[meteorite-list] Definitions of types of falls and finds

From: Shawn Alan <shawnalan_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 15:52:40 -0700
Message-ID: <20140506155240.e8713c95af9984a493c5db01816d4c10.f69b2ee281.wbe_at_email22.secureserver.net>

Hello Mendy and Listers

Mendy glad you posted what Jeff suggested.. Kinda makes since, but at
the end of the day all someone has to do is put that info on the
nomenclature page in description of the meteorite. I think fall or find
is perfect. All finds are falls at one point in time and all fall are
finds, cause someone found the meteorite. But the reason behind
fall/find is to document what was witnessed falling from the sky or if
it was just found. At any case, this is making my brain hurt, but I
think fall or find is perfect and don't need any other definitions to
explain those events. We have enough categories and classifications with
meteorites as is, do we really need more??? :)

Shawn Alan
IMCA 1633
ebay store http://www.ebay.com/sch/imca1633nyc/m.html
Website http://meteoritefalls.com

[meteorite-list] Definitions of types of falls and finds

Mendy Ouzillou Tue, 06 May 2014 12:45:37 -0700

I've been thinking about the email Jeff sent out some time back and
to propose a slightly different set of names and simplify the
You can see Jeff's original email below. I think we have all struggled
defining meteorites that are neither observed falls nor finds and part
the reason is that we were conflating too many ideas.
Observed fall: Observed to fall, either by eyewitnesses or with
The event was well documented. Physical evidence associated with the
collected meteorites is consistent with a fresh fall, or, when
does not occur immediately, the strewn field location (if there is one)
appearance taking into account weathering associated with time on the
ground, may be directly attributed to the fall.
Correlated fall: No material was found immediately after an observed
but later analysis and physical evidence conclusively points to an
event on a specific date or within a very narrow range of dates.
Find: Material was found and no event can be conclusively associated
with an
observed event. A find that appears like a fresh fall is still a find if
observed event can be associated with it.
Feedback welcome.
Mendy Ouzillou

-----Original Message-----
From: meteorite-list-boun... at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-boun... at meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 6:26 AM
To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Picture of the Day

I should add: my first two categories are types of falls, whereas the
three are types of finds.


On 1/5/2013 8:12 AM, Jeff Grossman wrote:
> In all seriousness, I have considered refining, or at least qualifying
> the definition of "fall." The categories I've considered are these,
> and the definitions are first passes:
> Observed fall: observed to fall, either visually or with instruments,
> and collected soon after the event. The event was well documented.
> Physical evidence associated with the collected meteorites is
> consistent with a fresh fall, or, when collection does not occur
> immediately, directly points to a fall at the time of the observed event.
> Unobserved fall: No observations were made of a fall event, but
> physical evidence conclusively points to a fall on a specific date or
> within a very narrow range of dates.
> Probable fall: In these cases, there was a well-documented meteor
> event with characteristics consistent with a meteorite fall, followed
> by the collection of meteorites some time later. There is a strong
> likelihood that the meteorite fell in the observed event, but physical
> evidence is not fully conclusive.
> Possible fall: The same situation as a probable fall, but there is
> significant doubt about whether the meteorite is connected to the
> event or about the reliability of the observations of the event.
> Doubtful fall: The same situation as a possible fall, but there is a
> high degree of doubt.
> This was all suggested by the circumstances surrounding the Bene?ov
> (a) and (b) meteorites, which I would have put in the "possible fall"
> category, if such a thing existed.
> Jeff
> On 1/4/2013 8:57 PM, Michael Farmer wrote:
>> I find this new attempt to change terminology disturbing. I have
>> hundreds of old catalogs from the top museums and dealers from more
>> than 200 years ago till today, all of them list falls and finds. None
>> of them discuss unobserved falls as an acceptable alternative.
>> Are we really ready to just accept anything thrown out there, and
>> watch as all manner of BS is used to discredit hundreds of years of
>> accepted terminology?
>> My private collection focuses on witnessed falls, with date and time
>> and science to back it up.
>> I am not interested in another group which would include every
>> meteorite ever to have fallen, since they did actually all fall at
>> some point.
>> Well, I guess Anne can delete her birthday fall calendar page since
>> now we can simply put every NWA on any date you choose to believe it
>> might have possibly fallen:).
>> Michael Farmer
>> Sent from my iPad
>> On Jan 4, 2013, at 6:47 PM, "Mike Bandli" <fuzzf... at comcast.net> wrote:
>>> If a meteorite falls from the sky and no one is there to hear it,
>>> does it make a sound?
Received on Tue 06 May 2014 06:52:40 PM PDT

Help support this free mailing list:

Yahoo MyWeb