[meteorite-list] A Bunch of Irregular Stones I Found (+How I Think They May Have Originated)

From: Peter Richards <pedrichards_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 20:16:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CAENymwB3UiJku54=mZ2D5UphPR9461cUYQ9ByMRm3MvYTd=3YA_at_mail.gmail.com>

Gary D. Matson said:
"In this particular case, your pictures are not at fault. They show
enough that apparently a number of experienced members here are
willing to offer strong opinions (even if not always quantifying
it) that what you have is not meteoritic. [If I were to put a
number on my own certainty, having just looked at your pictures
for the first time, I'd feel safe in pegging it at the 4-sigma
level (99.994%)].:
-Gary, I said "qualify," not "quantify," in case you didn't notice
that. It is a suggestion. It's true that sometimes the risk of failing
to qualify an argument is negligible, or "nil," and, in those cases
qualifying them may seem absurd. However, "in all likelihood" isn't
that difficult to write, even twice, and I think it would be a step in
the right direction, in all scientific pursuits, my own included, if,
everyone whether or not a designated expert, or person of great
experience, were more cautious with their language. The saying goes
"pride comes before the fall," and you can realize that easily, even
if you haven't in fact been proven wrong, when you make a realization
that you are still able to question your own idea. Maybe it is taken
for granted that these are all theories, shared herein. If that's the
case, what's the harm in re-stating the fact? I think everyone may be
better off, even when one is rather sure, if the risk is not taken,
but to each his own, regarding that.

Graham Ensor said:
"why ask one of most experienced group of meteorite
enthusiasts and experts (all of which are passionate about helping
others to search for new finds and material) for an opinion based on a
visual analysis/photos of your samples if you are certain for yourself
and are willing to dismiss a unanimous verdict..."if you are that
certain they are meteorites then you should submit samples to an
experienced university for scientific analysis

-Graham, I shared the material in order to facilitate some discussion
about the possibility that meteorites are depicted therein. I am not
completely certain "for myself," and, in this case, haven't made the
mistake of directly alleging that I am so. I was hoping for a more
"scientifically" accurate conversation, as I stated. Perhaps if, for
example, you cared to state explicitly that it was your opinion, you
would encourage yourself to verbalize those internal processes which
led to your conclusion, which, might put off a final consensus, or
"unanimous verdict" as you've put it, and call for more effort in
ascertaining the "truth," but with the advantage of significantly
reduced chances of a reaching a "false positive" stance. For example,
you might have responded to my written material as well, or anything
specifically. If you wanted to help, you might have suggested why a
folded portion of an outer layer of stone, revealing an inner layer of
a different color, is common on non-meteorites, such as "slag", or
encouraged me to photographically document that feature more
attentively by opining that no such fold was clearly visible. After
all, as per Doug Schmitt, (I infer) we could, possibly, be responsible
for extinction of life on this planet due to a meteorite strike, or
response to a meteorite-strike in the form of nuclear warfare, if we
fail to appropriately qualify our assertions.
Regarding the idea that I should submit samples to a university for
analysis: it is a consideration, but if anyone had an "educated" and
fully convincing opinion to offer here, maybe I would have been
dissuaded from pursuing that, but again, I haven't ascertained that
what I've seen here has been especially constructive, so I'll have to
'play it by ear.' Herer is a link to a set better documenting what
apparently is a surface that's been peeled back, and which folded:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/67498324 at N08/8580635967/in/set-72157633065874890/
Peter Richards
P.S. Thank you anyone who can stand me having to hone my photography
skills "on the fly" for this.
Received on Fri 22 Mar 2013 09:16:33 PM PDT