[meteorite-list] WANTED: small unclassified type 3's

From: Rob Matson <mojave_meteorites_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 23:19:28 -0700
Message-ID: <000001ce6346$f762c930$e6285b90$_at_cox.net>

Hi William,

> Michael, No need to get all anal about the verbage, this ain't a Supreme Court
hearing.
> I guess I could have inserted the word "possible", maybe even used the word
"potential",
> but thankfully there's reasonable people who've displayed the capability of
understanding
> what I was getting at without the use of crystal clear lawyer speak such as
what's written
> in a software User Agreement. Go ahead and critique every line and word that I
wrote,
> I'll be the first to agree that it's probably wrought with problems, but I'm
not going to
> rewrite it, nor am I going to take draft's of future documents to the english
department
> of the nearest college for correction before posting.

You're being overly reactionary in your reply to Michael. He raised a perfectly
valid
point: there is absolutely no way you can determine with confidence that an
uncut
meteorite (especially from NWA) is unequilibrated (type-3).

> By the way, I can tell the difference between a Murchison and NWA 2086, and
would
> you beleive I can do so without the use of analysis.

That is a completely different matter.

> Similarly, there just so happens to be the existence of some stones which can
be
> determined to be type 3 without the use of analysis ...

No -- not "similarly." William, you need to be disabused of this notion, unless
your
"some stones" is extremely restrictive.

> ... so you mean to tell me that you'd have trouble being able to tell if a
stone
> such as Begga was a type 3 or not without the use of analysis?

YES, ABSOLUTELY, if that stone is uncut. No meteoriticist would ever claim an
uncut stone was unequilibrated without seeing a thin section.

Cheers,
Rob
Received on Fri 07 Jun 2013 02:19:28 AM PDT