Hello Stefen and List, I agree, the metal-rich diogenite (NWA 1827 provisional) is probably the same as your NWA 1882 and was submitted as a mesosiderite. This is what happens when a heterogeneous stone is studied and not all the petrologic boundaries are crossed, no fault of the scientists. That is why there is such a thing as provisional status so that the NomCom can sort out differences in classifications and hopefully come up with the correct one. Just to keep the record straight, we have no interest in the metal-rich diogenite and have never marketed it as such. Since the metal-rich diogenite was confused with one of three of our different mesosiderites we are somewhat aware of what is happening so we thought we would comment.
All the best, Adam and Greg Hupe IMCA 2185 ______________________________________________ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list