[meteorite-list] WG: AW: [IMCA] Hammers & Orientation from Dave

[Walter Branch]

Hi Darryl,

Okay, but...

>or scholarly assessment---

That's what I assumed we are attempting.  This list is for meteorite 
enthusiasts, not journalism enthusiasts.

I propose we stick to discussing meteorites, not bomb blasts.

-Walter

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Darryl Pitt" <darryl at dof3.com>
To: "Walter Branch" <waltbranch at bellsouth.net>
Cc: "Meteorite Mailing List" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:49 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] WG: AW: [IMCA] Hammers & Orientation from Dave




Hi Walter!

With all respect....

In ANY report---except where there exist the specificity of a coroner
or scholarly assessment---bomb victims are bomb victims.

There is never differentiation between those killed by blast injury,
penetrating wounds, blunt trauma or smoke/fire.  In fact the foregoing
types of injury are correctly referred to as primary, secondary,
tertiary and miscellaneous BLAST INJURIES.  Primary blast injury is
specifically a rapid increase in air pressure--a shock wave.

If the bull was killed by a shock wave created by an impact---it was
killed by the impact.

And that's no bull....

;-)



On Mar 10, 2009, at 10:11 PM, Walter Branch wrote:

> Hello Darryl,
>
>> is a bombing victim killed by a bomb-produced shock
>> wave not killed by the bomb?
>
> No.  They would killed by the shock wave.
>
> If dirt kicked up by a meteorite hits a person, is said meteorite  then a 
> "hammer?"  No.
>
> Like all analogies, it eventually breaks down.
>
> It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the end - 
> Douglas Adams.
>
> -Walter Branch
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darryl Pitt" <darryl at dof3.com>
> To: "Impactika" <impactika at aol.com>
> Cc: <IMCA at imcamail.de>; "Martin Altmann" <altmann at meteorite-martin.de>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 6:57 PM
> Subject: Re: WG: AW: [IMCA] Hammers & Orientation from Dave
>
>
>
> (deep breath)
>
> is a bombing victim killed by a bomb-produced shock wave not killed by
> the bomb?
>
>
>
> hi anne!  ;-)
>
>
> On Mar 10, 2009, at 6:43 PM, Impactika wrote:
>
>> Hello Dave, and all,
>>
>> I submit another example to you:  Carancas, since it has been   discussed 
>> on the other List.
>>
>> In my personal opinion, only one fragment of the Carancas  meteorite 
>> would qualify as a hammer: the fragment that hit the  house on the 
>> picture, but it would have to be properly documented,  with proof  that 
>> this specific fragment, and not another one, or a  piece of  ejecta, is 
>> the actual fragment that damaged this roof.   Any other  fragment is just 
>> that: a fragment of the Carancas  meteorite. As for  the animals, they 
>> might have been hit by a shock  wave, not by a  fragment of the 
>> meteorite.
>>
>> With the same logic, a few of the Park Forest fragments can  qualify  as 
>> hammers, I am talking about the actual fragments that  hit cars,  roofs, 
>> .... and only those. And again, only with proper  verifiable 
>> documentation. All other pieces of Park Forest are just  that: pieces  of 
>> the Park Forest meteorite.
>>
>> That still leaves Peekskill and Claxton as hammer meteorites,  since 
>> they are single stones, and witnessed, documented falls.
>>
>> As for me, as a dealer, I will not use the term hammer on my  website 
>> unless I have absolute proof and documentation that a  certain  specimen 
>> did hit a human, animal, or something man-made  (roads,  trees, 
>> fields.... don't count!).
>>
>> But that is my opinion.
>> Any others?
>>
>> Anne Black
>> IMCA - #2356
>>
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 03/10/09 09:16:39 Mountain Daylight Time, 
>> altmann at meteorite-martin.de writes:
>> Von: dave at fallingrocks.com [mailto:dave at fallingrocks.com]
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. März 2009 15:47
>> An: Martin Altmann
>> Betreff: RE: AW: [IMCA] Hammers & Orientation
>>
>> Hi, Martin,
>>
>> Please forward this quick note back to the IMCA list; I'm on a web 
>> interface and can't respond to the list from here...thanks:
>>
>> . . . . . . . . . . .
>> The problem, at least in my view, with hammers is the fact that  they 
>> are most appreciated by the least meteorite-savvy buyers.   These  newbie 
>> collectors are most exposed to paying a ridiculous  price  because a 
>> piece of, say, Thuathe was found in the roof of a  hut --  yet the piece 
>> they're contemplating purchase around was  picked up in  a field two 
>> miles away. Thuathe might not be the best  example, as  it's a killer 
>> meteorite in its own right.  Your  example of Gao- Guenie, though by no 
>> means reflected in market  pricing (yet,  anyway), might be better.
>>
>> . . . . . . . . . . .
>> Dave
>>
>> IMCA #5967
>>
>> www.fallingrocks.com
>>
>>
>> Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a   recession.
>> _______________________________________________
>> IMCA mailing list
>> IMCA at imcamail.de
>> http://lists.imcamail.de/mailman/listinfo/imca
>
> _______________________________________________
> IMCA mailing list
> IMCA at imcamail.de
> http://lists.imcamail.de/mailman/listinfo/imca
>
> ______________________________________________
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list