[meteorite-list] Lots of Gold and Meteorites on Heritage Auctions
From: Adam Hupe <raremeteorites_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 01:34:01 -0700
How could it possibly be the main mass when it is claimed to be part of
the NWA 8455 "clan" which consists of 15 names under its many pairings?
The single NWA 8455 stone was reported to weigh 2,814 grams which would
make it the current "main mass" of this pairing group.
This also doesn't explain why much more than 3 complete stones reported
under the La'gad pairing have been placed on the market. The TKW of this
pairing was supposed to be only 338 grams yet this amount has been
It appears unclassified (self-paired) stones have been placed on the
market using the La'gad nomenclature. There are many keeping track of
what is being offered.
On 11/3/2017 12:40 AM, Robert Verish via Meteorite-list wrote:
> Thank you, Peter, for posting again (for a?2nd time)?the link to the MBD entry for the La'gad meteorite.
> It was a simple, but polite, way to point out that all of the questions that have been asked about this meteorite have their answers in that entry.
> It shouldn't be necessary, but now that the dust-up has settled,?I feel compelled to clear away any lingering?misconceptions:
> there is no question, this is the La'gad meteorite
> there is no question who the classifier is, nor what is?the classification
> there is no question who found this meteorite, or where?it was?found
> there is no question who owns this meteorite
> there is no question at all about the provenance of this meteorite
> there is no question that this is the main-mass of the La'gad meteorite.
> The stone in the auction weighs 171grams and has had a sample cut from it, other wise it would weigh 186.24grams. This matches the MBD entry.
> Having the stone called-out in the MBD and having it be the main-mass, and having the type-specimen be from that mass, is a premium for collectors.
> Having the coords recorded in the MBD and having a name (like La'gad)?and not a number?is a premium for collectors, as well.
> Taking everything into consideration, this?Lunar would be a positive addition to?any collection.
> Bob V.
> On ?Thursday?, ?November? ?02?, ?2017? ?06?:?18?:?45? ?PM, Peter Marmet via Meteorite-list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> Adam Hupe wrote via Meteorite-list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>:
>> La'gad doesn't show up in the Meteoritical Bulletin. What institution or scientist examined this exact specimen or is it unofficial or self-paired?
> 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
Received on Fri 03 Nov 2017 04:34:01 AM PDT