[meteorite-list] "Great Discovery" maybe ;-) NOT

From: Anne Black <impactika_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 22:11:59 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <8CFFA39EDF7CD1C-1C88-23B89_at_Webmail-m121.sysops.aol.com>

Yes, Elton, certainly bogus.
But I wonder if it is in anyway connected to another email I found in
my spam box today. Here is most of it:

"We are writing you regarding a special offer. We think you have
already heard of the Tissint meteorite, the Martian meteorite that
crashed in Morocco in July 2011 and the Natural History Museum has
bought one of its pieces lately (1.1 kg).
In fact, That 1.1 kg stone of Tissint Martian meteorite is just a small
piece of the mother Tissint meteorite which we still have safe and
sound. The latter is about 800-1000 times bigger than the meteorite
which is at the Natural History Museum gallery at the moment. We
recovered the whole Martian rock soon after it fell, then we hid it in
a professional way following the advice tips of some experts to prevent
any contamination,so if you would like to buy from us, contact us
through our email address: meteoritebusiness at gmail.com
Reply only if interested please,"

Well, I am not interested. But 800-1000 times bigger than the 1.1kg
piece would make it 900 to 1100 kg mass.
About the same size than that the one in that announcement.
Coincidence? Same scam?

Oh, and BTW, they want to sell it as one piece! No the price is not
mentionned.
Did anyone else get that email?


Anne M. Black
www.IMPACTIKA.com
IMPACTIKA at aol.com


-----Original Message-----
From: MEM <mstreman53 at yahoo.com>
To: Anne Black <impactika at aol.com>; meteorite-list
<meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>; COMeteoriteClub
<COMeteoriteClub at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Mar 28, 2013 8:00 pm
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] "Great Discovery" maybe ;-) NOT


It has bogus written all over it.? Here is a big why-- 387 kg exceeds
the mass
of ejectable material from the surface of Mars by about 380? kgs. The
problem is
the "Goldielocks conundrum:? Not too small-not too large but just
right".? A
size small too small might make escape velocity but, may be too small
to survive
entry.? The launching wack has to be just right-- too hard and the
target gets
vaporized. Too large a a target rock and the inertia results in melting
entirely
before it can get moving.? The "not too small--not too large" envelope
is
theoretically between approx. 2kg up to 5-7(?) kg sized chunks at the
surface
which survive the "just right"-- sized impactor.?


To fit this "find" scenario, multiple rocks--all most identical in
size, adding
up to 387 kg is statistically impossible in that no less than 76x10kg
sized
rocks would have to have been gently blasted from the surface of Mars,
fly in
formation through a perfect trajectory all arriving as a meteor storm
loosing
not more than half their mass during entry and every last stone would
have to
have been recovered.
What we believe we know about orbital physics says this is impossible.?
We have
already ruled out the possibility of a single mass making it into orbit
so this
387 TKM could not be just a few stones-- and really be from Mars.


Any single stone in this recovery(sic) exceeding 5-7kg(no ablation
loss) is
automatically over the physical limit for a? max-sized Martian
meteorite as I am
going by memory.? Someone might want to consult McSween's Meteorites
and their
Parent Bodies to see is calculations. I though he placed a limit of
around 2?kg
for recovered stone but I believe we did recover a 3-4 kg Martian. Some
inquiring mind might want to post the largest single mass or TKW for a
single
Martian meteorite.?? Note this doesn't rule out the paired falls we
have where
multiple hand -sized stones were recovered over a very large area.

The fact that the levels of copper, silver, and gold are discussed is
another
read flag.? I don't keep up with what is commercially mine-able ore but
for
copper I assume it has to be 5 or more oz per ton for copper and? I
don't
remember any meteorite chemistry that had more than a few ppb of any of
those
metals.? The sulfate type ore deposit has yet to be identified on Mars
but those
are even more fragile than silicate deposits.? Oh and where is the zinc
this is
after all a sulfate type ore occurrence according to the press release?

The only Glyn Howard I can find a reference to is Glyn Howard, science
teacher/meteoritics scientist, ... Successful Music Teacher and Author
Continues
Streak of Popular Kids' Books... He has not ever published a peer
reviewed
classification for a meteorite that I can find but the press release
says he
classified it himself...? In addition to having bogus written all over
it, I can
detect the smell of Curry in there somewhere....


Elton



>________________________________
> From: Anne Black <impactika at aol.com>
>To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com;
COMeteoriteClub at yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 8:37 PM
>Subject: [meteorite-list] "Great Discovery" maybe ;-)
>
>Just in case you missed this "great" announcement:
>
>http://world.einnews.com/247pr/337148
>
>Enjoy!
>
>
>Anne M. Black
>www.IMPACTIKA.com
>IMPACTIKA at aol.com
>
>______________________________________________
>
>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 Thu 28 Mar 2013 10:11:59 PM PDT