[meteorite-list] a reply to Hupe and Farmer

[MexicoDoug at aol.com]

Adam H. writes:

<< I heard about the two "planetary" pieces while enjoying myself .... I 
wasted time and gasoline to come over and check out what was obviously a Diogenite 
and a Eucrite.  >>

The difference between these classifications may be as obvious as the 
difference between Adam and Greg, which hopefully ET can tackle in the next Planetary 
Superbowl next January.  With hindsight I don't know how I could ever could 
have fumbled that one for a year!!!)

Diogenites and eucrites may not be as much to your fancy but they are to 
mine.  Beauty and desireability are the eye of the beholder we all know.  Pretty 
please, not to drag such unintentional biases into the real lowly commercial 
point here which none of you have taken the bull by the horns to address though 
Mike came close, if I were entitled to an opinion which I am definitely not.  
But:

To claim a Lunar or Martian is a better piece than the mysterious world of 
Vesta, that Diogenites, Eucrites and by extension Howardites are not on par with 
"planetary" specimens than those more common ones from the Moon which isn't a 
planet by definition, that maybe they do not offer equally or more clues to 
the genesis of the Solar system...Finally, quality examples of those classes 
are probably more rare on Earth, and further away to get - over 400 kg of moon 
rocks are available to study. 

Comments from the peanut gallery, where chopped liver, popcorn, howardites, 
diogenites and eucrites abound, but not as much as we wished, and personally 
suscribing to the belief that all meteorites are equally endowed in the eyes of 
their creator.
Doug