[meteorite-list] Kalahari lunar vs NWA 5000

From: Darryl Pitt <darryl_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 23:49:58 -0400
Message-ID: <6E8C501F-15A0-4EC0-AFFF-BAF3B9CC67E7_at_dof3.com>

Folks....

NWA 5000 is a spectacular meteorite whose resume did not require enhancing. I wholly agree there is no lunar that's nicer. That said, Kalahari 009 exists ?it's a fact. I am not going to climb into the details other than to share that the owner is a paranoid eccentric who has gone to great lengths to remain anonymous. That's all that is at work here. Nothing nefarious....just put Occam's Razor back into play. In addition, I know of two other lunar masses that are larger than NWA 5000?one reassembled and one intact.




On Jun 7, 2016, at 10:07 PM, Michael Farmer via Meteorite-list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

> I just now realized how I had left out an important piece of the email earlier.
> The Kalahari lunars have never been seen or exhibited publicly. I and many others have serious doubts about even their existence.
> The tiny samples shows in photos show a very ugly lunar. Those could never be compared to NWA 5000 in value or any other way. I forgot to add the name in my last email. Please don't get confused. If anyone claims to have a lunar nicer or larger please put it on the scale and show it. Otherwise it's all just talk.
> Michael Farmer
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
> ______________________________________________
>
> Visit our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/meteoritecentral and 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 Tue 07 Jun 2016 11:49:58 PM PDT