a project who
> supposedly buys specimens in his free time. How different is such
> piggybacking from the microgram residues on a piece of tape out of a
> camera? How did Dr. King amass that huge personal collection on many
> field trips to places such as, aw, forget it. Not worth going into, it
> would be more counterproductive than good to go there.
>
> Best wishes
> Doug
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Grossman <jngrossman at gmail.com>
> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Sent: Sat, Jun 25, 2011 8:34 pm
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Moon Dust
>
>
> What law are you talking about?
>
> On 6/25/2011 7:55 PM, Michael Gilmer wrote:
>> Hi Jeff and List,
>>
>> What strikes me here is that NASA has 842 pounds of lunar material
> and
>> they are apparently bent out shape over a few milligrams of dust
>> clinging to a piece of scotch tape. It's absolutely silly and it
>> speaks of skewed priorities.
>>
>> It was mentioned to me in private email by a respected list member
>> that the NASA samples in question were not addressed by the law until
>> 1972. If that is true, then it seems to me that any sample removed
>> legally prior to that date would be "grand-fathered in" as legal.
>>
>> A relevant example would be trinitite. Trinitite removed before the
>> law specifically addressed it is legal. However, going to the site
>> now and removing trinitite is illegal. Another example would be
>> Canyon Diablo iron meteorites - those CD meteorites removed before
> the
>> "prohibition" are legal. Those removed today are illegal because one
>> must trespass to get them. The devil is in the details - how does one
>> distinguish a legal Diablo meteorite from an illegal one? And how
>> would one determine a legal piece of dusty tape from an illegal one?
>>
>> ATTENTION GOVERNMENT - STOP PISSING AWAY OUR TAX MONEY CHASING AFTER
>> DUSTY TAPE! Instead, here are some suggestions for using our tax
>> money - build homes for the homeless, feed the hungry, offer medical
>> care to the sick, create jobs for the unemployed, fund the sciences,
>> or any number of things that are more important than dusty tape.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> MikeG
>>
>
> ______________________________________________
> 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
>