Hello,
it could be a good idea to include some pictures. However, it could be a
false good idea. Most meteorites are not spectacular and will not be
studied by anyone other than those who make the initial description. Who
is interested in ordinary rusty chondrites? What outstanding science
will be brought by these samples? Is it really important to complicate
the work of the classifiers for these samples? Who will agree to do this
work if the procedure becomes even more demanding?
Cheers,
Jean-Alix
Le 14/06/2020 à 20:55, Peter Marmet via Meteorite-list a écrit :
I have started in Meteorites group discusion that every new classification
should include few photos of specimen….
Excellent idea, Marcin!
It exists for many mets from Antarctica already! Why not for all the newly
classified mets? Including thin section photos!!!
https://tinyurl.com/ybygnu78
BTW: I’m not too fond about facebook policy but facebook is where the meteorite
world takes place!
Cheers,
Peter
______________________________________________
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@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
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@meteoritecentral.com
https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
