Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites ( a little gorgeous Ad).
do you want to change in practice, what makes sense? If the probabilities to find a Martian sediment are so extremely low, does it make sense to make serial analyses at more or less random on sediments, whether they contain cosmogenic nucleids to find out, whether they were in space? Draw a circle of a mile around your home, if you would measure each and every sedimentary stone there, I fear, that would cost as much as the Apollo program... and I wouldn't directly expect, that a Martian would be among them. I think, it makes no sense. (Btw. why are you always so fixated on fusion crust? There are other properties. Take the signs of shock effects. And the Martians in general seem to be all quite shocked. Some have even shock veins, and if you look at the known ones - there is no type else, which would have so much maskelynite. And another btw.: If you would have to do with NWA meteorites, you'd know, that it is certainly not so trivial, as you might think, that the people involved would care only for stones looking like typical meteorites! On contrary! Quite the most often question posed is, whether a stone is a meteorite at all or only terrestrial. Harvest the pictures of the Meteoritical Bulletin database, the EoM, the list archives and you will be flabbergasted, what for weird rocks people had identified as meteorites!). Where could we get our first sedimentary Martian meteorite from? 1.) We can wait, until with sound and light such stones will fall on our head. 2.) We have to wait, until once in one of the parts of the Antarctic hunting grounds, where you really have nothing else than sheer ice, such a stone will be once found. 3.) We wait until the best experts we have on the planet will bring such a stone. Who are they? By fr: the most exotic and the most of the exotic meteorites of the World meteorite inventory came and are coming from Sahara. Say the Meteoritical Bulletins. The anonymous hunters, the dealers, the collectors and curators financing them, and finally the scientists classifying these finds - better and more efficient (also cost-efficient) experts do not exist. So I guess, that would be the most promising of those 3 points. But for that, Carl, we need: Ptiience! Best! Martin PS. Uh, the Heirs came down with such a bad cold. Oooh. And despite that, I tortured myself in writing again such a lengthy post. So I have to add an AD. An urgent one. 1.) Rather by chance, we found still 2 nice cuts of the very important NWA 5990. The only depleted permafic Martian diabase. Fine fresh, unpaired, highly unusual. Unfortunately small tkw. 0.199g and 0.256g they have. Not being pushy - but you won't get that again anymore. They are the last. Not a crumb left. After they're gone - that extremely special Martian will be over and out, gata finito, aus! 2.) And 3 slices with fusion crust, around half a gram of the sensational NWA 6162, which is currently introduced on the LPS-conference, are left. Also ultimate specimens of that unpaired Martian. The Martian, which is so sensationally fresh, that not only we believe, that it is the best basalt, a collector ever could own - just ask those, who are happy owners of a slice. All not at horrendous prices, but even at a slightly reduced rate. Really last chance. (And ebay would make them only unnecessarily expensive). Addendum: Last time where we gave the new abstracts about the recent Martians, We weren't aware of.. here for your records, A comprehensive 18-pages work about NWA 5789 was published in January in MAPS: Juliane GROSS, Allan H. TREIMAN, Justin FILIBERTO, and Christopher D. K. HERD: Primitive olivine-phyric shergottite NWA 5789: Petrography, mineral chemistry, and cooling history imply a magma similar to Yamato-980459 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/science/treiman/Gross5789.pdf -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: cdtuc...@cox.net [mailto:cdtuc...@cox.net] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 23. März 2011 16:53 An: Martin Altmann; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites Martin, As always, I like your input but please look at the subject line on this thread. We are talking about Sedimentary rocks here. All of these planetary rocks you refer to are igneous. Not sedimentary. They actually do look like meteorites to me and you both. Sedimentary rocks might have layering and veining, sand, mica, and too many other oddities to mention here. But the point is that until these Scientists are paid to test all ice field finds and not just the igneous ones, we may NEVER find any sedimentary meteorites. We need to re-think what we are looking for, We know these rocks exist on Mars. So, we know they exist in meteorites. I offer you the challenge again. Ask any Scientist if he is EVER willing to study any rock that resembles a sedimentary rock that lacks fusion crust. His / her answer will be NEVER. I recall
Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites
and Geoscience departments are no service industry to tell to people, whether their stones are something or not, but they shall do mineralogy, space science and planetology! It would be a horrible waste of resources - of lab equipment and highly-qualified people, if their main occupation would be to test myriads of non-meteorite-looking terrestrial stones, in the vague hope that one day one of them could turn out to be a very special space rock. Therefore I think, it's better to wait, until those, who have as main profession the recovery of possible meteorites, will bring them such a stone or until something like that will be found in Antarctica or until a fireball smashes something like that directly in front of our feet. And if that will have happened, then it's easier, because then we all know what to look for. Patience, patience. (We all do the best we can :-) Best! Martin -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: cdtuc...@cox.net [mailto:cdtuc...@cox.net] Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. März 2011 23:54 An: Martin Altmann; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites Martin, You ask; Why do I think so? Its simple. We know they are there. If people were paid to study all rocks found in Antarctica and all of the other way way out of place rocks. Then they would not be overlooked as they are today. The truth is that many rocks collected even from ice fields are later rejected and deemed meteorwrongs. They are being rejected particularly if they have NO fusion crust or odd chemistries. I have seen obvious meteorites that are rejected because they don't fit neatly into the stuff we already know. If NASA would pay our Scientists to follow through on some of these prospects, I am sure some of them would be verified. The best example that comes to mind is D'Orbigny. It was totally rejected for a long time and by a lot of different people including NASA folks. I think Darryl said, Had it been recognized, he would be the one living well in Oregon today. Well, luckily someone was paid enough to take the time to further study it and to me. It is one of the most spectacular meteorite I've ever seen. That is the point. If we are to find sedimentary meteorites. We need to begin to study odd rocks found out of place that have no fusion crust. It is clear from the only science we have that sedimentary rocks have either white crusts or no crust at all. To that point. I guarantee you right now that there is not a meteorite scientist on this planet today that would bother to study a rock without crust. Just ask them. Any of them. Ask them if they would study a rock without crust and I guarantee they would say NO. I mean why should they? There are enough rocks with crust that are obvious. So, why bother with rocks that are likely going to be wrongs? Do the math. Unless and until these people are properly paid to possibly waste their own valuable time, they are simply not going to do it. So, that is why I say. Once we begin to pay these people to study any and all out of place rocks we will never find any sedimentary meteorites. Because they will likely have no fusion crust. These rocks will continue to be pigeon holed into categories of the wrongs. This crust issue could start a whole new argument of it's own but, our Science shows that crust falls off. Especially on this type of stone. I am not knocking our Scientists at all. In fact I respect them. That is why I say. NASA needs to pay them . We know there has to be sedimentary meteorites just as we know their must be life elsewhere. We have the ability to find the one but, the other may take time. Carl -- Carl or Debbie Esparza Meteoritemax __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites
I would think the answer to your question is simpler than the science trying to explain why we do not have this material in our possession. The stones in questions are more likely unrecognized, particularly if there is a lack of fusion crust. Reference our own understanding (recognition) of meteorites 50 years ago and 100 years ago. Our knowledge base has expanded substantially and continues to improve (evolve) as more material is studied. For those of you who have seen hundreds or thousands of meteorites and compare those observations to the meteorite identification checklists that can be found commonly, you know that the atypical exists everywhere. -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Walter Branch Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 7:57 PM To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites Hello Steve, Carl and List, Thanks very much for the comments. I am at a distinct disadvantage, not having a background in geology so please bear with me. I understand exothermic processes but... The oldest sedimentary rocks are found in various places such as Greenland, Hudson Bay in northern Quebec, Western Australia, etc. These rocks are billions of years old, yet they are still recognized as sedimentary rocks. Why? Should they not have disappeared long ago? Would you say these rocks were never exposed to heat, water or weathering? I would think that traveling through space, where obviously no terrestrial weathering occurs, potential Martian sedimentary rocks would not undergo weathering until they landed on Earth which would be on the order of millions of years ago. Much more recent than the oldest Earth sedimentary rocks. It may very well be that the reason we don't have any Martian sedimentary rocks in our collections (scientific and otherwise) is because they have all weathered away or at least to the point where we would not recognize them as being Martian, or even meteoritic, in origin. Yes, I have looked at Dr. Irving's site. http://www.imca.cc/mars/martian-meteorites.htm It's a great site and is on my favorites list but he doesn't speculate as to why we have no Martian sedimentary rocks, which is what I am most interested in. -Walter __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites
David, Walter, list, I think you may be right here. Maybe they have no fusion crust. Perhaps my link to the artificial meteorite study did not work so here it is again; http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Stone_6_Artificial_Meteorite_Shows_Martian_Impactors_Could_Carry_Traces_Of_Life_999.html It clearly states as a matter of fact that sedimentary rocks either had a white crust or no crust at all when put to the test. So, if this is the science speaking. Why should we expect anything but white crust or No crust at all? This suggests that the only way a Scientist is going to be willing to spend their time on anything like this is if they are paid to do it. So far Nobody is actually paid to do it. I have been told this by professors themselves. That they do meteorite classifications as a side job and only if they want to. As a case in point. I showed a well known lunar expert a cut and polished stone. I told him that many people in the meteorite field have seen this stone and all believe it to be of Lunar origin. He looked closely at it with a loop and said; it does look like a lunar. It has a good 50% chance of it being Lunar But, I have NO interest in classifying it. Call Dolores. That is an exact quote. I emailed Dolores and Dolores does not respond to my emails or phone messages. I was told by her husband that she too has no incentive to classify even Lunar's. He went on to say that they can apply for federal money (grants) after a meteorite is authenticated but NOT before. So, maybe down the road they may be able to get paid to study the rock but, Not until later. In her defense she is super busy with the MESSENGER Mercury mission and from what I understand will be for quite some time. This is a very sad story. Why doesn't NASA fund this? I mean we talk about NASA's great accomplishments in space yet they seem to ignore the freebies found here on Earth. And finally the other problem is access. Politics plays a huge role in classification. There are certain people who get rock star treatment when it comes to hot finds while others are ignored. Sure , high profile players should get the attention of scientists but, I'm told others are actually being blackballed by scientists? So, again I say. put politics aside by giving scientists an incentive with cash and I think we will find sedimentary meteorites in a hurry. If it's true that meteorites have their own ranges of chemistry and if it's true that they can be charted and graphed by scientists like Randy Korotev as documented evidence that they are purported to be. If it plots on the chart correctly then that is proof it is Lunar and if it does not plot that is proof it is not. Then, I see Blain Reed's XRF gun as a great aid to Scientists. Here he has an opportunity to weed out the bad prospects and document the chemistry of the good ones. The ones that do plot on those very exclusive charts and graphs should be looked at with priority. But, even with having all the right chemistry and all the right minerals. We still need Oxygen isotopes done to clinch the deal. This is not available to the public. So, we still need to convince Scientists that what we have may be a meteorite. As a hunter for 23 years I know that there are a lot of odd and out of place rocks out there. So hopefully some day we can overcome all of these problems. I think money is the answer. Carl Carl or Debbie Esparza Meteoritemax David Norton renov8hot...@earthlink.net wrote: I would think the answer to your question is simpler than the science trying to explain why we do not have this material in our possession. The stones in questions are more likely unrecognized, particularly if there is a lack of fusion crust. Reference our own understanding (recognition) of meteorites 50 years ago and 100 years ago. Our knowledge base has expanded substantially and continues to improve (evolve) as more material is studied. For those of you who have seen hundreds or thousands of meteorites and compare those observations to the meteorite identification checklists that can be found commonly, you know that the atypical exists everywhere. -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Walter Branch Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 7:57 PM To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites Hello Steve, Carl and List, Thanks very much for the comments. I am at a distinct disadvantage, not having a background in geology so please bear with me. I understand exothermic processes but... The oldest sedimentary rocks are found in various places such as Greenland, Hudson Bay in northern Quebec, Western Australia, etc. These rocks are billions of years old, yet they are still recognized as sedimentary rocks. Why? Should they not have disappeared long ago? Would you say
Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites
Hiho, I think we will find sedimentary meteorites in a hurry. Why do you think so? To me it seems even not so easy and trivial to find a normal Martian meteorite. There are only 56 among the 10,000-20,000 different meteorites known. And among the 40,000-100,000+++ stones and fragments picked up in Antarctica, only 25 stones or so were Martians.(of 15 different). Falls...1200+ observed falls - all the same 4 came down. On the whole North American continent only 1 Martian was found so far. (and 1 in an old collection). Hence if Martian sediments were only as numerous as normal Martian meteorites, it would be quite a difficult task. (I'm living in an area of the World, where even the recovery of an ordinary chondrite is quite a sensation). So I guess, you simply have to have some patience. All the very recent 15 years so many unusual and whack stones were found and classified to be meteorites, which no mortal would have picked up suspecting them to be meteoritic, therefore we fully can trust in all the hundreds of anonymous true experts combing the Sahara, the not so anonymous expert hunters in Oman and in the campaigns on the blue icefields. If there are sedimentary meteorites, they will find them. Precondition is only, that you allow the people to hunt. If you have something e.g. like in Australia then of course it is impossible to find a sedimentary one, because then even something not so rare like a CV3 or an EUC is exponentially more seldom found, says the Bulletin, then elsewhere the Martians or the Lunars. That's the only problem, where politics plays a role. (But don't worry such a mediaeval or pre-modern position like current Australian meteoritics presents, is rather a position of scientific outcasts.) I read somewhere, that the upper crust of Earth consists of rocks. Methodically it would make not so much sense to measure them all, whether they are of meteoritic origin. And everyone who has a webpage about meteorites can tell you a thing or two about how many hundreds of alleged meteorites the people offload on each of them each year. Juuust a little patience. Martin -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von cdtuc...@cox.net Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. März 2011 18:00 An: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; 'Walter Branch'; David Norton Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites David, Walter, list, I think you may be right here. Maybe they have no fusion crust. Perhaps my link to the artificial meteorite study did not work so here it is again; http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Stone_6_Artificial_Meteorite_Shows_Martian _Impactors_Could_Carry_Traces_Of_Life_999.html It clearly states as a matter of fact that sedimentary rocks either had a white crust or no crust at all when put to the test. So, if this is the science speaking. Why should we expect anything but white crust or No crust at all? This suggests that the only way a Scientist is going to be willing to spend their time on anything like this is if they are paid to do it. So far Nobody is actually paid to do it. I have been told this by professors themselves. That they do meteorite classifications as a side job and only if they want to. As a case in point. I showed a well known lunar expert a cut and polished stone. I told him that many people in the meteorite field have seen this stone and all believe it to be of Lunar origin. He looked closely at it with a loop and said; it does look like a lunar. It has a good 50% chance of it being Lunar But, I have NO interest in classifying it. Call Dolores. That is an exact quote. I emailed Dolores and Dolores does not respond to my emails or phone messages. I was told by her husband that she too has no incentive to classify even Lunar's. He went on to say that they can apply for federal money (grants) after a meteorite is authenticated but NOT before. So, maybe down the road they may be able to get paid to study the rock but, Not until later. In her defense she is super busy with the MESSENGER Mercury mission and from what I understand will be for quite some time. This is a very sad story. Why doesn't NASA fund this? I mean we talk about NASA's great accomplishments in space yet they seem to ignore the freebies found here on Earth. And finally the other problem is access. Politics plays a huge role in classification. There are certain people who get rock star treatment when it comes to hot finds while others are ignored. Sure , high profile players should get the attention of scientists but, I'm told others are actually being blackballed by scientists? So, again I say. put politics aside by giving scientists an incentive with cash and I think we will find sedimentary meteorites in a hurry. If it's true that meteorites have their own ranges of chemistry and if it's true that they can be charted and graphed by scientists like Randy Korotev
Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites
Auftrag von cdtuc...@cox.net Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. März 2011 18:00 An: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com; 'Walter Branch'; David Norton Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites David, Walter, list, I think you may be right here. Maybe they have no fusion crust. Perhaps my link to the artificial meteorite study did not work so here it is again; http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Stone_6_Artificial_Meteorite_Shows_Martian _Impactors_Could_Carry_Traces_Of_Life_999.html It clearly states as a matter of fact that sedimentary rocks either had a white crust or no crust at all when put to the test. So, if this is the science speaking. Why should we expect anything but white crust or No crust at all? This suggests that the only way a Scientist is going to be willing to spend their time on anything like this is if they are paid to do it. So far Nobody is actually paid to do it. I have been told this by professors themselves. That they do meteorite classifications as a side job and only if they want to. As a case in point. I showed a well known lunar expert a cut and polished stone. I told him that many people in the meteorite field have seen this stone and all believe it to be of Lunar origin. He looked closely at it with a loop and said; it does look like a lunar. It has a good 50% chance of it being Lunar But, I have NO interest in classifying it. Call Dolores. That is an exact quote. I emailed Dolores and Dolores does not respond to my emails or phone messages. I was told by her husband that she too has no incentive to classify even Lunar's. He went on to say that they can apply for federal money (grants) after a meteorite is authenticated but NOT before. So, maybe down the road they may be able to get paid to study the rock but, Not until later. In her defense she is super busy with the MESSENGER Mercury mission and from what I understand will be for quite some time. This is a very sad story. Why doesn't NASA fund this? I mean we talk about NASA's great accomplishments in space yet they seem to ignore the freebies found here on Earth. And finally the other problem is access. Politics plays a huge role in classification. There are certain people who get rock star treatment when it comes to hot finds while others are ignored. Sure , high profile players should get the attention of scientists but, I'm told others are actually being blackballed by scientists? So, again I say. put politics aside by giving scientists an incentive with cash and I think we will find sedimentary meteorites in a hurry. If it's true that meteorites have their own ranges of chemistry and if it's true that they can be charted and graphed by scientists like Randy Korotev as documented evidence that they are purported to be. If it plots on the chart correctly then that is proof it is Lunar and if it does not plot that is proof it is not. Then, I see Blain Reed's XRF gun as a great aid to Scientists. Here he has an opportunity to weed out the bad prospects and document the chemistry of the good ones. The ones that do plot on those very exclusive charts and graphs should be looked at with priority. But, even with having all the right chemistry and all the right minerals. We still need Oxygen isotopes done to clinch the deal. This is not available to the public. So, we still need to convince Scientists that what we have may be a meteorite. As a hunter for 23 years I know that there are a lot of odd and out of place rocks out there. So hopefully some day we can overcome all of these problems. I think money is the answer. Carl Carl or Debbie Esparza Meteoritemax David Norton renov8hot...@earthlink.net wrote: I would think the answer to your question is simpler than the science trying to explain why we do not have this material in our possession. The stones in questions are more likely unrecognized, particularly if there is a lack of fusion crust. Reference our own understanding (recognition) of meteorites 50 years ago and 100 years ago. Our knowledge base has expanded substantially and continues to improve (evolve) as more material is studied. For those of you who have seen hundreds or thousands of meteorites and compare those observations to the meteorite identification checklists that can be found commonly, you know that the atypical exists everywhere. -Original Message- From: meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com [mailto:meteorite-list-boun...@meteoritecentral.com] On Behalf Of Walter Branch Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 7:57 PM To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Subject: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites Hello Steve, Carl and List, Thanks very much for the comments. I am at a distinct disadvantage, not having a background in geology so please bear with me. I understand exothermic processes but... The oldest sedimentary rocks
Re: [meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites
-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites Martin, You ask; Why do I think so? Its simple. We know they are there. If people were paid to study all rocks found in Antarctica and all of the other way way out of place rocks. Then they would not be overlooked as they are today. The truth is that many rocks collected even from ice fields are later rejected and deemed meteorwrongs. They are being rejected particularly if they have NO fusion crust or odd chemistries. I have seen obvious meteorites that are rejected because they don't fit neatly into the stuff we already know. If NASA would pay our Scientists to follow through on some of these prospects, I am sure some of them would be verified. The best example that comes to mind is D'Orbigny. It was totally rejected for a long time and by a lot of different people including NASA folks. I think Darryl said, Had it been recognized, he would be the one living well in Oregon today. Well, luckily someone was paid enough to take the time to further study it and to me. It is one of the most spectacular meteorite I've ever seen. That is the point. If we are to find sedimentary meteorites. We need to begin to study odd rocks found out of place that have no fusion crust. It is clear from the only science we have that sedimentary rocks have either white crusts or no crust at all. To that point. I guarantee you right now that there is not a meteorite scientist on this planet today that would bother to study a rock without crust. Just ask them. Any of them. Ask them if they would study a rock without crust and I guarantee they would say NO. I mean why should they? There are enough rocks with crust that are obvious. So, why bother with rocks that are likely going to be wrongs? Do the math. Unless and until these people are properly paid to possibly waste their own valuable time, they are simply not going to do it. So, that is why I say. Once we begin to pay these people to study any and all out of place rocks we will never find any sedimentary meteorites. Because they will likely have no fusion crust. These rocks will continue to be pigeon holed into categories of the wrongs. This crust issue could start a whole new argument of it's own but, our Science shows that crust falls off. Especially on this type of stone. I am not knocking our Scientists at all. In fact I respect them. That is why I say. NASA needs to pay them . We know there has to be sedimentary meteorites just as we know their must be life elsewhere. We have the ability to find the one but, the other may take time. Carl -- Carl or Debbie Esparza Meteoritemax __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Sedimentary Martian Meteorites
Hello Steve, Carl and List, Thanks very much for the comments. I am at a distinct disadvantage, not having a background in geology so please bear with me. I understand exothermic processes but... The oldest sedimentary rocks are found in various places such as Greenland, Hudson Bay in northern Quebec, Western Australia, etc. These rocks are billions of years old, yet they are still recognized as sedimentary rocks. Why? Should they not have disappeared long ago? Would you say these rocks were never exposed to heat, water or weathering? I would think that traveling through space, where obviously no terrestrial weathering occurs, potential Martian sedimentary rocks would not undergo weathering until they landed on Earth which would be on the order of millions of years ago. Much more recent than the oldest Earth sedimentary rocks. It may very well be that the reason we don't have any Martian sedimentary rocks in our collections (scientific and otherwise) is because they have all weathered away or at least to the point where we would not recognize them as being Martian, or even meteoritic, in origin. Yes, I have looked at Dr. Irving's site. http://www.imca.cc/mars/martian-meteorites.htm It's a great site and is on my favorites list but he doesn't speculate as to why we have no Martian sedimentary rocks, which is what I am most interested in. -Walter __ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
