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

From: Richard Montgomery <rickmont_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 18:59:52 -0700
Message-ID: <FC41A3C4E77E43359737F0EDB4CA81C4_at_bosoheadPC>

Wow. The learning curve seems to remain very steep.

Peter, my above comment isn't meant as a criticism, simply a reality. My
initial interest in meteorites was sparked by the countless meteorwrongs I
encountered before making the decision to study. Having a comprehensive
type collection in hand, reading and reading and reading, and then diving
into advanced texts, allows me to look back into some of my naiive queries,
when I was asking silly questions.

I trust that the wisdom here on this List will be taken to heart, spark your
intrigue, and invite you to start a journey. It's amazing!

No egos in truth. Only egos in blame for wished outcomes.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Matson, Robert D." <ROBERT.D.MATSON at saic.com>
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] A Bunch of Irregular Stones I Found (+How
IThink They May Have Originated)


> Hi Peter,
>
>> I am open to opinions, but, in truth, it is almost an atrocity
>> the way the objects depicted in some, to my own discredit, less-
>> than-stellar photographs can be absolutely dismissed off-handedly,
>> and so quickly!
>
> 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%)].
>
>> Why is it that people think they can gain, or maintain prestige,
>> in a scientific field by failing to qualify their opinions, as
>> such.
>
> I think in most cases people aren't trying to be boastful of
> their pronouncements -- they are honestly trying to be truthful
> and helpful. Resist the temptation to shoot the messenger.
>
>> By the same token that Ms. Black has suggested I read Korotev
>> on meteorwrongs, I would suggest some of you read material,
>> perhaps even from Freud, discussing "the ego" in order to
>> understand why you wouldn't, at least, qualify, your assertions,
>> to some extent, by saying, "I am nearly certain," or "rather
>> sure," because you must know you are fallible ...
>
> I would counter that Freud's ego can work both for and against
> you. I'm sure you are aware that there are a disturbing number of
> people who are willing to believe outlandish things in the face
> of ample evidence to the contrary. (I'm not saying you fall into
> this category.) The bottom line is that if you are looking for
> an expert opinion on the meteoritic possibilities of a rock
> based solely on images presented, there is no more authoritative
> online group from which you can get an instant and reliable
> response than this Meteorite List.
>
> Best wishes,
> Rob
>
> ______________________________________________
>
> 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 Fri 22 Mar 2013 09:59:52 PM PDT