Re: [meteorite-list] "Venus Stone" is not L6 (and not a Holbrook)

[Robert Verish]

--- Original Message ---
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:43:07 GMT
From: "Steve Schoner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] "Venus Stone" is not L6
(and not a Holbrook)

++...
There is absolutely no reason that a chip from one of
the exposed surfaces could not be removed for
classification.  It does not take much, certainly less
than a gram.  And such a chip would not take away
from any of the black fusion crust that makes this
meteorite so spectacular.

Such a chip, analyzed would settle the question once
and for all.

Steve Schoner


BRAVO Steve!

My sentiments exactly.

Bob V.
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] "Venus Stone" is not L6 (and not a Holbrook)

[Steve Schoner]

[meteorite-list] "Venus Stone" is not L6 (and not a Holbrook)

Several years ago, shortly after it was purchased by Bob Haag, I had
the opportunity to hold this stone in my hands.  Now, having searched
the Holbrook field since 1967, and finding nearly 900 stones, mostly in
the gram range, my impression was that this "could" indeed be a Holbrook.

Case in point, many Holbrook stones are oriented.  Many Holbrook stones
show a great variation of weathering.  I have found larger fragments
extremely weathered within yards of smaller ones that had virtually no
weathering.  Nininger told me that he noticed the same trait.  And I
have wondered if the meteorite has traces of cosmic salt like the
recent Monahans, TX salt bearing meteorite.  (The Monahans stone fall,
two specimens found, is also, I think classified as an L-6.  I will
have to check it up)  Such cosmic salts will cause rapid weathering of
the larger specimens which would have greater chances of having pockets
of it.


Originally in the old method of classification, Holbrook was given the
class of "Spherical Olivine Hypersthene Chondrite."  Holbrook, in
weathered specimens does have prominent chondrules sticking out of the
surface.  And my impression of the Venus Stone, with its black nose
cone fusion crust and brown-tan interior is the same as those larger
weathered pieces of Holbrook.  (BTW: That image posted, as Dave noted,
is completely wrong. This stone is quite black, just like some of the
Holbrooks found today. And you can see a very good photo of it in Bob
Haag's Collection book)

I think that Holbrook, now classed as an L-6, is not like other L-6
meteorites.  There are indeed variations within it.  It is more porous
than the majority of L-6 meteorites.  And more importantly, it does
have in some parts clearly defined round chondrules.  That was where
the term "Spherical" came in when it was originally classified back in
the days when meteoriticists had less chemically, defined methods.

Look at "Portales Valley"-- That is no "ordinary" H-6 meteorite, though
that is what it is classified as.  

There is absolutely no reason that a chip from one of the exposed
surfaces could not be removed for classification.  It does not take
much, certainly less than a gram.  And such a chip would not take away
from any of the black fusion crust that makes this meteorite so
spectacular.

Such a chip, analyzed would settle the question once and for all.

Steve Schoner
IMCA #4470

__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] "Venus Stone" is not L6 (and not a Holbrook)

[DNAndrews]

>
>
>My jaw dropped when I noticed that there were numerous
>>chondrules standing out in high relief on this
>>weathered surface.  I realized immediately that this
>>stone was too low of a petrologic grade and too
>>weathered to be a Holbrook meteorite. 
>>You see for yourself in this image:
>>
>>
>

What did the photographer use in this image? A Yellow filter? You know, 
and I know that the Venus Stone is no way looks this weathered or 
YELLOW. I've seen and held it. Guess that horse urine really did a job 
on it.

Local Yokel No Brain,
Dave

>  
>
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

Re: [meteorite-list] "Venus Stone" is not L6 (and not a Holbrook)

[DNAndrews]

Guess I'm a "No-Brainer-Local-Yokel" It's funny that Bob Haag told me 
that it's an L6, but you know otherwise. There is lots of land before it 
gets to the Petrified Forest. Thanks for all the flattering words from 
you. It's surely appreciated.

Local "Un-Named-No-Brainer" Dave

Local Dave

Robert Verish wrote:

>And Bob Haag was right when he said that his "Venus
>Stone" is too old to be from the Holbrook fall.
>
>For the longest time, I too, thought that Bob's
>"Stone" was a Holbrook meteorite, until...
>
>I was able to closely examine the "Venus Stone" when
>it was on display at the Tucson Show a couple of years
>ago.  After the awe of having Bob Haag place into my
>hands the most revered example of a beautiful
>meteorite had subsided, I started to notice that the
>exterior was more weathered than I had expected. 
>There wasn't much of a fresh fusion-crust.  And then I
>noticed that around the edges of the nose-cone there
>were portions of the stone missing.  You can imagine
>my dismay when I discovered that the stone wasn't
>"perfect".  And where there were portions missing,
>that exposed surface was definitely weathered.
>
>My jaw dropped when I noticed that there were numerous
>chondrules standing out in high relief on this
>weathered surface.  I realized immediately that this
>stone was too low of a petrologic grade and too
>weathered to be a Holbrook meteorite. 
>You see for yourself in this image:
>
>
>
>The fact that the "Venus Stone" is not an L6, and
>therefore not related to the Holbrook fall, was for me
>a "no-brainer".  Then the idea that the "Venus Stone"
>may be part of ANOTHER strewn field started to
>intrigue me.  And the idea that, if another stone
>could be found/classified/paired to it, then the 
>"Venus Stone" could  be spared the cutting of a type
>specimen!  Now that was even of more interest to me.
>
>So, I researched this meteorite.  But I discovered
>that the actual finder and the real locality were
>already known.  And then I was told that the find
>locality is surrounded by a National Park, The
>Petrified Forest, which would complicate expanding any
>possible strewn field.  It's not that I would begrudge
>turning over a meteorite to the Smithsonian, it's just
>that I'm not sure that even the Smithsonian can remove
>a meteorite from a National Park.
>
>So, I started to lose interest and started to
>reconcile that this would end up being just another
>unclassified Arizona meteorite.  Hopefully, someone
>more local may get lucky one day and rekindle some
>interest...
> 
>If you are interested, and before you head on out that
>way, you should take a look at this satellite image:
>
>
>Good luck,
>Bob V.
>
>P.S. - you'll notice that I've avoided using the word
>"Adamana", because that name has not been formally
>approved.
>
>
>__
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>  
>
__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

[meteorite-list] "Venus Stone" is not L6 (and not a Holbrook)

[Robert Verish]

And Bob Haag was right when he said that his "Venus
Stone" is too old to be from the Holbrook fall.

For the longest time, I too, thought that Bob's
"Stone" was a Holbrook meteorite, until...

I was able to closely examine the "Venus Stone" when
it was on display at the Tucson Show a couple of years
ago.  After the awe of having Bob Haag place into my
hands the most revered example of a beautiful
meteorite had subsided, I started to notice that the
exterior was more weathered than I had expected. 
There wasn't much of a fresh fusion-crust.  And then I
noticed that around the edges of the nose-cone there
were portions of the stone missing.  You can imagine
my dismay when I discovered that the stone wasn't
"perfect".  And where there were portions missing,
that exposed surface was definitely weathered.

My jaw dropped when I noticed that there were numerous
chondrules standing out in high relief on this
weathered surface.  I realized immediately that this
stone was too low of a petrologic grade and too
weathered to be a Holbrook meteorite. 
You see for yourself in this image:



The fact that the "Venus Stone" is not an L6, and
therefore not related to the Holbrook fall, was for me
a "no-brainer".  Then the idea that the "Venus Stone"
may be part of ANOTHER strewn field started to
intrigue me.  And the idea that, if another stone
could be found/classified/paired to it, then the 
"Venus Stone" could  be spared the cutting of a type
specimen!  Now that was even of more interest to me.

So, I researched this meteorite.  But I discovered
that the actual finder and the real locality were
already known.  And then I was told that the find
locality is surrounded by a National Park, The
Petrified Forest, which would complicate expanding any
possible strewn field.  It's not that I would begrudge
turning over a meteorite to the Smithsonian, it's just
that I'm not sure that even the Smithsonian can remove
a meteorite from a National Park.

So, I started to lose interest and started to
reconcile that this would end up being just another
unclassified Arizona meteorite.  Hopefully, someone
more local may get lucky one day and rekindle some
interest...
 
If you are interested, and before you head on out that
way, you should take a look at this satellite image:


Good luck,
Bob V.

P.S. - you'll notice that I've avoided using the word
"Adamana", because that name has not been formally
approved.


__
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list