Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt?
Thank you Frank. And here are 2 more: Northwest Africa 8655 ** found 2014 (Northwest Africa) LL5-melt breccia 6.44 kg Northwest Africa 1701 ** NWA 1701 Ordinary chondrite (LL5, impact melt breccia) Amazing what you find when you search the Met.Database.! Anne M. Black www.IMPACTIKA.com impact...@aol.com -Original Message- From: Frank Cressy To: Graham Ensor ; Anne Black Cc: meteorite list ; Michael Farmer Sent: Mon, Feb 23, 2015 8:24 am Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt? Paragould also has a significant amount of melt breccia areas, and an LL5 to boot. Frank On Monday, February 23, 2015 4:07 AM, Graham Ensor via Meteorite-list wrote: The Met Bulletin description contains the sentence "A significant portion (1/3) of the stones consist of a dark, fine-grained impact melt containing mineral and chondrule fragments." Graham On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:13 AM, Anne Black via Meteorite-list < meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> wrote: > Frankly, > If Chelyabinsk is not an impact-melt then frankly I don't know what is! > Look for yourselves: http://www.impactika.com/chely-slice.jpg > And dozens of other pictures right on the Met. Database. > And the classification was done by the Vernadsky Institute. > > > Anne M. Black > www.IMPACTIKA.com > impact...@aol.com > > > -Original Message- > From: Michael Farmer via Meteorite-list < > meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> > To: < meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> < > meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> > Sent: Sun, Feb 22, 2015 9:38 pm > Subject: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt? > > > Steve and Quinn Arnold are telling us on Facebook that Chelyabinsk is not an > impact-melt breccia, and that Tony Irving confirms that. Is that true? Funny > when I google it, hundreds of papers discuss the metric ton of known > Chelyabinsk as all being impact-melt material. Of course, those of us who > went there and have a large amount of Chelyabinsk can tell you that it sure > seem full of clasts, and melt pockets and shock veins. Since his kickstarter > rock seems to be the only known LL5 melt (according to the (met. Bull.)and > Chelyabinsk seems to be nothing of the sort, it is amazing to me. > Comments? Anyone in this list, scientist or collector know something I don't, > that Chelyabinsk is a "non" impact-melt meteorite? > Micael Farmer > > > > > Sent from my iPad > __ > > Visit 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 the Archives athttp://www.meteorite-list-archives.com > Meteorite-list mailing list >Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com >https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives athttp://www.meteorite-list-archives.com Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt?
The Met Bulletin description contains the sentence "A significant portion (1/3) of the stones consist of a dark, fine-grained impact melt containing mineral and chondrule fragments." Graham On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:13 AM, Anne Black via Meteorite-list wrote: > Frankly, > If Chelyabinsk is not an impact-melt then frankly I don't know what is! > Look for yourselves: http://www.impactika.com/chely-slice.jpg > And dozens of other pictures right on the Met. Database. > And the classification was done by the Vernadsky Institute. > > > Anne M. Black > www.IMPACTIKA.com > impact...@aol.com > > > -Original Message- > From: Michael Farmer via Meteorite-list > To: > > Sent: Sun, Feb 22, 2015 9:38 pm > Subject: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt? > > > Steve and Quinn Arnold are telling us on Facebook that Chelyabinsk is not an > impact-melt breccia, and that Tony Irving confirms that. Is that true? Funny > when I google it, hundreds of papers discuss the metric ton of known > Chelyabinsk as all being impact-melt material. Of course, those of us who > went there and have a large amount of Chelyabinsk can tell you that it sure > seem full of clasts, and melt pockets and shock veins. Since his kickstarter > rock seems to be the only known LL5 melt (according to the (met. Bull.)and > Chelyabinsk seems to be nothing of the sort, it is amazing to me. > Comments? Anyone in this list, scientist or collector know something I don't, > that Chelyabinsk is a "non" impact-melt meteorite? > Micael Farmer > > > > > Sent from my iPad > __ > > Visit 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 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 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
Re: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt?
Frankly, If Chelyabinsk is not an impact-melt then frankly I don't know what is! Look for yourselves: http://www.impactika.com/chely-slice.jpg And dozens of other pictures right on the Met. Database. And the classification was done by the Vernadsky Institute. Anne M. Black www.IMPACTIKA.com impact...@aol.com -Original Message- From: Michael Farmer via Meteorite-list To: Sent: Sun, Feb 22, 2015 9:38 pm Subject: [meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt? Steve and Quinn Arnold are telling us on Facebook that Chelyabinsk is not an impact-melt breccia, and that Tony Irving confirms that. Is that true? Funny when I google it, hundreds of papers discuss the metric ton of known Chelyabinsk as all being impact-melt material. Of course, those of us who went there and have a large amount of Chelyabinsk can tell you that it sure seem full of clasts, and melt pockets and shock veins. Since his kickstarter rock seems to be the only known LL5 melt (according to the (met. Bull.)and Chelyabinsk seems to be nothing of the sort, it is amazing to me. Comments? Anyone in this list, scientist or collector know something I don't, that Chelyabinsk is a "non" impact-melt meteorite? Micael Farmer Sent from my iPad __ Visit 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 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
[meteorite-list] Chelyabinsk is not a impact-melt?
Steve and Quinn Arnold are telling us on Facebook that Chelyabinsk is not an impact-melt breccia, and that Tony Irving confirms that. Is that true? Funny when I google it, hundreds of papers discuss the metric ton of known Chelyabinsk as all being impact-melt material. Of course, those of us who went there and have a large amount of Chelyabinsk can tell you that it sure seem full of clasts, and melt pockets and shock veins. Since his kickstarter rock seems to be the only known LL5 melt (according to the (met. Bull.)and Chelyabinsk seems to be nothing of the sort, it is amazing to me. Comments? Anyone in this list, scientist or collector know something I don't, that Chelyabinsk is a "non" impact-melt meteorite? Micael Farmer Sent from my iPad __ Visit 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
