[meteorite-list] Mifflin, Amiss

From: michael cottingham <mikewren_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 21:23:03 -0600
Message-ID: <6AD0C13C-DA43-4831-9E0C-AEC0D18C592B_at_gilanet.com>

Amen Brother!

Michael Cottingham
On May 7, 2011, at 9:21 PM, Michael Farmer wrote:

> I have this to say, we discussed this right after the fall, no one I know believed that story or that stone was true. It is lunacy to think that someone in Mifflin decided to refuse all the offers of cash posted all over the countryside, all of us running around there, begging to buy any stones, and decided to call someone in Tucson, who doesnt even have a website. So you think they sold the stone, shipped it out and waited for cash in the mail? BOGUS to the core.
> Terry was offering huge amounts of money for stones and there were no sellers. So if you ask me to believe that a local decided to sell to someone far away instead of just pocketing $100 bills that almost every hunter there had in their wallets and were ready to spend on a meteorite.
> This was a scam hatched up by someone who did not even bother to go to Mifflin.
> I have said it before, and say it again, THINK before you BUY, if it smells fishy, it likely is. Buy from real hunters and dealers, not those who "got it through the mail" but can't say from whom.
>
> Michael Farmer
>
> --- On Sat, 5/7/11, drtanuki <drtanuki at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> From: drtanuki <drtanuki at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Mifflin, Amiss
>> To: "michael cottingham" <mikewren at gilanet.com>, meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> Date: Saturday, May 7, 2011, 8:57 PM
>> Hi Michael, Great job as
>> always; thank you!
>> It seems that Carl needs to come clean
>> and name the person that he "bought" the material
>> from? Carl at least owes us that courtesy if he wants
>> to maintain any respectability in the meteorite world?
>>
>> From what I read the water is too murky if someone spends
>> any amount of money to buy from an "unknown" finder? seller
>> and cannot? remember their name, etc.? And address? A
>> city? Anything?
>>
>> Carl how much of this material did this finder? seller help
>> you put on the market?
>> Carl? Do you have an explanation? Please do
>> give us the whole and factual story.
>> Carl I am not accusing you of anything; rather hoping that
>> you will quickly clear up matters before further commotion
>> appears in the henhouse.
>> Best Regards, Dirk Ross...Tokyo
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On Sun, 5/8/11, michael cottingham <mikewren at gilanet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> From: michael cottingham <mikewren at gilanet.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Mifflin, Amiss
>>> To: "drtanuki" <drtanuki at yahoo.com>
>>> Cc: "jason utas" <jasonutas at gmail.com>,
>> meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> Date: Sunday, May 8, 2011, 11:38 AM
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Good question. I have accounted for and taken "out" of
>> the
>>> gene pool, almost all of the bad Mifflin that I got
>> dragged
>>> into. I do not know about the others.
>>>
>>> Best Wishes
>>>
>>> Michael Cottingham
>>> On May 7, 2011, at 8:31 PM, drtanuki wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jason,
>>>> You raise several good points and analysis.
>> One
>>> further question that should be asked is how many
>> grams of
>>> this rock were put into the market as Mifflin? And
>> have they
>>> made their way into the "gene pool" to how many buyers
>> and
>>> sellers and yet to reproduce more offspring? Dirk
>>> Ross...Tokyo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --- On Sun, 5/8/11, jason utas <jasonutas at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> From: jason utas <jasonutas at gmail.com>
>>>>> Subject: [meteorite-list] Mifflin, Amiss
>>>>> To: "Meteorite-list" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>>>>> Date: Sunday, May 8, 2011, 10:12 AM
>>>>> Hello All,
>>>>>
>>>>> My story begins in the summer of last
>> year.
>>> I saw
>>>>> some strange pieces
>>>>> of 'Mifflin' on ebay that I thought looked
>> funny.
>>>
>>>>> People were talking
>>>>> about the meteorite having two lithologies,
>>> but...the
>>>>> slices and
>>>>> individuals that I saw looked 'off.' A
>>> select few
>>>>> looked like
>>>>> H-chondrites, and they had the telltale signs
>> of
>>> wear that
>>>>> freshly-imported Moroccan falls bear: worn
>> edges,
>>> exposed
>>>>> metal flakes
>>>>> on protruding corners (where the fusion crust
>> had
>>> been worn
>>>>> off due to
>>>>> improper packing), etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the time, I did nothing but send a
>> private
>>> email to Anne
>>>>> Black
>>>>> notifying her of my suspicions. I spoke
>> with
>>> some
>>>>> other prominent
>>>>> list-members addressing it, and they all
>> agreed
>>> that the
>>>>> material
>>>>> looked funny, but that nothing could be done
>> about
>>> it given
>>>>> the
>>>>> required burden of proof.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I sat on my hands for several months.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just over a month ago, I saw a piece of the
>>> funny-looking
>>>>> 'Mifflin' on
>>>>> ebay. It looked similar to some pieces that
>> I
>>> remembered
>>>>> seeing on
>>>>> ebay months before, and, being an end-cut, I
>> was
>>> able to
>>>>> see both the
>>>>> stone's funny-looking inside -- and the
>> apparent
>>> metal
>>>>> grains on the
>>>>> stone's exterior.
>>>>>
>>>>> I used the 'buy-it-now' option to purchase
>> the
>>> end-cut, and
>>>>> it
>>>>> arrived while Peter and I were in Morocco.
>>> When we
>>>>> returned, I
>>>>> promptly shipped the end-cut off to Tony
>> Irving of
>>> the
>>>>> University of
>>>>> Washington; he agreed to analyze the stone
>>> posthaste.
>>>>>
>>>>> The results came back, but Tony wanted to
>> wait
>>> until the
>>>>> probe was
>>>>> recallibrated so that he could run it again
>> to be
>>> sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lo and behold, he did confirm that my end-cut
>> was
>>> an
>>>>> equilibrated
>>>>> H-chondrite, with an olivine Fa of 18.6.
>>> For
>>>>> comparison, Chergach and
>>>>> Bassikounou both have Fa contents of 18.4
>> and
>>> 18.6,
>>>>> respectively.
>>>>>
>>>>> University of Madison, Wisconsin performed
>> most of
>>> the work
>>>>> on the
>>>>> Mifflin fall. Between them and the Field
>>> Museum, over
>>>>> twenty separate
>>>>> stones were analyzed. They were all
>>> L5. Mifflin
>>>>> is classified as an
>>>>> L5, with an Fa of ~24.9 +/- 0.2.
>>>>>
>>>>> I then sent Tony the link to the ebay auction
>> so
>>> he could
>>>>> confirm that
>>>>> the piece that he had analyzed was indeed
>> the
>>> piece that I
>>>>> had sent
>>>>> him. He did.
>>>>>
>>>>> I purchased my end-cut from Bryan
>> Scarborough
>>> (IMCA), who
>>>>> purchased it
>>>>> from Michael Cottingham, who purchased it
>> from
>>> Greg
>>>>> Catterton (IMCA),
>>>>> who purchased the stone with Carl Esparza
>> from the
>>> finder.
>>>>>
>>>>> Carl told me the following story over the
>> phone:
>>>>> He was contacted "out of the blue" by
>> someone
>>> hunting in
>>>>> the Mifflin
>>>>> strewn-field. According to Carl, the
>> finder
>>> stated
>>>>> that he thought
>>>>> there was a "conspiracy against him," because
>> no
>>> one would
>>>>> offer him
>>>>> more than $5/g. and he believed his finds
>> were
>>> worth more
>>>>> than that.
>>>>> So, according to Carl, he then offered the
>> finder
>>> $10/g,
>>>>> and a deal was
>>>>> struck.
>>>>>
>>>>> But...the finder asked that he not be paid
>> via
>>> paypal or
>>>>> wire
>>>>> transfer; he wanted cash mailed to a P.O.
>> Box.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, Carl mailed the money to the P.O. Box and
>> the
>>> first of
>>>>> two 'Mifflin'
>>>>> stones was over-nighted to him the next
>> day.
>>> It
>>>>> should be noted that
>>>>> Carl included Greg Catterton as his partner
>> in
>>> this deal,
>>>>> and Greg
>>>>> sent over several hundred dollars to help pay
>> for
>>> the
>>>>> stones.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, as Carl said over the phone,
>> his
>>> old
>>>>> computer recently
>>>>> died, so he lacks the name and email address
>> of
>>> the finder,
>>>>> as well as
>>>>> the number/address of the P.O. Box to which
>> he
>>> sent the
>>>>> money. Carl
>>>>> is also unwilling to share the bank receipt
>> from
>>> the
>>>>> transaction which
>>>>> would prove that he did make a large cash
>>> withdrawal for
>>>>> the stones.
>>>>> I asked Carl for the finder's phone number,
>> but he
>>> told me
>>>>> that he had
>>>>> recently tried to call the finder, himself,
>> only
>>> to find
>>>>> that the
>>>>> number had been disconnected.
>>>>> He was unwilling to share the number with
>> me,
>>> regardless.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the phone, Carl suggested that his source
>> had
>>> likely
>>>>> ripped him
>>>>> off, and he said that he believed that it was
>> the
>>> reason
>>>>> why he had
>>>>> been asked to send the money untraceably, as
>> he
>>> did; Carl
>>>>> described
>>>>> the situation as a "typical scam."
>>>>>
>>>>> He also suggested that the stones *might* be
>> from
>>> an
>>>>> unrelated fall --
>>>>> or could be the result of Mifflin being an
>>> 'Almahata Sitta
>>>>> sort of
>>>>> fall.'
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't disprove either of those ideas, but
>> they
>>> are
>>>>> unlikely for the
>>>>> following reasons:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Almahata Sitta is a unique event in the
>> history
>>> of
>>>>> meteoritics.
>>>>> Different lithologies have been observed in
>> many
>>>>> meteorites, but to
>>>>> have individual stones of completely
>> different
>>> and
>>>>> unrelated meteorite
>>>>> types falling separately is unique. Out of
>>> the 1,238
>>>>> accepted
>>>>> observed falls in the meteoritical bulletin,
>> only
>>> one has
>>>>> exhibited
>>>>> individuals that have consisted of different
>>> meteorite
>>>>> types (for
>>>>> example, H + L, Ureilite + EH, etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> And it's not that we haven't been looking
>> for
>>> similar
>>>>> events; with
>>>>> each and every fall, multiple stones are
>> analyzed,
>>> and the
>>>>> simple fact
>>>>> of the matter is that they are always
>>> similar...with *one*
>>>>> exception.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, Almahata Sitta is an exception. How
>> much
>>> of an
>>>>> exception? 0.08%
>>>>> of meteorite falls are like it. Less than
>> a
>>> tenth of
>>>>> a percent.
>>>>> Possible...but extremely unlikely. We also
>>> have to
>>>>> wonder about why
>>>>> or how this hunter managed to find the only
>> two
>>> H's from
>>>>> the fall that
>>>>> were recognized. Over twenty other stones
>>> were
>>>>> studied and this
>>>>> finder supposedly turned up two or three that
>> were
>>> all
>>>>> H's. It's 'funny.'
>>>>>
>>>>> The other possibility that Carl advocated is
>> that
>>> the
>>>>> stones may actually
>>>>> have been found in Wisconsin -- and they may
>> be
>>> part of a
>>>>> new fall that
>>>>> somehow slipped under the radar. He
>>> initially
>>>>> suggested that they were
>>>>> from the fireball widely seen across the
>> Midwest
>>> on May
>>>>> 10th, but, at the
>>>>> time, I had paypal records from Greg that
>> stated
>>> that he
>>>>> had sent Carl the
>>>>> money for the stones as early as April 24th.
>>>>> So we ruled out that possibility..
>>>>>
>>>>> But, I agree; the stones could theoretically
>> have
>>> come from
>>>>> a
>>>>> different fall. The end-cut that I bought
>>> showed no
>>>>> visible signs of
>>>>> weathering. No oxide, no anything.
>>> Given the
>>>>> weather in and around
>>>>> Mifflin at the time of the fall, we can
>> assume
>>> that the
>>>>> stones were
>>>>> picked up within a week or so of having
>>> fallen. No
>>>>> AMS reports of
>>>>> anything in the region for the given
>> timeframe
>>> doesn't
>>>>> disprove
>>>>> anything since meteorites often fall without
>> much
>>> ado,
>>>>> but...two falls
>>>>> in the same place *at the same time?*
>>>>> Granted, it's possible. Not very likely,
>>> though.
>>>>>
>>>>> And you've still got to wonder about why no
>> one
>>> else found
>>>>> any
>>>>> H-chondrites while looking for Mifflin.
>> It's
>>> not like
>>>>> meteorites were
>>>>> laying thickly on the ground. Everyone who
>>> found
>>>>> stones out there put
>>>>> considerable time into hunting -- and they
>> all
>>> found only
>>>>> L5's. So if
>>>>> Carl's source were telling the truth, and he
>> did
>>> find the
>>>>> stones, it
>>>>> seems best to assume that he wasn't hunting
>> in the
>>> Mifflin
>>>>> strewn-field, because, if he were, he would
>> 1)
>>> probably
>>>>> have found
>>>>> L5's, and 2) other people would probably
>> have
>>> found H's as
>>>>> well.
>>>>>
>>>>> The conclusion I draw from this is that the
>> truth
>>> has
>>>>> become
>>>>> well-hidden. What is certain is that I
>> have
>>> been
>>>>> refunded by
>>>>> Bryan, and I know for a fact that Bryan has
>> been
>>> refunded
>>>>> by
>>>>> Michael Cottingham, who has in turn been
>> refunded
>>> by Greg
>>>>> Catterton.
>>>>>
>>>>> What I have heard, however, is that Carl has
>> been
>>> defending
>>>>> the
>>>>> legitimacy of his stones, and is refusing to
>>> refund Greg
>>>>> Catterton.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regardless of whether the material is Mifflin
>> or
>>> another
>>>>> meteorite
>>>>> (from Wisconsin or from NWA -- it doesn't
>> matter),
>>> the
>>>>> simple fact
>>>>> of the matter is that the material sold by
>> Carl
>>> has been
>>>>> shown to be
>>>>> different from how it was advertised, and as
>> such,
>>> he
>>>>> should be
>>>>> willing to accept its return for a refund.
>>> If he
>>>>> wishes to get it
>>>>> analyzed and sell it to others as a new
>> meteorite,
>>> that is
>>>>> his
>>>>> concern.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am fairly certain that Bryan, Michael, and
>> Greg
>>>>> unknowingly sold the
>>>>> material as Mifflin, believing that it was
>> indeed
>>> what they
>>>>> sold it
>>>>> as.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is my 2 cents.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Jason Utas
>>>>>
>> ______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>
Received on Sat 07 May 2011 11:23:03 PM PDT