[meteorite-list] A 'Find' of Another Kind - the Vote is In!

From: John Lutzon <jl_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 01:03:14 -0500
Message-ID: <FD51A56C709F46E7865F816AA04077BB_at_Home>

Great read!, Kevin

Perfect "out of the Box" composition.

John Lutzon

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Kichinka" <marsrox at gmail.com>
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 12:35 AM
Subject: [meteorite-list] A 'Find' of Another Kind - the Vote is In!


Team Meteorite:

The wind is howling to the stars on a chilly (22*C/72&F) night here on
the central plateau of Costa Rica.

Thanks to the miracle of modern refrigeration, I've just utilized the
'last breast' from Thanksgiving to make Turkey Chowder for dinner. As
a single guy living alone, there's probably some symbolism there.

To work off the enzymes and growth hormones knowingly consumed in that
last breast, I stepped out on my patio with a glass of Chilean wine I
poured out of a box. The second I opened the door, the choir of
crickets cut off their chorus.

"Hey, it's just me. Sing on!" I requested in Spanish.

Bueno. "Chirp, chirp, chirp...." cantaban los grillos.

Even the insects are friendly here. I like it.

While wishing with all my might that Steve of Chicago can find a
partner to exchange a "Gao with sexual orientation, flow lips and a
rollover line" for a copy of THE Bob Haag's Catalogue from 1985 (and
hoping, too, that the prices are 'still in effect'), I pondered the
good Dr. Jeff Grossman's work to refine a 'fall', going where no man
has gone before.

Pull the tab-top off of your box of wine and join me under the windy
stars while I review how this played out on the m-list, what was until
now the uncontested definition of a meteorite 'fall'.

Hey, hey. This is a classy discussion. I know its poured from a box,
but no Dixie cups, OK? Only 'Glass' glass.

First the gauntlet was thrown. Note the conviction of Jeff's opening
three word volley....

"In all seriousness....

... I have considered refining, or at least qualifying the definition
of "fall." The categories I've considered are these, and the
definitions are first passes:

Observed fall: observed to fall, either visually or with instruments,
and collected soon after the event. The event was well documented.
Physical evidence associated with the collected meteorites is consistent
with a fresh fall, or, when collection does not occur immediately,
directly points to a fall at the time of the observed event.

Unobserved fall: No observations were made of a fall event, but physical
evidence conclusively points to a fall on a specific date or within a
very narrow range of dates.

Probable fall: In these cases, there was a well-documented meteor event
with characteristics consistent with a meteorite fall, followed by the
collection of meteorites some time later. There is a strong likelihood
that the meteorite fell in the observed event, but physical evidence is
not fully conclusive.

Possible fall: The same situation as a probable fall, but there is
significant doubt about whether the meteorite is connected to the event
or about the reliability of the observations of the event.

Doubtful fall: The same situation as a possible fall, but there is a
high degree of doubt.

This was all suggested by the circumstances surrounding the Bene(a)
and (b) meteorites, which I would have put in the "possible fall"
category, if such a thing existed.

Jeff "

*******************************************************************************************
Ships may pass quietly in the night, but the list threw anchor on this
one and prepared to send broadsides.

The esteemed and most respected Anne M. Black (is it true that the 'M'
stands for 'meteorite'?) came down on the 'logical side' and supported
Jeff's new terminology. The Most Excellent Paul Swartz put on the same
uniform and ran a lap for the team.

But Michael Farmer fired the first volley - "I find this new attempt
to change terminology disturbing. I have hundreds of old catalogs from
the top museums and dealers from more than 200 years ago till today,
all of them list falls and finds. None of them discuss unobserved
falls as an acceptable alternative. Are we really ready to just accept
anything thrown out there, and watch as all manner of BS is used to
discredit hundreds of years of accepted terminology?

Adding.... "Any label I get describing a meteorite as an "unobserved
fall" will be promptly thrown where it belongs, in the trash heap of
schemes and scams.

Well into his second box of red, Jim Wooddell exclaimed in support, "I
don't often agree with Michael Farmer, but when I do, I am drinking!
Stay thirsty my friends!

Good advice, Jim!

John Cabassi "sees no reason to change."

Bill Kies came up with his best contribution ever when he explained "
If all finds are falls and all falls are finds, even though all falls
haven't been found and all finds have been found, a fall has to be
found before it becomes a fall or a find, but a find is just a find
even though it fell, so everything that's found fell and everything
has to fall to be found and a fall has to be a find before it's a fall
at all and never the twain shall meet?"

The crickets sense a hit song and will call you in the morning, Bill.

But seriously, Thomas Webb writes, "The terms "find" and "fall" are
concise and understood by everyone in the
meteorite community. I don't see the need to introduce terms that may
lead to more ambiguity."

Michael Blood raises the bid three oo-googles, "I am sure there are
many, many other times when a meteorite is found within 24 hrs of the
Fall so that date of the fall is known, though the fall was
technically "unobserved" - but I see no reason to become so specific
other than in notations of the details - and most certainly not as a
separate "classification," as what has already been noted: all "finds"
were "unobserved falls" if you use the term loosely.

Upon which Mike of the 'Galactic Meteorite Minis and Fossil Fabricator
Factory'- noticing approaching marketing anomalies announced -
"Attention: sales of all unobserved falls are hereby suspended until
further notice."

"So are the sales of unobserved finds" hastily added Werner Schroer of
Australia, sitting in a tub of ice while watching a box of unobserved
Henburys melt to vapor in the Nullarbor heatwave.

CG took the opposite tack, seeing opportunity, and offered an
assortment of rare, museum-quality, 'about to fall' specimens at
incredible and special introductory prices. They were sold-out before
they even hammered the ground.

But then the list took a turn for practicality.

"In other words, if it ain't broke, don't change it" wrote Gary
Fujihara, deep in meditation while double-tasking, stringing fragrant
flower leis, a surprise bonus gift for his many meteorite clients.

(Surgically) Masked man Michael Mulgrew took a precautionary medical
stance on the issue, "This new term only exists on one web page. May
it stay in quarantine there. "

Bob Very Verish simply stated statute - "This form and the Met Soc
"Guidelines for Meteorite Nomenclature" is replete with the terms
"fall" and "find", and nowhere is there any reference to a category
that could be called "unobserved falls. The closest that I could find
was, "Otherwise leave blank."

Just like most lines of my Federal tax return.

Linton Rohr knows what he sees, "I observed a large quantity of
specimen ID cards, before printing my own. Fall vs. Find seemed to be
well established, generally accepted, and just plain traditional."

Greg Hupe was all for simplicity - "I find that I prefer 'fall' and
'find' as well, straight to the point. Now I
better get back to work before I fall behind any more!..".

..... as was space-saving Mendy - "I like the conciseness of Fall
versus Find - It's easier to fit and write on a specimen card."

'Greenie" Jodie Reynolds is for conserving every possible electron and
posits that 'falls and finds' simply be reflected as digital entries
'0' and '1'.

Roman Jirasek, he of the best museum ID labels, simultaneously wonders
and concludes, 'you can't put a date on an unobserved fall can you?
You can definitely put a date on a find."

Finally, our group therapists observed....

"People can argue about many things. My question is - why?" - Mike Miller

Inventing a scary new creature, Martin Altmann prays, "Please folks,
don't make such a bugbear out of that, like it has happened with the
so-called "hammer falls". I think, meteorites are already expensive
enough."

Fred Hall reminds us of the Wisdom of the Ages -

"An "unobserved fall" is two words to describe the one word that has
been used for a century - "Find".

The one word "Find" is good enough for the Catalogue of Meteorites.

It was good enough for Harvey Nininger.

It is what I shall always use."

Me too, Fred.

I can only wonder about the relevance to our discussion of something
we already have called 'weathering factor'.

Owners of my book, "The Art of Collecting Meteorites" can turn to page
53 (I knew this book would eventually be good for something - ad)
where I cite Wlotska et al. (1993) - "A weathering scale for ordinary
chondrites".

The intent of their work was to guess terrestrial age. He offered two
scales, the first described the effects of chemical alteration with
"WO - a fresh fall" to "W6 - massive replacement of silicates by clay
minerals and oxides." His second scale estimated terrestrial ages with
"W0 = <5,000 years" to W6 = 30,000 - 50,000 years."

Sometimes even with a complicated thing like meteorites, whenever
possible, keepin' it simple, works. Here's a modern example.

Some thing fell from the sky. Bedouin warriors were roused from their
sleep in Al-Qaida-controlled northern Mali by an explosion they
confused with anti-aircraft fire. Invading NATO forces looking for a
lost drone pick up some rocks the next year on top of the dessicated
skeletons of two donkeys, left like "asses in a moment". The specimens
go to the lab, they check out as L, H, LL, Carbonaceous, whatever, get
their faelite %, get their O-isotopes plotted, get their Wlotska's W =
numbers.

In most cases I think we can call it, 'handled.'

But smarter folks than me will decide this issue. I'm glad Jeff is
trying something new. Better everyday in every way.

Next up, "Tucson 2013 - Driving v Flying (but is teleportation now
cost effective?)

>From Nine Degrees North...
Just me and the crickets singing to the stars.

Kevin Kichinka
Rio del Oro, Santa Ana, Costa Rica
www.theartofcollectingmeteorites.com
"The Global Meteorite Price Report - 2013" email me now for your copy
______________________________________________

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 Wed 09 Jan 2013 01:03:14 AM PST