Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
for your news the new italian meteorites exit in the next Met.Bull. and stop to say this idiocy without any tests in your hands. they are months that I wonder who puts in these turn falsehood but you not give this informations, therefore better that you of it quiet bushels From: Michael Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mauro Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 22:56:42 -0700 Wow, advice from the guy who fakes new Italian meteorite falls. I think we can ignore just about anything you say Matteo. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Mauro Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 10:10 PM Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 if is for this other pieces of olivine digenite its available from the moroccan people, but not for this is right copy the complete text of a auction and put in another auction, or if you put and write (C) Hupe From: stan . [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 04:14:23 + Almost forgot, the french also have an olivine diogenite now, around 200g iirc... From: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:27:47 -0700 Dear List, Enough is really enough, Bob Evans not listening to what was posted by people in know is now using the NWA 1877 designation, the number reserved for an Olivine Diogenite. We paid for the study of this material, reserved a NWA number for it and made it official by submitting it to the NomCom for a vote. A regular Diogenite or even terrestrial stones could easily be confused so be careful about purchasing an Olivine Diogenite from anybody who did not have his material studied in a lab, approved by the NomCom and issued its very own number. Off List, does anybody have Bob Evans address so that it will save us time in serving the legal documents we had prepared, this has gone far enough. Wishing everybody who adheres to good standards and plays by the rules well, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Personalizza MSN Messenger con sfondi e fotografie! http://www.ilovemessenger.msn.it/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Ricerche online più semplici e veloci con MSN Toolbar! http://toolbar.msn.it/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Hello All, Farmer wrote, Wow, advice from the guy who fakes new Italian meteorite falls. I think we can ignore just about anything you say Matteo. Mauro-Matteo wrote.something, something, new meteorite. Mark coughs, and accidently pastes the following http://www.meteoritearticles.com/coltessera.html Mark Bostick www.meteoritearticles.com Please visit, www.MeteoriteArticles.com, a free on-line archive of meteor and meteorite articles. __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
this for close the mouths to a person in this list continue to say fake informations on this meteorite and on me. From: MARK BOSTICK [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 01:21:20 -0500 Hello All, Farmer wrote, Wow, advice from the guy who fakes new Italian meteorite falls. I think we can ignore just about anything you say Matteo. Mauro-Matteo wrote.something, something, new meteorite. Mark coughs, and accidently pastes the following http://www.meteoritearticles.com/coltessera.html Mark Bostick www.meteoritearticles.com Please visit, www.MeteoriteArticles.com, a free on-line archive of meteor and meteorite articles. _ Ricerche online più semplici e veloci con MSN Toolbar! http://toolbar.msn.it/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
ah...Lido di Venezia and Argentera probably exit in the next Met.Bull. for the Mareson di Zoldo and the Piave River I am under waith Vincent Jacques write to Sara Russel for explain the analysis done in Belgiumbut I do not, probably Vincent its death, why he never have answer to Sara and its pass many months. From: MARK BOSTICK [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 01:21:20 -0500 Hello All, Farmer wrote, Wow, advice from the guy who fakes new Italian meteorite falls. I think we can ignore just about anything you say Matteo. Mauro-Matteo wrote.something, something, new meteorite. Mark coughs, and accidently pastes the following http://www.meteoritearticles.com/coltessera.html Mark Bostick www.meteoritearticles.com Please visit, www.MeteoriteArticles.com, a free on-line archive of meteor and meteorite articles. __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Filtri antispamming e antivirus per la tua casella di posta http://www.msn.it/msn/hotmail __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
on 9/12/04 11:10 PM, Mauro Daniel at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: better that you of it quiet bushels - Well said! (?) __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Hello List I can understand that when someone classyfy 200g as NWA4000 then other samples above this 200g can be or not the same material. But where is border beetween meteorites that can be sell without classification under similar NWA numbers and other, than can't be sold using NWA numbers that someone own ?? If I CAN'T use NWA1110 and NWA1877 then maybe someone can explaine me why I CAN sell H chondrites from Burkina as Gao-Guenie without classification every kilo for example and noone screaming that Im Thief and sell untested material ? Where is the owner of Gao-Guenie name ? Why he is not screeaming ? Why noone screaming that Bob CANT sell his black peas as Amgala, becouse Ambala is a NWA number from Dr No with TKW 15kg and amgala from Bob is material not include in this 15kg? Or maybe this working only for meteorites 100$/g and more and everything below this price is not worth to write long letters? Or only this is only law for Hupes meteorites ? Only If we have any rules then why they fit only to rare meteorites and for example I can sell ANYTHING as Nwa869 and noone will say anything ? Ofcourse there is also another case. Its a confidence and honesty of every dealer. For example me, If I know that THIS IS Gao then I sell it as Gao. We have a good proverb in poland: If noone know what is the matter, then matter is money PS. This email is not against Hupes. I like You guys. -[ MARCIN CIMALA ]-[ I.M.C.A.#3667 ]- http://www.Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PolandMET.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.Gao-Guenie.com GSM +48(607)535 195 [ Member of: Polish Meteoritical Society ] __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
I'd say it's all a matter of integrity and honesty. _ Best regards, Bernhard Rendelius Rems CEO RPGDot Network This outgoing mail has been virus-checked. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Meteoryt.net Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 12:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello List I can understand that when someone classyfy 200g as NWA4000 then other samples above this 200g can be or not the same material. But where is border beetween meteorites that can be sell without classification under similar NWA numbers and other, than can't be sold using NWA numbers that someone own ?? If I CAN'T use NWA1110 and NWA1877 then maybe someone can explaine me why I CAN sell H chondrites from Burkina as Gao-Guenie without classification every kilo for example and noone screaming that Im Thief and sell untested material ? Where is the owner of Gao-Guenie name ? Why he is not screeaming ? Why noone screaming that Bob CANT sell his black peas as Amgala, becouse Ambala is a NWA number from Dr No with TKW 15kg and amgala from Bob is material not include in this 15kg? Or maybe this working only for meteorites 100$/g and more and everything below this price is not worth to write long letters? Or only this is only law for Hupes meteorites ? Only If we have any rules then why they fit only to rare meteorites and for example I can sell ANYTHING as Nwa869 and noone will say anything ? Ofcourse there is also another case. Its a confidence and honesty of every dealer. For example me, If I know that THIS IS Gao then I sell it as Gao. We have a good proverb in poland: If noone know what is the matter, then matter is money PS. This email is not against Hupes. I like You guys. -[ MARCIN CIMALA ]-[ I.M.C.A.#3667 ]- http://www.Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PolandMET.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.Gao-Guenie.com GSM +48(607)535 195 [ Member of: Polish Meteoritical Society ] __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Dear Marcin and List, if NWA4000 has a total known weight of 200 g, it would be a little strange, if somebody offers 500 g of NWA4000 for sale. In my opinion the correct way would be that the seller offers the material aspossibly paired with NWA4000 and provides a thin section of the possibly paired material for an examination. Otherwise every collector could classify his meteorites and sell it as NWAxyz. The statemet It looks just the same wouldn't be enough for me as a buyer. Particulary at high-priced meteorites. As a dealer I will have all possibly paired stones of NWA- rare types examined in future by a seperate thin section and I will have the Tkw corrected in the MetBull, if I get paired stones. This seems to me to be a good solution at the moment. I think, if a collector buys a slice of a high-priced meteorite, he has a right to know the exact informations about the specimen. Best regards, Stefan Stefan Ralew SR-Meteorite Collection Berlin/ Germany www.meteoriten.com - Original Message - From: Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 12:35 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello List I can understand that when someone classyfy 200g as NWA4000 then other samples above this 200g can be or not the same material. But where is border beetween meteorites that can be sell without classification under similar NWA numbers and other, than can't be sold using NWA numbers that someone own ?? If I CAN'T use NWA1110 and NWA1877 then maybe someone can explaine me why I CAN sell H chondrites from Burkina as Gao-Guenie without classification every kilo for example and noone screaming that Im Thief and sell untested material ? Where is the owner of Gao-Guenie name ? Why he is not screeaming ? Why noone screaming that Bob CANT sell his black peas as Amgala, becouse Ambala is a NWA number from Dr No with TKW 15kg and amgala from Bob is material not include in this 15kg? Or maybe this working only for meteorites 100$/g and more and everything below this price is not worth to write long letters? Or only this is only law for Hupes meteorites ? Only If we have any rules then why they fit only to rare meteorites and for example I can sell ANYTHING as Nwa869 and noone will say anything ? Ofcourse there is also another case. Its a confidence and honesty of every dealer. For example me, If I know that THIS IS Gao then I sell it as Gao. We have a good proverb in poland: If noone know what is the matter, then matter is money PS. This email is not against Hupes. I like You guys. -[ MARCIN CIMALA ]-[ I.M.C.A.#3667 ]- http://www.Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PolandMET.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.Gao-Guenie.com GSM +48(607)535 195 [ Member of: Polish Meteoritical Society ] __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Regarding the different procedure for e.g. NWA / Gao-Guenie - this issue was addressed in an email by Jeff Grossman dated Sept. 9, 2004 (see below). Gao-Guenie can be treated like Allende or Holbrook in this context as it doesn't apply to areas of dense meteorite concentration. Cheers, Jörn EMAIL BY JEFF GROSSMAN - 09.09.2004 -- The official policy of the Meteoritical Society, as determined by its Nomenclature Committee, is that the name NWA 1110 only refers to the material described under that name in Meteoritical Bulletin no. 86, which has a total weight of 118 g. No other material should be called by that name. It is acceptable and routine, however, for people to make statements indicating that various numbered stones may be paired (although I would be cautious about believing such statements unless they appear in the Bulletin or other scientific publications). All new NWA stones, even if apparently paired with something else, must get their own numbers. This is the rule that applies to meteorites collected in areas of dense meteorite concentration, including all of those known as NWA. Note that this is NOT the same rule that applies if you find another piece of Holbrook or Allende... those would inherit the same name unless they could be proven to be separate meteorites. The Committee is considering a new rule that would allow a new NWA stone to be paired with NWA 1110. Under this rule, the new stone would have to be given a provisional NWA number of its own, NWA . It would have to be characterized by an expert, who would have to submit the evidence for pairing to the NomCom. If accepted, and if the type specimen requirement based on the aggregate mass has been satisfied, we would announce that NWA was paired with NWA 1110, thereby increasing the TKW by a certain amount. NWA would become an official synonym for NWA 1110. This rule has not yet been adopted (it was open for public comment in the early summer). jeff -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Meteoryt.net [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Montag, 13. September 2004 12:35 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello List I can understand that when someone classyfy 200g as NWA4000 then other samples above this 200g can be or not the same material. But where is border beetween meteorites that can be sell without classification under similar NWA numbers and other, than can't be sold using NWA numbers that someone own ?? If I CAN'T use NWA1110 and NWA1877 then maybe someone can explaine me why I CAN sell H chondrites from Burkina as Gao-Guenie without classification every kilo for example and noone screaming that Im Thief and sell untested material ? Where is the owner of Gao-Guenie name ? Why he is not screeaming ? Why noone screaming that Bob CANT sell his black peas as Amgala, becouse Ambala is a NWA number from Dr No with TKW 15kg and amgala from Bob is material not include in this 15kg? Or maybe this working only for meteorites 100$/g and more and everything below this price is not worth to write long letters? Or only this is only law for Hupes meteorites ? Only If we have any rules then why they fit only to rare meteorites and for example I can sell ANYTHING as Nwa869 and noone will say anything ? Ofcourse there is also another case. Its a confidence and honesty of every dealer. For example me, If I know that THIS IS Gao then I sell it as Gao. We have a good proverb in poland: If noone know what is the matter, then matter is money PS. This email is not against Hupes. I like You guys. -[ MARCIN CIMALA ]-[ I.M.C.A.#3667 ]- http://www.Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PolandMET.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.Gao-Guenie.com GSM +48(607)535 195 [ Member of: Polish Meteoritical Society ] __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Sorry, my inteligen mail program send this too early :)) So I think, the best what Adam or Greg can do now to prevent selling any paired or unpaired legal or illegal, tested or not tesed samples of NWA1877 is to buy all remaining samples of Olivine Diogenite from Morocco (Habibi and Co) , classify them and add them to orginal NWA1877 TKW or produce another unnecessary NWA number. This will definitelly end NWA1877 storry. For Bob Evans case I think that he should make a thin section, send it to classification and compare datas with NWA1877 to be sure if this is the same material or not. But there is question if the same material can have the same number if its really the same ? Who knows Or just simply compare thin section NWA1877 with his diogenite. How many Olivine diogenites is now known? 2, 3, 4 ?? This is not L6 so pairing should be not difficult. My two oliwines to this case. -[ MARCIN CIMALA ]-[ I.M.C.A.#3667 ]- http://www.Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PolandMET.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.Gao-Guenie.com GSM +48(607)535 195 [ Member of: Polish Meteoritical Society ] - Original Message - From: Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 12:35 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello List I can understand that when someone classyfy 200g as NWA4000 then other samples above this 200g can be or not the same material. But where is border beetween meteorites that can be sell without classification under similar NWA numbers and other, than can't be sold using NWA numbers that someone own ?? If I CAN'T use NWA1110 and NWA1877 then maybe someone can explaine me why I CAN sell H chondrites from Burkina as Gao-Guenie without classification every kilo for example and noone screaming that Im Thief and sell untested material ? Where is the owner of Gao-Guenie name ? Why he is not screeaming ? Why noone screaming that Bob CANT sell his black peas as Amgala, becouse Ambala is a NWA number from Dr No with TKW 15kg and amgala from Bob is material not include in this 15kg? Or maybe this working only for meteorites 100$/g and more and everything below this price is not worth to write long letters? Or only this is only law for Hupes meteorites ? Only If we have any rules then why they fit only to rare meteorites and for example I can sell ANYTHING as Nwa869 and noone will say anything ? Ofcourse there is also another case. Its a confidence and honesty of every dealer. For example me, If I know that THIS IS Gao then I sell it as Gao. We have a good proverb in poland: If noone know what is the matter, then matter is money PS. This email is not against Hupes. I like You guys. -[ MARCIN CIMALA ]-[ I.M.C.A.#3667 ]- http://www.Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PolandMET.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.Gao-Guenie.com GSM +48(607)535 195 [ Member of: Polish Meteoritical Society ] __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Stephan said: snip ... I think, if a collector buys a slice of a high-priced meteorite, he has a right to know the exact informations about the specimen. Yeah, I agree with that one, how many of us have paid over large sums for material, only to get a slice in a plastic bag with no origin info what so ever!? What we need, is a standard meteorite record card with the history of the specimen on it, (and if the rock gets cut, the card gets copied and the new owner/info gets added to it). Certainly with Lunar and Martian stuff, it might be a good idea.. at least it could be traced almost back to the original finder/purchaser. (and it used to be called a 'LABEL' in my day.. :) Best Mark __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
What I do (I know it isn't a cure but will certainly help sometimes to keep track of the material I own): If I buy something, I record from whom I bought it. When I sell something, I record to whom I sell and add a letter to the sold piece, asking the new owner to keep a record about source and buyer (if he resells it) as well. I did so from the first piece I bought up to today. However, I do not pass on labels. I make my own when I resell. _ Best regards, Bernhard Rendelius Rems CEO RPGDot Network This outgoing mail has been virus-checked. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mark ford Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 4:38 PM To: Meteorite List Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Stephan said: snip ... I think, if a collector buys a slice of a high-priced meteorite, he has a right to know the exact informations about the specimen. Yeah, I agree with that one, how many of us have paid over large sums for material, only to get a slice in a plastic bag with no origin info what so ever!? What we need, is a standard meteorite record card with the history of the specimen on it, (and if the rock gets cut, the card gets copied and the new owner/info gets added to it). Certainly with Lunar and Martian stuff, it might be a good idea.. at least it could be traced almost back to the original finder/purchaser. (and it used to be called a 'LABEL' in my day.. :) Best Mark __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Good idea Bernd. People like to make their own labels, for obvious reasons, unfortunately that's when all the history of the specimen is lost! But if we had a standard record card, as well though. Best, Mark -Original Message- From: Bernhard Rendelius Rems [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 September 2004 16:13 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 What I do (I know it isn't a cure but will certainly help sometimes to keep track of the material I own): If I buy something, I record from whom I bought it. When I sell something, I record to whom I sell and add a letter to the sold piece, asking the new owner to keep a record about source and buyer (if he resells it) as well. I did so from the first piece I bought up to today. However, I do not pass on labels. I make my own when I resell. _ Best regards, Bernhard Rendelius Rems CEO RPGDot Network This outgoing mail has been virus-checked. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mark ford Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 4:38 PM To: Meteorite List Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Stephan said: snip ... I think, if a collector buys a slice of a high-priced meteorite, he has a right to know the exact informations about the specimen. Yeah, I agree with that one, how many of us have paid over large sums for material, only to get a slice in a plastic bag with no origin info what so ever!? What we need, is a standard meteorite record card with the history of the specimen on it, (and if the rock gets cut, the card gets copied and the new owner/info gets added to it). Certainly with Lunar and Martian stuff, it might be a good idea.. at least it could be traced almost back to the original finder/purchaser. (and it used to be called a 'LABEL' in my day.. :) Best Mark __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Regarding the different procedure for e.g. NWA / Gao-Guenie - this issue was addressed in an email by Jeff Grossman dated Sept. 9, 2004 (see below). Gao-Guenie can be treated like Allende or Holbrook in this context as it doesn't apply to areas of dense meteorite concentration. but what about stones like nwa 869? technically each one of them nees it's own nwa number and must be classified... my argument against the current guidelines is such: if a person were to submit 'x' new find comprising of many fragments of a meteorite, classification can be done based upon a representative thin section of only 1 fragment (or even a few tinsections) - even if there are many MANY fragements to the find. all of the fragments get the same nwa number with little or no testing done to them. now if more material if found in the exact same place, by the same people, and is the exact same rare classification as the orginal find - but it's found after the original stuff is published - then the new material must have thermoluminecence studies, cosmic ray exposure, and oxygen isotopse data taken before the material will be considered paired to the orignial find. I challange anyone to give me a valid scientific reason why material sumbited before publishing can all be considered nwa xxx based upon a cursory visual examination - yet material found after a write up in the met bul requires exhaustive additional testing to qualify as a pairing - testing that science make take years to complete for even the most exotic meteorites such as martian and lunars. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Hello Stan and List. Yes, this was exactly the point that we made in an earlier posting (The Probem with Reductionism ad Infinitum). The members of this list have not yet received any response from Adam on this matter and we wonder if he or anyone else have a reasonable explanation for this apparent double standard. -John Dawn stan . wrote: Regarding the different procedure for e.g. NWA / Gao-Guenie - this issue was addressed in an email by Jeff Grossman dated Sept. 9, 2004 (see below). Gao-Guenie can be treated like Allende or Holbrook in this context as it doesn't apply to areas of dense meteorite concentration. but what about stones like nwa 869? technically each one of them nees it's own nwa number and must be classified... my argument against the current guidelines is such: if a person were to submit 'x' new find comprising of many fragments of a meteorite, classification can be done based upon a representative thin section of only 1 fragment (or even a few tinsections) - even if there are many MANY fragements to the find. all of the fragments get the same nwa number with little or no testing done to them. now if more material if found in the exact same place, by the same people, and is the exact same rare classification as the orginal find - but it's found after the original stuff is published - then the new material must have thermoluminecence studies, cosmic ray exposure, and oxygen isotopse data taken before the material will be considered paired to the orignial find. I challange anyone to give me a valid scientific reason why material sumbited before publishing can all be considered nwa xxx based upon a cursory visual examination - yet material found after a write up in the met bul requires exhaustive additional testing to qualify as a pairing - testing that science make take years to complete for even the most exotic meteorites such as martian and lunars. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Dear John and List, The word apparent double standard would apply here. If you feel it is ok to pick numbers at random for additional finds when it comes to NWA and not others, why is this not happening with the Antarctic, Sahara, DAGs, SAUs and Dhofars? Why is it that when a Martian meteorite was announced as NWA 1068 some dealers are using a number that describes a pairing instead (NWA 1110)? Could it be that they are too lazy to apply for their own numbers, have their material studied and submitted for vote. NWA 1110 is not a catchall for additional finds, it is an official set of tested pebbles that happen to be Martian. Using the name NWA 869 is meaningless because like Kem Kem it has become a catchall stone. I would go as far as to say, you would better off selling NWA 869 as unclassified because an unclassified stone seems to be worth more on the open market these days. This one of the reasons I object strongly when it comes to rare material. All the best, Adam - Original Message - From: John Birdsell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: stan . [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 8:53 AM Subject: Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello Stan and List. Yes, this was exactly the point that we made in an earlier posting (The Probem with Reductionism ad Infinitum). The members of this list have not yet received any response from Adam on this matter and we wonder if he or anyone else have a reasonable explanation for this apparent double standard. -John Dawn stan . wrote: Regarding the different procedure for e.g. NWA / Gao-Guenie - this issue was addressed in an email by Jeff Grossman dated Sept. 9, 2004 (see below). Gao-Guenie can be treated like Allende or Holbrook in this context as it doesn't apply to areas of dense meteorite concentration. but what about stones like nwa 869? technically each one of them nees it's own nwa number and must be classified... my argument against the current guidelines is such: if a person were to submit 'x' new find comprising of many fragments of a meteorite, classification can be done based upon a representative thin section of only 1 fragment (or even a few tinsections) - even if there are many MANY fragements to the find. all of the fragments get the same nwa number with little or no testing done to them. now if more material if found in the exact same place, by the same people, and is the exact same rare classification as the orginal find - but it's found after the original stuff is published - then the new material must have thermoluminecence studies, cosmic ray exposure, and oxygen isotopse data taken before the material will be considered paired to the orignial find. I challange anyone to give me a valid scientific reason why material sumbited before publishing can all be considered nwa xxx based upon a cursory visual examination - yet material found after a write up in the met bul requires exhaustive additional testing to qualify as a pairing - testing that science make take years to complete for even the most exotic meteorites such as martian and lunars. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Hello Adam, Stan and List. Adam-I think you missed the point that Stan and I were trying to make. We all agree that it would be best if every single stone found in the desert could be independently classified, the problem is that there are not enough resources or people willing to do so. The question was basically, how can fragments of some potential meteorite be paired with a classified fragment that has been properly analyzed and microprobed, when the remaining fragments have not even had a window polished into them, let alone been microprobed? This is particularily the case when there is no provenance as to the location in which these fragments were found as they could have been found in several different locations. It would seem in such a case that the best guestimate one could make in such a case would be to say that these non-analyzed fragments probably pair with the analyzed ones. For example, in the case of the 118g of NWA 1110, presumably around 116g have not been microprobed. In this case, it seems that the most accurate statement would be something along the lines of... the NWA 1110 non-analyzed fragments making up ~116g probably pair with NWA 1110's microprobed fragments. We are wondering about this because we are coming up against a similar predicament with several other falls. Thanks! -John Dawn Adam Hupe wrote: Dear John and List, The word apparent double standard would apply here. If you feel it is ok to pick numbers at random for additional finds when it comes to NWA and not others, why is this not happening with the Antarctic, Sahara, DAGs, SAUs and Dhofars? Why is it that when a Martian meteorite was announced as NWA 1068 some dealers are using a number that describes a pairing instead (NWA 1110)? Could it be that they are too lazy to apply for their own numbers, have their material studied and submitted for vote. NWA 1110 is not a catchall for additional finds, it is an official set of tested pebbles that happen to be Martian. Using the name NWA 869 is meaningless because like Kem Kem it has become a catchall stone. I would go as far as to say, you would better off selling NWA 869 as unclassified because an unclassified stone seems to be worth more on the open market these days. This one of the reasons I object strongly when it comes to rare material. All the best, Adam - Original Message - From: John Birdsell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: stan . [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 8:53 AM Subject: Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello Stan and List. Yes, this was exactly the point that we made in an earlier posting (The Probem with Reductionism ad Infinitum). The members of this list have not yet received any response from Adam on this matter and we wonder if he or anyone else have a reasonable explanation for this apparent double standard. -John Dawn stan . wrote: Regarding the different procedure for e.g. NWA / Gao-Guenie - this issue was addressed in an email by Jeff Grossman dated Sept. 9, 2004 (see below). Gao-Guenie can be treated like Allende or Holbrook in this context as it doesn't apply to areas of dense meteorite concentration. but what about stones like nwa 869? technically each one of them nees it's own nwa number and must be classified... my argument against the current guidelines is such: if a person were to submit 'x' new find comprising of many fragments of a meteorite, classification can be done based upon a representative thin section of only 1 fragment (or even a few tinsections) - even if there are many MANY fragements to the find. all of the fragments get the same nwa number with little or no testing done to them. now if more material if found in the exact same place, by the same people, and is the exact same rare classification as the orginal find - but it's found after the original stuff is published - then the new material must have thermoluminecence studies, cosmic ray exposure, and oxygen isotopse data taken before the material will be considered paired to the orignial find. I challange anyone to give me a valid scientific reason why material sumbited before publishing can all be considered nwa xxx based upon a cursory visual examination - yet material found after a write up in the met bul requires exhaustive additional testing to qualify as a pairing - testing that science make take years to complete for even the most exotic meteorites such as martian and lunars. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman
Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Dear List, We do know where all of NWA 1110 was found as does the journalist who documented our second expedition to Marrir. The first trip was published in Meteorite Magazine. Every piece of NWA 1110 was found by a Nomadic family in a 12 meter X 12 meter area 14 kilometers from the village of Marrir. This is not a strewn field. We figured NWA 1068 must have hit a rock on impact and shattered into several hundred pieces scattering them over a small area. The location alone is enough to make pairing statements after a qualified scientist authenticated every piece and the NomCom approved the scientists' work by making it official. Adam - Original Message - From: John Birdsell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 9:40 AM Subject: Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello Adam, Stan and List. Adam-I think you missed the point that Stan and I were trying to make. We all agree that it would be best if every single stone found in the desert could be independently classified, the problem is that there are not enough resources or people willing to do so. The question was basically, how can fragments of some potential meteorite be paired with a classified fragment that has been properly analyzed and microprobed, when the remaining fragments have not even had a window polished into them, let alone been microprobed? This is particularily the case when there is no provenance as to the location in which these fragments were found as they could have been found in several different locations. It would seem in such a case that the best guestimate one could make in such a case would be to say that these non-analyzed fragments probably pair with the analyzed ones. For example, in the case of the 118g of NWA 1110, presumably around 116g have not been microprobed. In this case, it seems that the most accurate statement would be something along the lines of... the NWA 1110 non-analyzed fragments making up ~116g probably pair with NWA 1110's microprobed fragments. We are wondering about this because we are coming up against a similar predicament with several other falls. Thanks! -John Dawn Adam Hupe wrote: Dear John and List, The word apparent double standard would apply here. If you feel it is ok to pick numbers at random for additional finds when it comes to NWA and not others, why is this not happening with the Antarctic, Sahara, DAGs, SAUs and Dhofars? Why is it that when a Martian meteorite was announced as NWA 1068 some dealers are using a number that describes a pairing instead (NWA 1110)? Could it be that they are too lazy to apply for their own numbers, have their material studied and submitted for vote. NWA 1110 is not a catchall for additional finds, it is an official set of tested pebbles that happen to be Martian. Using the name NWA 869 is meaningless because like Kem Kem it has become a catchall stone. I would go as far as to say, you would better off selling NWA 869 as unclassified because an unclassified stone seems to be worth more on the open market these days. This one of the reasons I object strongly when it comes to rare material. All the best, Adam - Original Message - From: John Birdsell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: stan . [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 8:53 AM Subject: Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello Stan and List. Yes, this was exactly the point that we made in an earlier posting (The Probem with Reductionism ad Infinitum). The members of this list have not yet received any response from Adam on this matter and we wonder if he or anyone else have a reasonable explanation for this apparent double standard. -John Dawn stan . wrote: Regarding the different procedure for e.g. NWA / Gao-Guenie - this issue was addressed in an email by Jeff Grossman dated Sept. 9, 2004 (see below). Gao-Guenie can be treated like Allende or Holbrook in this context as it doesn't apply to areas of dense meteorite concentration. but what about stones like nwa 869? technically each one of them nees it's own nwa number and must be classified... my argument against the current guidelines is such: if a person were to submit 'x' new find comprising of many fragments of a meteorite, classification can be done based upon a representative thin section of only 1 fragment (or even a few tinsections) - even if there are many MANY fragements to the find. all of the fragments get the same nwa number with little or no testing done to them. now if more material if found in the exact same place, by the same people, and is the exact same rare classification as the orginal find - but it's found after the original stuff is published - then the new material must have thermoluminecence studies, cosmic ray exposure
Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Hi Adam and thanks for the note. We know of around 60 g of picritic shergottite fragments that look identical to NWA 1110, and that were not part of the original 118 grams. This suggests that either several pieces of NWA 1068 hit rocks and broke into fragments, or perhaps more likely, a mass exploded at low elevation spreading fragments over a larger area than the 12 x 12 meter region that you mentioned??? Cheers -John Dawn Adam Hupe wrote: Dear List, We do know where all of NWA 1110 was found as does the journalist who documented our second expedition to Marrir. The first trip was published in Meteorite Magazine. Every piece of NWA 1110 was found by a Nomadic family in a 12 meter X 12 meter area 14 kilometers from the village of Marrir. This is not a strewn field. We figured NWA 1068 must have hit a rock on impact and shattered into several hundred pieces scattering them over a small area. The location alone is enough to make pairing statements after a qualified scientist authenticated every piece and the NomCom approved the scientists' work by making it official. Adam - Original Message - From: John Birdsell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 9:40 AM Subject: Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello Adam, Stan and List. Adam-I think you missed the point that Stan and I were trying to make. We all agree that it would be best if every single stone found in the desert could be independently classified, the problem is that there are not enough resources or people willing to do so. The question was basically, how can fragments of some potential meteorite be paired with a classified fragment that has been properly analyzed and microprobed, when the remaining fragments have not even had a window polished into them, let alone been microprobed? This is particularily the case when there is no provenance as to the location in which these fragments were found as they could have been found in several different locations. It would seem in such a case that the best guestimate one could make in such a case would be to say that these non-analyzed fragments probably pair with the analyzed ones. For example, in the case of the 118g of NWA 1110, presumably around 116g have not been microprobed. In this case, it seems that the most accurate statement would be something along the lines of... the NWA 1110 non-analyzed fragments making up ~116g probably pair with NWA 1110's microprobed fragments. We are wondering about this because we are coming up against a similar predicament with several other falls. Thanks! -John Dawn Adam Hupe wrote: Dear John and List, The word apparent double standard would apply here. If you feel it is ok to pick numbers at random for additional finds when it comes to NWA and not others, why is this not happening with the Antarctic, Sahara, DAGs, SAUs and Dhofars? Why is it that when a Martian meteorite was announced as NWA 1068 some dealers are using a number that describes a pairing instead (NWA 1110)? Could it be that they are too lazy to apply for their own numbers, have their material studied and submitted for vote. NWA 1110 is not a catchall for additional finds, it is an official set of tested pebbles that happen to be Martian. Using the name NWA 869 is meaningless because like Kem Kem it has become a catchall stone. I would go as far as to say, you would better off selling NWA 869 as unclassified because an unclassified stone seems to be worth more on the open market these days. This one of the reasons I object strongly when it comes to rare material. All the best, Adam - Original Message - From: John Birdsell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: stan . [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 8:53 AM Subject: Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Hello Stan and List. Yes, this was exactly the point that we made in an earlier posting (The Probem with Reductionism ad Infinitum). The members of this list have not yet received any response from Adam on this matter and we wonder if he or anyone else have a reasonable explanation for this apparent double standard. -John Dawn stan . wrote: Regarding the different procedure for e.g. NWA / Gao-Guenie - this issue was addressed in an email by Jeff Grossman dated Sept. 9, 2004 (see below). Gao-Guenie can be treated like Allende or Holbrook in this context as it doesn't apply to areas of dense meteorite concentration. but what about stones like nwa 869? technically each one of them nees it's own nwa number and must be classified... my argument against the current guidelines is such: if a person were to submit 'x' new find comprising of many fragments of a meteorite, classification can be done based upon a representative thin section
Re: AW: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
The word apparent double standard would apply here. If you feel it is ok to pick numbers at random for additional finds when it comes to NWA and not others, why is this not happening with the Antarctic, Sahara, DAGs, SAUs and Dhofars? just for the sake of clarity, i dont think this is a problem with only nwa's, but ALL numbered series of meteorites. i only used nwa in my posts as i assumed it would be clear what i was tlaking about - meteorites named by number from areas of dense finds _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
At 11:10 PM 9/12/2004, Mauro Daniel wrote: therefore better that you of it quiet bushels Can anyone interpret this for me? I'm in the process of moving right now and my Captain Super decoder ring is packed away in a box. Best, JKG __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
therefore better that you of it quiet bushels probably should read Therefore, you better keep your mouth shut. I think Mauro is using an online translator for converting Italian to English---such translators often provide amusing results. }=] __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Dear List, Enough is really enough, Bob Evans not listening to what was posted by people in know is now using the NWA 1877 designation, the number reserved for an Olivine Diogenite. We paid for the study of this material, reserved a NWA number for it and made it official by submitting it to the NomCom for a vote. A regular Diogenite or even terrestrial stones could easily be confused so be careful about purchasing an Olivine Diogenite from anybody who did not have his material studied in a lab, approved by the NomCom and issued its very own number. Off List, does anybody have Bob Evans address so that it will save us time in serving the legal documents we had prepared, this has gone far enough. Wishing everybody who adheres to good standards and plays by the rules well, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Adam, Ive had just about enough of you. Quit being a little cry baby and get a friggin hobby. Jeff Grossman already told you meteorite names ARE NOT PROPRIETARY Do you know what that means Adam? YOU DO NOT OWN THE NAME , ADAM !! I will forward the list the email from Jeff Grossman in a moment. Adam Sell your meteorites and leave me the hell alone ! Everybody have a good week, and sorry about these unmitigated outbursts from Adam. Thank You Bob Evans - Original Message - From: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 9:27 PM Subject: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Dear List, Enough is really enough, Bob Evans not listening to what was posted by people in know is now using the NWA 1877 designation, the number reserved for an Olivine Diogenite. We paid for the study of this material, reserved a NWA number for it and made it official by submitting it to the NomCom for a vote. A regular Diogenite or even terrestrial stones could easily be confused so be careful about purchasing an Olivine Diogenite from anybody who did not have his material studied in a lab, approved by the NomCom and issued its very own number. Off List, does anybody have Bob Evans address so that it will save us time in serving the legal documents we had prepared, this has gone far enough. Wishing everybody who adheres to good standards and plays by the rules well, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Almost forgot, the french also have an olivine diogenite now, around 200g iirc... From: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:27:47 -0700 Dear List, Enough is really enough, Bob Evans not listening to what was posted by people in know is now using the NWA 1877 designation, the number reserved for an Olivine Diogenite. We paid for the study of this material, reserved a NWA number for it and made it official by submitting it to the NomCom for a vote. A regular Diogenite or even terrestrial stones could easily be confused so be careful about purchasing an Olivine Diogenite from anybody who did not have his material studied in a lab, approved by the NomCom and issued its very own number. Off List, does anybody have Bob Evans address so that it will save us time in serving the legal documents we had prepared, this has gone far enough. Wishing everybody who adheres to good standards and plays by the rules well, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
if is for this other pieces of olivine digenite its available from the moroccan people, but not for this is right copy the complete text of a auction and put in another auction, or if you put and write (C) Hupe From: stan . [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 04:14:23 + Almost forgot, the french also have an olivine diogenite now, around 200g iirc... From: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:27:47 -0700 Dear List, Enough is really enough, Bob Evans not listening to what was posted by people in know is now using the NWA 1877 designation, the number reserved for an Olivine Diogenite. We paid for the study of this material, reserved a NWA number for it and made it official by submitting it to the NomCom for a vote. A regular Diogenite or even terrestrial stones could easily be confused so be careful about purchasing an Olivine Diogenite from anybody who did not have his material studied in a lab, approved by the NomCom and issued its very own number. Off List, does anybody have Bob Evans address so that it will save us time in serving the legal documents we had prepared, this has gone far enough. Wishing everybody who adheres to good standards and plays by the rules well, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Personalizza MSN Messenger con sfondi e fotografie! http://www.ilovemessenger.msn.it/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877
Wow, advice from the guy who fakes new Italian meteorite falls. I think we can ignore just about anything you say Matteo. Mike Farmer - Original Message - From: Mauro Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 10:10 PM Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 if is for this other pieces of olivine digenite its available from the moroccan people, but not for this is right copy the complete text of a auction and put in another auction, or if you put and write (C) Hupe From: stan . [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 04:14:23 + Almost forgot, the french also have an olivine diogenite now, around 200g iirc... From: Adam Hupe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [meteorite-list] Enough is Enough, Now NWA 1877 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:27:47 -0700 Dear List, Enough is really enough, Bob Evans not listening to what was posted by people in know is now using the NWA 1877 designation, the number reserved for an Olivine Diogenite. We paid for the study of this material, reserved a NWA number for it and made it official by submitting it to the NomCom for a vote. A regular Diogenite or even terrestrial stones could easily be confused so be careful about purchasing an Olivine Diogenite from anybody who did not have his material studied in a lab, approved by the NomCom and issued its very own number. Off List, does anybody have Bob Evans address so that it will save us time in serving the legal documents we had prepared, this has gone far enough. Wishing everybody who adheres to good standards and plays by the rules well, Adam __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list _ Personalizza MSN Messenger con sfondi e fotografie! http://www.ilovemessenger.msn.it/ __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
