[meteorite-list] Quick Question about Sahara xxxxx finds

Michael Gilmer meteoritemike at gmail.com
Sun Dec 19 12:14:33 EST 2010 

Well, I had written a long and insightful reply pertaining to the
original Sahara xxxx issue, but my laptop had a moment of stupidity
and I lost the entire reply.  I have no desire to completely re-type
it out.  A pity, since I think it was an effective statement about the
duality of what is acceptable in the academic world and the "lay
world".  (*sigh*)


On 12/19/10, Jeff Grossman <jgrossman at usgs.gov> wrote:
> Parts of Algeria are included in the definition of NWA.
>
> As for export laws, you tell me!
>
> Jeff
>
> On 12/19/2010 11:34 AM, Greg Catterton wrote:
>> Thanks for the info Jeff. I have a couple questions...
>>
>>> Algeria, Niger, and Libya were all possible collection
>>> areas, and these are not in the NWA area, which is defined
>>> as "Morocco and adjacent parts of the surrounding
>>> countries."
>> If this is the case, how do recent Lunars like NWA 2996, 4483 and 5151
>> become NWA stones when they were found in Algeria?
>> Given export laws (however foolish they are) shouldnt these require export
>> permits to own like Canadian and Argentina falls since Algeria does not
>> allow export?
>>
>> Greg Catterton
>> www.wanderingstarmeteorites.com
>> IMCA member 4682
>> On Ebay: http://stores.shop.ebay.com/wanderingstarmeteorites
>> On Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WanderingStarMeteorites
>>
>>
>> --- On Sun, 12/19/10, Jeff Grossman<jgrossman at usgs.gov>  wrote:
>>
>>> From: Jeff Grossman<jgrossman at usgs.gov>
>>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Quick Question about Sahara xxxxx finds
>>> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> Date: Sunday, December 19, 2010, 7:44 AM
>>> There are several issues and a
>>> misconception here.
>>>
>>> Misconception: The Nomenclature Committee (NomCom) does not
>>> change the names of meteorites once they are accepted,
>>> except in extraordinary circumstances (e.g., the Gao/Guenie
>>> nomenclatural nightmare).  To do so would cause endless
>>> confusion.  All of the Nova meteorites were named that
>>> way when they were initially published in the Bulletin.
>>>
>>> The "Sahara" series, which were collected and so-named by
>>> the Labenne family, predates the "NWA" series by several
>>> years.  In the late 1997, the Sahara meteorites were
>>> being sold under this name, several groups of scientists
>>> wanted to publish on them, and the NomCom had to figure out
>>> what to do about their names.  The choices were to
>>> accept these names, convince the Labennes to rename them, or
>>> to rename them ourselves for the official
>>> announcement.  For several reasons, Sahara was
>>> accepted.  First, the names were already coming into
>>> widespread use, and renaming them would cause a mess.
>>> Second, it was understood that the coordinates would be
>>> released, perhaps in five years, once the area was hunted
>>> out (this never happened, but I still hope it will).
>>>
>>> The vote to establish the NWA series came in 2000, when it
>>> became clear that the Saharan nomenclature problem was
>>> growing in magnitude.  It seems possible that, had the
>>> Labenne meteorites appeared after this date, NomCom would
>>> have insisted that they all be called NWA.  But
>>> probably not:  we thought that Tunisia, eastern
>>> Algeria, Niger, and Libya were all possible collection
>>> areas, and these are not in the NWA area, which is defined
>>> as "Morocco and adjacent parts of the surrounding
>>> countries."
>>>
>>> Given all of this, probably the ideal names for the Labenne
>>> meteorites would have been Sahara 001 - Sahara xxx, but what
>>> was done was done.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> On 12/18/2010 2:25 PM, Greg Catterton wrote:
>>>> Many will provide false information or not any at all
>>> to keep the location secret. There is a discussion elsewhere
>>> currently about a finder lying about the location to secure
>>> the material available.
>>>> Algeria has laws preventing the export of meteorites,
>>> yet there are new ones coming out everyday. Even recent
>>> Lunars from there are accepted and sold. All one has to do
>>> is simply say NWA.
>>>> Berduc was the same way, many were transported outside
>>> the country and claimed to have been found elsewhere.
>>>> I have seen many others questioned about locations and
>>> even know of one person who has outright lied about where a
>>> stone was recovered to keep from paying the land owner the
>>> share agreed on and created a laughable story of the find
>>> that has been published with so many flaws, it looks like a
>>> scam ad on ebay. I bet some of you have a piece of it in
>>> your collection and dont even know the whole story behind
>>> it!
>>>> I think it happens more then we would really want to
>>> know.
>>>> Greg Catterton
>>>> www.wanderingstarmeteorites.com
>>>> IMCA member 4682
>>>> On Ebay: http://stores.shop.ebay.com/wanderingstarmeteorites
>>>> On Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WanderingStarMeteorites
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --- On Sat, 12/18/10, Michael Gilmer<meteoritemike at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> From: Michael Gilmer<meteoritemike at gmail.com>
>>>>> Subject: [meteorite-list] Quick Question about
>>> Sahara xxxxx finds
>>>>> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>>>> Date: Saturday, December 18, 2010, 1:51 PM
>>>>> Hi Listees,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a quick question for the group and maybe
>>> someone
>>>>> here can shed
>>>>> some light on this subject....
>>>>>
>>>>> Meteorites that do not have find coordinates or
>>> have
>>>>> falsified find
>>>>> coordinates are typically given the "Nova"
>>> designation by
>>>>> NonCom or if
>>>>> they are from Northwest Africa, they are given the
>>> "NWA"
>>>>> designation.
>>>>> In a handful of cases, a named meteorite was later
>>> changed
>>>>> to a "Nova"
>>>>> because it was discovered that the find
>>> coordinates were
>>>>> incorrect or
>>>>> dubious.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, why after all of these years does the Sahara
>>> xxxxx
>>>>> finds (mostly
>>>>> Labenne finds) are not referred to as "NWA" or
>>>>> "Nova"?  It is
>>>>> well-known that the find coordinates on the many
>>> of these
>>>>> Labenne
>>>>> Sahara finds are falsified, which has hurt science
>>> and the
>>>>> provenance
>>>>> of the specimens.  To this day, over a decade
>>> later,
>>>>> the true find
>>>>> coordinates of these specimens have not been
>>> revealed and
>>>>> probably
>>>>> will never be revealed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can someone explain the double-standard at work
>>> here? Is it because
>>>>> of the pioneering work and otherwise-respectable
>>> work that
>>>>> the
>>>>> Labennes have done - despite the falsification of
>>> the find
>>>>> locations?
>>>>> Why do these Sahara finds get special treatment,
>>> while
>>>>> other finds
>>>>> with dubious locations are lumped under "NWA" or
>>> "Nova" ?
>>>>> I realize the NWA designation did not exist when
>>> the Sahara
>>>>> finds were
>>>>> accepted by NonCom, but shouldn't they now receive
>>> the
>>>>> Nova
>>>>> designation?  In fact, the NWA designation
>>> was
>>>>> created, in part, due
>>>>> to the confusion created by the Sahara
>>> finds.  So why
>>>>> do they still
>>>>> get a special place in nomenclature after all of
>>> this
>>>>> time?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> MikeG
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone&   Ironworks
>>> Meteorites
>>>>> Website - http://www.galactic-stone.com
>>>>> Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
>>>>> News Feed - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
>>>>> Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone
>>>>> Meteorite Top List - http://meteorite.gotop100.com
>>>>> EOM - http://www.encyclopedia-of-meteorites.com/collection.aspx?id=1564
>>>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>>> Visit the Archives at
>>>>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>>>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>> Visit the Archives at
>>>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> Visit the Archives at
>>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> Visit the Archives at
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone & Ironworks Meteorites

Website - http://www.galactic-stone.com
Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
News Feed - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone
Meteorite Top List - http://meteorite.gotop100.com
EOM - http://www.encyclopedia-of-meteorites.com/collection.aspx?id=1564
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

More information about the Meteorite-list mailing list