[meteorite-list] A 'Find' of Another Kind - the Vote is In!
From: Anita Westlake <anitawestlake_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 05:04:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1357736683.70738.YahooMailClassic_at_web184406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> That was beautifully written, Kevin. You should write a book! (ha ha). Msy all your Costa Rican nights be filled with stars and box wine. Anita --- On Wed, 1/9/13, Thomas Webb <webbth1 at yahoo.com> wrote: From: Thomas Webb <webbth1 at yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] A 'Find' of Another Kind - the Vote is In! To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com, "Kevin Kichinka" <marsrox at gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, January 9, 2013, 1:03 AM Kevin, Hilarious!? I think I need a box of that wine! Thomas --- On Wed, 1/9/13, Kevin Kichinka <marsrox at gmail.com> wrote: > From: Kevin Kichinka <marsrox at gmail.com> > Subject: [meteorite-list] A 'Find' of Another Kind - the Vote is In! > To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com > Date: Wednesday, January 9, 2013, 12:35 AM > 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 > ______________________________________________ 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 08:04:43 AM PST |
StumbleUpon del.icio.us Yahoo MyWeb |