[meteorite-list] Moon Dust

From: John.L.Cabassi <*John_at_meteoritecentral.com*> Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 08:26:48 -0700 Message-ID: <432935E1640E4A398AE0BE9D66829F16_at_anitak9bz49jy2> · John_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
>
______________________________________________
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