[meteorite-list] Lorton, Smithsonian and "cool" scientists thinking
Jeff Kuyken
info at meteorites.com.au
Sat Jan 30 01:52:46 EST 2010
I've always wondered why more scientists involved with meteorite study don't
deal with private collectors more. My belief is that it's probably more of a
personal thing and not nessicarily a tradition one.
But the proof is in the pudding as the saying goes! Just look through the
Met. Bull. from the last decade or two. Time after time you will find the
scientists who are doing the majority of the work AND also the most
important study are the ones who deal with collectors and dealers on a
regular basis.
Cheers,
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Fujihara" <fujmon at mac.com>
To: "Galactic Stone & Ironworks" <meteoritemike at gmail.com>
Cc: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>; <MeteorHntr at aol.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 6:52 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Lorton, Smithsonian and "cool" scientists
thinking
> ... and may I add that not only are scientists these days sporting
> "ponytails, dreadlocks and tattoos" (and I know several), but more are of
> the female persuasion. Girl Power dude.
>
> On Jan 29, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Galactic Stone & Ironworks wrote:
>
>> Hi Steve and List,
>>
>> Great post and unfortunately very true.
>>
>> Something I have noticed in the last couple of years - more and more
>> scientists have ponytails, dreadlocks, and tattoos. When I watch
>> science documentaries on TV now, you often see a young scientist with
>> a goatee and dreadlocks. It's funny and encouraging at the same time.
>> Times are a changin and people are becoming more open minded and
>> tolerant.
>>
>> When I grew up in the early 70's, all scientists on TV had buzz-cuts
>> and looked like cops. So, perhaps this archaic anti-collecting
>> attitude we go the same way as the dinosaurs. Just give it time.
>>
>> Seriously, next time you watch a science documentary (especially the
>> ones about astronomy), take a look at the scientists they interview -
>> you see a few "old school" types, but you also see the next young crop
>> of up and coming scientists, and if looks are any gauge, then I feel
>> hopeful that these exclusionary attitudes and snobbish views will
>> disappear along with the buzz cuts and pocket protectors. ;)
>>
>> Best regards and happy hunting,
>>
>> MikeG
>>
>> PS - isn't the Smith publicly subsidized by tax payer money? If so,
>> what right do they have to deny access to the specimens?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/29/10, MeteorHntr at aol.com <MeteorHntr at aol.com> wrote:
>>> Hey List,
>>>
>>> It was my understanding that a local news station was called to the
>>> Lorton
>>> doctor's office, and then that TV news crew actually drove the
>>> meteorite
>>> to the Smithsonian for verification. At that time, it became obvious
>>> that
>>> it
>>> was a genuine meteorite and then efforts by the museum personnel were
>>> started to acquire this specimen for the museum.
>>>
>>> In any case, when I arrived at the fall site the next day after the
>>> story
>>> broke, with a Meteorite Men camera crew on my heels, Smithsonian
>>> personnel
>>> were there at the fall site, which I thought was great. You can't
>>> blame
>>> them for wanting to obtain the rock. In fact, there would be something
>>> wrong
>>> if they didn't want to acquire it.
>>>
>>> I will say that our Meteorite Men producers made extensive attempts to
>>> gain permission from the Smithsonian for me to come to the U.S.
>>> National
>>> Collection with a camera crew and shoot footage of Earth's newest alien
>>> visitor
>>> to appear in one of our upcoming February episodes. If the Lorton
>>> story
>>> would have played out big enough, it could have become its own episode,
>>> most
>>> likely running at the end of February or in March of this year.
>>>
>>> We were willing to pay the $1,000 shooting fee that the Smithsonian
>>> normally charges, but we were flatly denied ANY access to the Lorton
>>> specimen for
>>> our TV show. I am not sure of all of the reasons, and who made the
>>> actual
>>> decision to deny us and our audience the opportunity to see it first
>>> hand,
>>> but it seems that because the Smithsonian now has their own new cable
>>> TV
>>> network, and as such it is now their policy to not give any competing
>>> TV
>>> networks any access to shooting any of their stuff in their
>>> collections.
>>>
>>> We also wanted to film the actual Tucson Ring specimen, that is the
>>> centerpiece in the National Collection's public display, for this next
>>> Wednesday's episode of Meteorite Men, but we were flatly denied access
>>> a
>>> few months
>>> ago to shoot that as well. The February 3rd episode of Meteorite Men
>>> goes
>>> into the historical story of the Tucson Ring and of course, as the
>>> center
>>> piece to our National Collection now on display in Washington D.C.,
>>> it's
>>> final resting place is an important part of the story of the greatest
>>> legend in
>>> all of meteorites.
>>>
>>> However, I was told that the "powers that be" at the Smithsonian did
>>> offer
>>> to sell us a black and white still photo of the Ring for $400 to use on
>>> the show. Nice of them, wasn't it? So, I don't think the problems we
>>> had
>>> this last week were related to the Lorton fall in particular, but seems
>>> to
>>> be
>>> a bigger bureaucratic problem elsewhere.
>>>
>>> Apparently, other networks have had severe access challenges lately in
>>> wanting to get footage of other national treasures since the
>>> Smithsonian
>>> cable
>>> network was formed. In our case it seems to be a real shame as it
>>> would
>>> have generated great PR for both our TV show and for the Smithsonian
>>> and
>>> for
>>> meteorites in general.
>>>
>>> Well, maybe one day, a few years down the road, we can look forward to
>>> the
>>> Smithsonian Cable TV Network running their own TV show about meteorites
>>> in
>>> general and maybe the Lorton specifically and we will all get to see it
>>> again.
>>>
>>> It is not my intention to paint the meteorite professionals at the
>>> National Collection in a bad light. In fact, I would invite them to
>>> respond here
>>> to give their side of the story. I have traded with the Smithsonian in
>>> the
>>> past and I even sold the Smithsonian some West specimens this last
>>> year.
>>> While the process was complicated and took a very long time, the people
>>> I
>>> worked with were great, and I consider them friends and colleagues in
>>> our
>>> celestial quest. I get the feeling that the challenges we face are in
>>> other
>>> departments other than theirs.
>>>
>>> I do know there is still some prejudice against the collecting
>>> community
>>> among some in governmental employed academia. There are those that
>>> still
>>> think all meteorites should be owned by governments and that there
>>> should
>>> be
>>> no private hunting for, collecting and owning of meteorites. There
>>> seems
>>> to be a few dinosaurs holding onto the idea that if someone earns a
>>> buck,
>>> or God forbid -- a living, in the meteorite business, it is a bad
>>> thing.
>>> (Ironically, I am still looking for the list of scientists and curators
>>> that
>>> donate 100% of their paychecks each week back to the institutions that
>>> employ them, because they really believe it is wrong for anyone to earn
>>> any
>>> money from working with meteorites.) And what is really ironic, is
>>> that
>>> people like Dr. Art Ehlmann at T.C.U., who really does all his
>>> meteorite
>>> work
>>> gratis, is on the top of the list of people who do their meteorite work
>>> for
>>> no pay AND he is also on the top of the list of scientists that support
>>> our
>>> collecting communities efforts.
>>>
>>> It is possible that there is an underlying fear that being associated
>>> with
>>> a TV show that features non-governmental collecting of meteorites could
>>> somehow cast them in a negative light, especially among a handful of
>>> archaic
>>>
>>> thinking colleagues that might scorn them at the Meteoritical Society
>>> meetings. Remember in junior high school, when a cool kid would talk
>>> with
>>> a
>>> non-cool kid, and all the other cool kids would shun their ill-acting
>>> member?
>>> Yea, I kind of think that "we are better than they are" thinking might
>>> still happen at some level amongst the "cool" scientists in the field.
>>>
>>> I am not sure who all still feels that way in the research community
>>> (maybe
>>> someone can make a list of them online?) as I have noticed a much more
>>> enlightened view from more and more scientists as the years pass.
>>> Hopefully
>>> that haughty bias will eventually dissolve away as people realize the
>>> positive contributions the private collector community makes to the
>>> science
>>> and
>>> that we are all in this great and healthy symbiotic relationship
>>> together.
>>>
>>> Steve Arnold
>>> of Meteorite Men
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> Gary Fujihara
> Big Kahuna Meteorites (IMCA#1693)
> 105 Puhili Place, Hilo, Hawai'i 96720
> http://bigkahuna-meteorites.com/
> http://shop.ebay.com/fujmon/m.html
> (808) 640-9161
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
More information about the Meteorite-list
mailing list