[meteorite-list] Fake Norway Rock

From: John Teague <volgems_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:47:12 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Message-ID: <18181933.1397224032553.JavaMail.root_at_mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

The horse is dead! Long live the horse!


-----Original Message-----
>From: Mark Ford <mark.ford at southernscientific.co.uk>
>Sent: Apr 11, 2014 4:52 AM
>To: "Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com" <Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Fake Norway Rock
>
>Sorry that should read: Phil and List,
>
>m.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Mark Ford
>Sent: 11 April 2014 09:51
>To: Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Fake Norway Rock
>
>Chris and list,
>
>No need for personal attacks. - After all wasn't it your good self that said about 'dowsing' many years ago:
>
>>>"First off, let me say that all you naysaying dowser denialists need
>>>to get off your high horses, come down from your ivory towers and
>>>>enter the realm of simple, reproducible, empirical evidence-based
>>>experimental scientific methodology ... >
>
>So where's the [scientific] evidence that the video is fake or not fake? - Let's face it, it looks too good to be true BUT we just can't tell!
>
>
>
>m.
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Joshua Tree Earth & Space Museum
>Sent: 10 April 2014 19:42
>To: Meteorite list
>Subject: [meteorite-list] Fake Norway Rock
>
>Chris,
>
>You need to install and tune up a bullshit detector. You seem awfully gullible. Plausibly explained by the meteorite hypothesis? Maybe to a moron.
>
>
>Phil Whitmer
>
>Joshua Tree Earth & Space Museum
>
>--------------------------------------------
>
>Then you need to tune up your analysis skills. And your knowledge of meteoritics. The video was not falsified, and is hardly "phony". What it shows is plausibly explained by the meteorite hypothesis. Many, perhaps most meteorite falls are not preceded by a significant fireball, and even fewer by acoustics of any sort.
>
>I don't hear many people saying there's a "reasonable chance" this could be a meteorite. I didn't even hear much of that early on. Only that nothing obviously excludes this from being a meteorite. That's a distinction well worth remembering. If this had been trivially rejected from the beginning, no analysis would have been performed, and that would be unfortunate.
>
>And that's getting real.
>
>Chris
>
>______________________________________________
>
>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
>______________________________________________
>
>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 11 Apr 2014 09:47:12 AM PDT