[meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt?

From: Anne Black <impactika_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 14:50:34 -0500
Message-ID: <14bb7fdba82-17d7-1882_at_webprd-m80.mail.aol.com>

Thank you Frank.

And here are 2 more:

Northwest Africa 8655 ** found 2014 (Northwest Africa) LL5-melt breccia 6.44 kg

Northwest Africa 1701 ** NWA 1701 Ordinary chondrite (LL5, impact melt breccia)

Amazing what you find when you search the Met.Database.!

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Cressy <fcressy at prodigy.net>
To: Graham Ensor <graham.ensor at gmail.com>; Anne Black <impactika at aol.com>
Cc: meteorite list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>; Michael Farmer <mike at meteoriteguy.com>
Sent: Mon, Feb 23, 2015 8:24 am
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt?
  
   Paragould also has a significant amount of melt breccia areas, and an LL5 to boot.
      
  
   Frank
    
        On Monday, February 23, 2015 4:07 AM, Graham Ensor via Meteorite-list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
      
The Met Bulletin description contains the sentence "A significant
portion (1/3) of the stones consist of a dark, fine-grained impact
melt containing mineral and chondrule fragments."
      
Graham
      
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:13 AM, Anne Black via Meteorite-list
< meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> Frankly,
> If Chelyabinsk is not an impact-melt then frankly I don't know what is!
> Look for yourselves:? http://www.impactika.com/chely-slice.jpg
> And dozens of other pictures right on the Met. Database.
> And the classification was done by the Vernadsky Institute.
>
>
> Anne M. Black
> www.IMPACTIKA.com
> IMPACTIKA at aol.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Farmer via Meteorite-list < meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> To: < meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> < meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Sun, Feb 22, 2015 9:38 pm
> Subject: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt?
>
>
> Steve and Quinn Arnold are telling us on Facebook that Chelyabinsk is not an impact-melt breccia, and that Tony Irving confirms that. Is that true? Funny when I google it, hundreds of papers discuss the metric ton of known Chelyabinsk as all being impact-melt material. Of course, those of us who went there and have a large amount of Chelyabinsk can tell you that it sure seem full of clasts, and melt pockets and shock veins. Since his kickstarter rock seems to be the only known LL5 melt (according to the (met. Bull.)and Chelyabinsk seems to be nothing of the sort, it is amazing to me.
> Comments? Anyone in this list, scientist or collector know something I don't, that Chelyabinsk is a "non" impact-melt meteorite?
> Micael Farmer
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
> ______________________________________________
>
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
       
>
>
> ______________________________________________
>
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
       
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
       Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
       https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
      
      
      
     
     
    
   
  
Received on Mon 23 Feb 2015 02:50:34 PM PST