Hey there list, not many of you seem to understand my post, so please let me
explain my self and please take the time to read the entire post. : )
I (my opinion) think Portales Valley is to unique to be lumped into the H6
category, H6's are common, Portales Valley is a one of a kind. I think I
understand that it is it's chemical composition that makes it an H6, but I
still do not think it would of hurt to add something (anything) to it's
classification to say that it is different. I was actually looking at
Norton's second great book and saw the picture of Portales Valley on page
78. What a beautiful meteorite, it brings up strong emotions every time I
see that picture! In an attempt to understand it's H6 classification, I made
a post. I think scientist's do some strange things sometimes, and I figured
this is one of them. : )
Like always, I can not post about anything with out my "anti-fan club"
writing me nasty emails. I received this from Mr. X (in it's entirety)
"Might I suggest the next time you have a question like this that you use
the GOOGLE search engine? Just type in the name ["Portales Valley"
classification] and you will have all the correct information at your
fingertips. This will also help you prevent looking like a fool. After
all, this topic of Portales Valley has been discussed on the Met. List
several times already. Do you really believe that ANYONE would classify
this spectacular meteorite incorrectly because they're lazy? Give us all a
break....please"
I replied with; (in it's entirety)
" I was hoping for an explanation that I could understand, which I
got.: ) I do not understand scientists and their way of thinking, (I am no
scientist) and I do not know if they would do something out of laziness,
just like I don't know why they needed 900 lbs of the Old Woman meteorite
for study......."
Mr. X replied (in it's entirety)
"They didn't need 900 lbs of the Old Woman for study...why don't you get
that story straight too. It appears you are the lazy one - get on the
internet and do some of your own research...you don't have to be a
scientist to do that! "
Ok then, I had quoted Norton's Rocks from Space when I said they needed
900lbs for study. Mr. X said I was wrong and should have researched it
before I said it, well I did! So in fact, Mr. X was saying Norton was
wrong!
I get so sick of being bombarded with nasty emails from these same guys
every time I post something they think is stupid, I had to do something!
So, I figured I would post about how Mr. X told me in so many words that
Norton was wrong and so was I. So I posted it as the book must be wrong, if
you look something up in Rocks from Space, you can not trust the info Norton
gave, if you do not believe me, ask Mr. X. Mr. X is actually a very
respected collector, list member and very knowable when it comes to
meteorites, I just got tiered of his insults.
I was not trying to insult Norton and his two great books in any way,
just want to show you all that someone had told me I was wrong when I used
Norton's info!
I was wrong for the post, I just did it out of anger and frustration, I am
sorry.
In all fairness to Mr. X, he told me after my post that what he meant was
that they did not need 900lbs, they wanted 900lbs out of greed.
Thanks, Tom
peregrineflier <><
IMCA #6168
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
