[meteorite-list] Franconia AREA (was, Re: ...terminology...)

From: Larry Atkins <thetoprok_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:04:28 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <8D0133CA7140C39-FFC-5139_at_webmail-d164.sysops.aol.com>

Bob, List,

Ok, Franconia is very convoluted. (What a great place!)

Time to have a few of my (L) finds from there classified. It's so
confusing, now I have no idea what any of my meteorites from the area
are! I'd like to see a visual aid, side by side, the various stones
sliced and labeled with classifications.


Sincerely,
Larry Atkins
?
IMCA # 1941
Ebay?alienrockfarm
?


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Verish <bolidechaser at yahoo.com>
To: Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral
<meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 29, 2013 1:57 am
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Franconia AREA (was, Re:
...terminology...)


In my original post I neglected to add a link to the Hutson paper.
Here is the link to the "News" page from the Met. Bull. Database:

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/MetBullNews.php?id=1

On that MetBull webpage is a link to the Melinda Hutson paper:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/maps.12062/abstract

It was my hope that my post would draw some interest and get more
people to read
this recent M&PS article. (2013 March, Vol.48 No.3 pg.365)

The thrust of my (partial) review was that many long-held assumptions
about the
Franconia area have been overturned by this paper.? Actually, a better
phrase
would be, "many sacred-cows have been slaughtered".
My post was a plea that if you were going to put in print some
observation about
the Franconia Area, you had better read this paper first.

I am in agreement with what is at the heart of Erik's post, so I don't
want his
point missed because of a technicality with his reference to the Gold
Basin
Fall.? I consider myself as a student of that strewn-field and,
although there
are many different meteorites found in the Gold Basin AREA, nowhere in
the
literature has anything other than L4-6 Fa:24?1 been attributed to the
Gold
Basin fall.

Prior to reading this recent paper, I was in complete agreement with
Larry about
the relative terrestrial age of the L-chondrites, particularly the
"fresh-appearing" BM002 & BM003 stones. But that was just another
cow-shaped
assumption. Terrestrial age-dating for 10 stones from the Franconia
Area were
presented in this paper, and aside from the lone H6 stone (BM001) all
of the
L-chondrites dated older than the H-falls.
Here is the relative order of falls:

1. BM 001 ~20kyr ago
2. BM 003 ~11kyr ago
3. Palo Verde Mine ~10kyr ago
4. BM 004 ~ 8kyr ago
5. BM 005 ~ 7kyr ago
6. BMW 4.0?0.7kyr ago
7. Franconia "fell recently"

Looking forward to hearing from others who have read this article.

Have a good night,
Bob V.

General List Policies:
  6. Make sure you can back up statements with -facts and references-


--- On Sun, 4/28/13, Mark <minador at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Mark <minador at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Franconia AREA (was, Re:
...terminology...)
> To: "Larry Atkins" <thetoprok at aol.com>
> Cc: "meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com"
<meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Date: Sunday, April 28, 2013, 5:15 PM
>
> I agree with Eric too,
> but not for the different dates that Larry refers to
> (which is mentioned in the same article).?
> After seeing many diverse rock types in a same small rock mass,
> I've always felt it's too simplistic to say
> different class. = different fall.
>
> I would go with the dating in this specific case that
> indicates different fall events though.
>
> Sent from my iPod Touch
>
>
> On Apr 28, 2013, at 4:44 PM, Larry Atkins <thetoprok at aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Eric,
> >
> > Though I'm not in total agreement with you,
> > that is a good point.
> > What it comes down to is terrestrial age.
> > That would settle it.
> > For instance, the L chondrites at Franconia are
> > quite obviously from a more recent event,
> > I'm certain they are not related.,?
> > they are distinctly different in hand
> > and look fresher, and far rarer..
> >
> > Almahitta - Sita, among others, says they are not
> always homogeneous. You make good points
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Larry Atkins
> >?
> > IMCA # 1941
> > Ebay alienrockfarm
> >?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Erik Fisler <phxerik at yahoo.com>
> > To: Meteorite List <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> > Sent: Sun, Apr 28, 2013 7:11 pm
> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Franconia AREA (was, Re:
> ...terminology...)
> >
> >
> > You mean all those H3-5's are paired?!? Lord.
> >
> > I think people forget that there are LL's, L's and H's
> > found from the Gold Basin fall.
> > To say that a mass from a parent body large
> > enough to have a strewn field
> > of this size and TKW should be one homogeneous
> > petro.-type is silly.
> > This business of trying to classify every stone as a
> > different fall for what
> > ever selfish or perverse reason along with having a
> > personal attachment to the
> > outcome of the over all conclusion is ridiculous and
> > completely against the
> > scientific method.
> >
> > How many of those Y[ucca]DCA or what ever H3-5's have been
> > found outside the mapped strewn field? And how far?
> >
> > -Erik Fisler
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Apr 26, 2013, at 11:02 PM, Robert Verish <bolidechaser at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi All,
> >> Just read another article in the 2013 March edition
> of M&PS,
> >> "Stones from Mohave County, Arizona:
> >> Multiple falls in the 'Franconia strewn field' "
> >> by Melinda Hutson, et al.
> >>
> >> There is much to digest from this 5-author paper
> >> that is 25 pages long.
> >> What with 14 stones being studied and 7 pairings to
> >> be described, there is a lot to chew on.
> >>
> >> Here's something to chew on.? According to this paper,
> >> "Much unclassified
> >> material that has been distributed [sold] as
> >> 'Franconia' may not be from the Franconia fall".?
> >> The authors make a case that
> >> more than half of the finds made in the "Franconia area"
> >> are paired to the Buck Mountain Wash fall.
> >>
> >> It has taken 10 years, but these findings show that
> >> I was justified in my belly-aching about all of the
> >> self-pairing that was occurring back then.??
> >> It was on this very List that I was strongly criticized
> >> for this, and many dealers that thought they knew better
> >> defended their God-given right to name their stones
> >> after the Franconia meteorite that I got classified.?
> >>
> >> A closer look at the MetBull images for Franconia shows
> >> that very few of them are from the Franconia fall.
> >> I offer no apologies for taking great satisfaction
> >> in the fact that I am now vindicated.
> >>
> >> The paper goes on to show that every Sacramento Wash
> >> numbered meteorite is paired to Buck Mountain Wash,
> >> which effectively has resulted in the demise of
> >> the SaW DCA and hastened the formation of the Yucca DCA.
> >>
> >> As I said, if you read this paper, there's a lot
> >> more to digest.
> >> It's late and I'm thinking about chewing on an antacid pill.
> >>
> >> -- Bob V.
> >>
> >> --- On Thu, 4/25/13, Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> From: Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell at gmail.com>
> >>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk - IMB
> or SMB? The
> > nomenclature of
> > Melts.
> >>> To: "Meteorite List" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> >>> Date: Thursday, April 25, 2013, 5:29 PM
> >>> Hi All!
> >>> Just a point of information.? I just read
> Dr. Rubin's paper,
> >>> "Multiple melting in a four-layered
> barred-olivine chondrule with
> >>> compositionally heterogeneous glass from LL3.0
> Semarkona"
> >>> Whew!? That's a title for a paper!
> >>> While we are on the subject of melts, I thought
> I'd point-out
> >>> this paper.
> >>> Enjoyed reading it the first time....actually
> understood some
> >>> of it and will read it once again after
> thinking about it
> >>> for a while.
> >>> You folks might enjoy reading it when you get a
> chance!
> >>> Thanks Alan!!
> >>>
> >>> Jim Wooddell
> >> ++++++++++++++
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >>
> >> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> >> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > ______________________________________________
> >
> > Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> >
> > Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> ______________________________________________
>
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>


______________________________________________

Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

  
Received on Mon 29 Apr 2013 06:04:28 PM PDT