[meteorite-list] RE: A meteorite within a meteorite

[Darren Garrison]

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 11:40:25 -0500, "Charles Viau" <cviau at beld.net> wrote:

>Hi List,
>
>Not trying to be picky about terminology, but would not "meteor within a
>meteorite" be the scientifically correct statement here?  OR, just the fact
>that it was encapsulated still makes it a meteorite, since it made it to the
>ground.

That's even a scarier thought than the recent debate about not calling Heat Sheild Rock a meteorite
because it didn't hit Earth.  Do we REALLY need a different name for each and every body that a
meteroid hits?  (If so, I look forward to the names for meteorids that hit the asteroid recently
named DouglasAdams.  I propose "pangalacticgargleblasterites" or
"theravenousbugblatterbeastoftraalites".)