[meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved, not just Novato)

From: Adam Hupe <raremeteorites_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:33:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1367361235.14654.YahooMailNeo_at_web122006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

Hi Mike and List,

No need to apologize, I agree completely with the following statement you made in your earlier post:

******************************************************************************
Everybody wins when the specimen is classified and approved via an
open, transparent, and "official" manner.
*******************************************************************************

To me, dealers who self-pair, steal nomenclature used to describe another meteorite and piggyback off of those who follow the rules are committing a great disservice to the rest of the community.

One or two dealers think nothing of plagiarizing copyrighted scientific documents that describe official meteorites in a effort to add an air of authenticity to their untested material!? These self-paired meteorites are virtually worthless because they have no real name, cannot be published in scientific papers and collectors will not maintain any real long-term value.? Everybody loses except the dealer who was either too cheap or too lazy to follow the rules.

Fortunately, I would estimate that 99% of community sees the value in following the rules,

Adam


?


?




----- Original Message -----
From: Galactic Stone & Ironworks <meteoritemike at gmail.com>
To: Meteorite List <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 2:51 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update (All recent falls unapproved,
        not just Novato)

Hi List,

I wasn't pointing fingers or trying to refer specifically to Novato.
I may have come off that way, I am afraid.? I meant in general with
all falls, and this recent mention of Novato jogged my memory about
the recent spate of unapproved falls.? I had meant to post to the List
a couple of weeks ago about this same issue, but I got side-tracked
and forgot.? The Novato discussion reminded me.? I'll post something
to the List to that effect.

My main goal is the same as most - to see Novato classified.
Regardless of who found what or who has what specimen, I'd just like
to see it in the Met Bull and in MAPS journals.? That won't happen
until the kink in the hose is worked out, so to speak.? As was pointed
out - look how quickly Battle Mountain got approved.? Novato fell
over a densely populated urban area, Battle Mountain fell over
underpopulated BLM land.? Both are OC's.? Why so quick with one and
not the other?? Same with that Alabama fall (Addison?) - another
stoppage in the pipeline somewhere.

We need to encourage people to come forward and get finds classified,
and not make it more difficult.? If we publicly nitpick and clobber
people for not handling the classification properly, then it will make
others reluctant to come forward.? We should be positive and say -
look, who cares why it took so long for this particular fall, let's
just be happy it is getting done now.? Everybody still wins.

Some of us collectors are the nitpickers.? I want something official
to put on my labels for my falls collection.? I have no dog in this
fight other than science.

Best regards and happy huntings for all,

MikeG




> --- On Tue, 4/30/13, Galactic Stone & Ironworks <meteoritemike at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> From: Galactic Stone & Ironworks <meteoritemike at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
>> To: "Michael Farmer" <mike at meteoriteguy.com>
>> Cc: "Alan Rubin" <aerubin at ucla.edu>, "Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral"
>> <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>, "Matson, Robert D."
>> <ROBERT.D.MATSON at saic.com>, "Robert Verish" <bolidechaser at yahoo.com>
>> Date: Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 12:24 PM
>>
>> Agreed, somebody needs to cough up a
>> piece to consolidate the type
>> specimen and satisfy the requirements for publication in the
>> Met Bulletin.? That is how it should be.? Until such a
>> specimen is analyzed, submitted, and approved,
>> it is not a meteorite, it is a rock
>> that is suspected to be a meteorite.? Giving it any
>> unofficial name
>> does not make it a meteorite, unless that name is approved
>> by NonCom.
>>
>> Everybody wins when the specimen is classified and approved
>> via an
>> open, transparent, and "official" manner.
>>
>> There are too many falls that are not approved yet.
>> Going back to the
>> year 2000, there are seventeen (17) falls that are not
>> officially
>> approved yet.? They come from all corners of the world
>> and some are
>> very well documented, but have not been approved for various
>> reasons.
>> For example, someone earlier mentioned that Canada does not
>> drag it's
>> feet on classifications and would simply buy the type
>> specimen.? Well,
>> there is the Montney fall from 2005 that is lost somewhere
>> in the
>> system.? Canada is usually pretty quick, but why hasn't
>> Montney been
>> approved?? Is there doubt about the fall in some way,
>> or is it a
>> problem similar to Novato where it is a bonafide fall but
>> has not been
>> approved for logistical reasons?
>>
>> Collectors and probably some scientists are eager for a few
>> recent
>> falls to become approved.? Until these meteorites are
>> approved, they
>> cannot be published in most peer-reviewed journals.
>> And until they
>> are approved, there will always be an element of reluctance
>> on the
>> behalf of some collectors.
>>
>> Zunhua?? No doubt there.? Penetrated a house and
>> was documented
>> thoroughly.? Why hasn't this one been classified
>> yet?? What are the
>> Chinese waiting on?? Nobody else outside China will
>> submit it for
>> classification because it is a scientific courtesy, so will
>> it remain
>> in limbo forever because .... ?
>>
>> Katol?? It's distinctive and on the market.
>> Again, there is no doubt
>> that it is a fall.? Let's hope GSI submits it so it can
>> be published.
>> Collectors want to know.? It may be a meteorite that is
>> interesting to
>> science as well.
>>
>> Draveil?? What's the hold up on this one?
>>
>> Oslo?
>>
>> The list -
>>
>> Jan 15, 2013 - "Planeta Rica" (unofficial) (ordinary
>> chondrite?) : Colombia
>> Feb 11, 2012 - "Huangzhong/Xining" (unofficial) (L6
>> chondrite?) : China
>> Mar 01, 2012 - "Oslo" (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) :
>> Norway (Hammer)
>> May 03, 2012 - "Diplo" (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?) :
>> Pakistan
>> May 22, 2012 - "Katol" (unofficial) (achondrite) : India
>> (Hammer)
>> Jun 03, 2012 - "Comayagua" (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite)
>> : Honduras (Hammer)
>> Jul 08, 2012 - "Jalangi" (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?)
>> : India
>> Oct 12, 2012 - "Beni Yacoub" (unofficial) (ordinary
>> chondrite?) : Morocco
>> Oct 17, 2012 - "Novato" (unofficial) (L6 chondrite) :
>> California USA(Hammer)
>> Oct 30, 2012 - "Addison" (unofficial) (ordinary chondrite?)
>> : Alabama USA
>> Dec 16, 2012 - "Algeria" (unofficial) (LL chondrite?) :
>> Algeria
>> Jul 11-12, 2011 - "Draveil/Essonne?" (unofficial) (H
>> chondrite?) :
>> France (Hammer)
>> May 01, 2010 - "Breja/Taouz" (unofficial) (LL6 chondrite?) :
>> Morocco/Algeria
>> Mar 01, 2009 - "Cartersville" (unofficial) (ordinary
>> chondrite) :
>> Georgia USA (Hammer)
>> Apr 12, 2008 - "Zunhua" (unofficial) (L4 chondrite?) : China
>> (Hammer)
>> Sep 07, 2007 - Guadalajara (L or LL3 chondrite?) : Mexico
>> (Hammer)
>> Jul 17, 2005 - "Montney" (H6 chondrite?) : Canada (Hammer)
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> MikeG
>>
______________________________________________

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 Tue 30 Apr 2013 06:33:55 PM PDT