[meteorite-list] CALIFORNIA-REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGIST - Final

[Norm Lehrman]

Ken,

Congrats to you for pursuing this to a conclusion. 
They aren't always this receptive to dissenting
opinions.  Once in a while, it works, and helps to
restore a bit of our confidence.

Thanks,
Norm
http://TektiteSource.com

--- ken newton <magellon at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Norm and others,
> I asked Mr. Rant to examine the specimen for growth
> rings. He replied:
> 
> "Due to the interest by others and the quandary it
> presents (experts are 
> puzzled!) I have removed the item from eBay until a
> qualified expert 
> evaluates the stone.
> 
> "It never occurred to me that a local petrified wood
> expert lives four 
> houses down from me.  I called him up and asked if
> he would give me his 
> professional opinion to a problem stone in my
> possession.  I just 
> returned from a visit with him.
> 
> "He not only instantly recognized this specimen as
> petrified wood but 
> was able to give a close approximation of the type
> of hardwood it was.  
> He believes my specimen is from American Chestnut or
> Giant Chinkapin.  
> He described the cell structures as the reasons why
> he believes that is 
> what it is.
> 
> "I asked him if there was any doubt whatsoever in
> his opinion, even one 
> or two percent doubt.  Zero doubt--it is petrified
> wood with 100 percent 
> certainty!  The only doubt is the type of tree;
> could certainly be wrong 
> in that area of his opinion.
> 
> "So, you were persistent and hung in there.  Thank
> you so much for 
> helping me with this auction.  I will relay similar
> information to those 
> others who were also puzzled.  I was totally fooled
> on this one, which 
> will make me more aware next time.
> 
> "I will stick to selling what I am more comfortable
> with from now 
> on--you know, stuff with a label on it. :-) Best
> regards, Kenneth Rank"
> 
> Norm, Thanks for solving this and restoring the
> credibility of geologist 
> worldwide (or until the next non-List geologist
> deems an obvious 'wrong' 
> to be a genuine meteorite :>)
> 
> Best,
> ken
> 
> 
> 
> Norm Lehrman wrote:
> 
> >Ken and list,
> >
> >This image:
> >http://i7.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/94/59/e4ce_3.JPG
> >
> >looks highly silicous, which could explain the lack
> of
> >streak.  Am I imagining it, or can you detect some
> >concentric banding, convex towards the upper left
> >(opposite the saw marks)?  If that's real, this may
> >well be petrified wood!  Surely the seller would've
> >recognized that---
> >
> >Norm
> >http://tektitesource.com
> >
> >--- ken newton <magellon at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >  
> >
> >>Hi Norm and others,
> >>Thanks for your reply.
> >>The photos do not show up well in the little ebay
> >>viewer so here are 
> >>three urls.
> >>http://i7.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/94/59/e4ce_3.JPG
> >>http://i2.ebayimg.com/01/i/000/94/59/e233_3.JPG
> >>http://i1.ebayimg.com/01/i/000/94/6b/a18e_3.JPG
> >>
> >>I asked about a streak test, Mr. Rank replied:
> >>"No, I did not do a streak test, but I did one
> just
> >>now per your request.
> >>The finding is negative for any color
> whatsoever--no
> >>blacks, rust,
> >> hematitic, ochre, or yellows present. Thank you
> for
> >>the interest."
> >>
> >>Very curious reply (in my opinion) when looking at
> >>the red interior of 
> >>the photos.
> >>Best,
> >>Ken
> >> 
> >>
> >>Norm Lehrman wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Ken and all,
> >>>
> >>>How embarassing for geologists everywhere and
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>another
> >>    
> >>
> >>>general downer for serious meteorite people. 
> This
> >>>stuff is frustrating and sad.  I hate seeing
> people
> >>>ripped off.
> >>>
> >>>My bristles go up everytime someone says: "I know
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>it's
> >>    
> >>
> >>>real 'cause I had a geologist look at it---"
> >>>
> >>>As a career practicing geologist with over
> 10-years
> >>>college-level teaching on the side, I can assure
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>you
> >>    
> >>
> >>>that most geology curricula do not include ANY
> >>>significant training or information regarding
> >>>meteorites, much less, their identification.
> >>>
> >>>It is true that we geologists see a lot of earth
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>rocks
> >>    
> >>
> >>>and are in a generally advantageous position to
> >>>recognize something out of the ordinary when we
> see
> >>>it, but I have described to this list before that
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>in
> >>    
> >>
> >>>well-intentioned nievete, I used to pass around
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>some
> >>    
> >>
> >>>fine SLAG pieces as examples of meteorites.
> >>>
> >>>Everyone, please be advised that, in general,
> >>>professional geologists and geological
> academicians
> >>>know less about meteorites than list members! 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Anyone
> >>    
> >>
> >>>reading this has been exposed to more meteorite
> >>>information on this list than any geologist gets
> in
> >>>multi-degree training unless they are involved in
> a
> >>>course of study specifically involving
> meteorites!
> >>>
> >>>Cheers,
> >>>Norm
> >>>(http://tektitesource.com)
> >>>
> >>>--- ken newton <magellon at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Hi,
> >>>>Check out this professional geologist's
> 'Ureilite
> >>>>meteorite with diamonds.'
> 
=== message truncated ===