I received a sample of Novato for classification not too long after it fell.
I made a thin section, did the microscopy and probe work and classified the
stone. This was the first thing that was done. I am not working on any
paper about the meteorite. I was asked to cut up the small piece I was sent
and then send those pieces to different researchers for the gathering of
additional data. I sent those out and now have almost no sample left at
UCLA save the original thin section. I was told that eventually the
requisite amount would be deposited at UCLA as the type specimen after some
additional research was done on the specimen. My only interest at this
point is to receive the specimen, log it in to the UCLA collection and
inform the NOMCOM that everything is now in order. I'm not holding anything
up.
Alan
Alan Rubin
Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics
University of California
3845 Slichter Hall
603 Charles Young Dr. E
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567
phone: 310-825-3202
e-mail: aeru...@ucla.edu
website: http://cosmochemists.igpp.ucla.edu/Rubin.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Farmer" <m...@meteoriteguy.com>
To: "Carl Agee" <a...@unm.edu>
Cc: "Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral" <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>;
"Robert Verish" <bolidecha...@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
I seem to think this is a control issue. Someone wants total control over
the meteorite. Sad to dominate a meteorite fall.
Never seen this type of action before.
Submission changes nothing about the science or the papers released later.
It is simply the act of registering the meteorite officially. I think they
don't want to release the type specimen or else the receiving institution
(UCLA) or (NASA) will then possibly release papers outside the control of
the "Consortium"?
My two kopeks.
Michael
Sent from my iPhone
On May 1, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Carl Agee <a...@unm.edu> wrote:
I'm having a hard time understanding this "problem" with Novato. Since
when do deposit samples not get analyzed and worked on? Maybe I'm
missing something here but the way I do it, is the sample gets ID-ed
and classified and then if it merits further research that happens
next, in that order. For example, you cannot submit an abstract to
LPSC or MetSoc on an unclassified or provisional meteorite.
Classification is absolutely the first thing that should happen.
Carl Agee
--
Carl B. Agee
Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics
Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences
MSC03 2050
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque NM 87131-1126
Tel: (505) 750-7172
Fax: (505) 277-3577
Email: a...@unm.edu
http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Michael Farmer <m...@meteoriteguy.com>
wrote:
Yes, hunting costs money, lots and lots of it. Ask me, I'm on the other
side of the planet right now and western unions as coming in daily. No
credit cards accepted where I am:)
But we have responsibilities. Pay to play, including getting the type
specimen properly curated. I am in 100% agreement with the noncom on
this one.
Science must come first.
Michael Farmer
Sent from my iPhone
On May 1, 2013, at 7:38 AM, robert crane <rrobb...@msn.com> wrote:
The problem I have is every one should spend their hard earned money in
the field looking for these damn things to ease the people that don't
leave their driveway. I'm sorry before u bitch and complain get off
your ass and not spend time in Stewart Valley or in Franconia getting
DCA crap classified. Work in the field and contribute. Make a
contribution to science before u bitch about other people. Hunting
ain't free.
On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:19 PM, "Richard Montgomery"
<rickm...@earthlink.net> wrote:
One of the stones from this find was "lent" to the NASA team, with an
open mind and naivte perhaps; a situation that definitely shook her by
total surprise and dismay, when another finder of another stone
offered a perspective. She wasn't pleased to learn that she may never
see it again.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Verish"
<bolidecha...@yahoo.com>
To: "Meteorite-list Meteoritecentral"
<meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Novato update
Thanks Rob,
for clearing the air and getting this thread back on track.
And now that the dust has settled, we're back to my original concern:
Why do we have to wait for just the name to be approved?
Here is the question I am posing to the List, stated another way:
If everyone is in agreement with the Jenniskins arrangement, then why
can't the Committee credit UCLA for the type specimen and move forward
with approving at least the name "Novato" (if need be, at least
provisionally)? I mean, what is the difference whether the type
specimen goes first to UCLA, then goes to NASA, or vice-versa? I mean,
for goodness sake, it's NASA we're talking about here.
Why do we have to wait for the results from the consortium before we
know the approved name of this meteorite?
I mean, we didn't even have a consensus classification for Sutter's
Mill, but that name still got approved! We didn't have to wait for the
results of the consortium, then. Why now?
But before I conclude, allow me to state several things
FOR THE RECORD:
Contrary to any unfounded assertions that may get printed on this
List, there is no "problem" getting type-specimens from finders to
researchers:
There were 8 Sutter's Mill finds donated from finders & property
owners.
The name "Sutter's Mill" was approved BEFORE a classification could be
agreed upon and long before the consortium published their results.
There were 2 Battle Mountain specimens voluntarily donated by finders
to researchers. The name "Battle Mountain" was approved 30 days after
the fall. What delay?
Other US falls with "no problems" getting type-specimens:
Mifflin, Lorton, Whetstone Mtns, Ash Creek - no delays in name
approval.
Finders of the "Novato" meteorite were making arrangements to submit
type specimens to researchers, prior to Jenniskins announcement to the
Press that he was submitting the Webber stone as a type specimen. Days
after his announcement is when I finally made my Novato find, and at
that time I never dreamt we would be having this discussion in 2013.
If it becomes necessary, I am prepared (as are other finders) to
submit a type specimen to UCLA. But not until we all have been given a
proper explanation.
-- Bob V.
--- On Mon, 4/29/13, Matson, Robert D. <robert.d.mat...@saic.com>
wrote:
From: Matson, Robert D. <robert.d.mat...@saic.com>
Subject: [meteorite-list] Novato update
To: "Pat Brown" <scientificlifest...@hotmail.com>, "Jim Wooddell"
<jim.woodd...@suddenlink.net>, "Met List"
<meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Monday, April 29, 2013, 8:51 PM
Hi All,
I've been informed by one of the Novato finders that this is
a non-issue.
Dr. Jenniskens has long-since pledged to donate more
than adequate Novato type specimen to UCLA for it to be
approved by the Nomenclature Committee. That it hasn't happened
already is simply because Dr. Jenniskens wished to ensure that all
academic requests for meteoritical material were handled promptly.
29 grams
of the first recovered stone were generously donated by Lisa
Webber to SETI for scientific analysis; of that, whatever is not
consumed
in destructive analyses has been promised to UCLA.
So there is no cause for alarm; people just need to be patient.
--Rob
On Apr 30, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Robert Verish <bolidecha...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Actually, it's still the "Novato" (provisional) meteorite.
It still is not in the Meteoritical Bulletin.
This is the slice that Brien Cook originally cut with the intention
of submitting it to UCLA. But when he read that someone else was
going to supply the type-specimen, he then placed it on eBay.
It would be nice if some Institute or consortium would make an offer
and try to repatriate this slice and make it a type-specimen so that
this US-fall could finally be made "official". All I'm saying is,
this "leaving an official-status hanging-in-mid-air" would never
happen in Canada. They would just simply buy the type-specimen.
It's time for the US to catch-up with Canada. It's time for a
change.
Bob V.
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@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@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@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@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
--
Carl B. Agee
Director and Curator, Institute of Meteoritics
Professor, Earth and Planetary Sciences
MSC03 2050
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque NM 87131-1126
Tel: (505) 750-7172
Fax: (505) 277-3577
Email: a...@unm.edu
http://meteorite.unm.edu/people/carl_agee/
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@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@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
