[meteorite-list] Its official! NWA 6291 "The King of Angrites" for sale -...

[Jeff Grossman]

Yikes!  Abstracts to meetings are not peer reviewed!

jeff


On 7/21/2010 10:05 PM, Adam Hupe wrote:
> Hi Jason and List,
>
> I do not refute Melinda Hutson's article that was never peer reviewed and
> contains several errors according to the classifying scientists.  I asked
> scientists about the article and they stated, it is obvious that she didn't read
> the original peer reviewed abstract carefully, even mistaking the type of
> petrology that was discussed using formulas that simply do not apply to the
> texture NWA 2999 exhibits.
>
> There were several prestigious coauthors listed in the original paper; Unique
> Angrite NWA 2999: The Case For Samples From Mercury.
>
> Who am I to argue with the world's best?  I will keep an open mind and hope for
> some ground truth that will hopefully settle it once and for all.  I think the
> authors were making a point of having an open mind and that the subject should
> be debated possibly stimulated more scientific interest in Angrites.  It took a
> long time to win over the scientific community that some of these meteorites
> were actually from Mars.  It was debated to death and now nobody argues about
> the Shergottite parent body any more.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Adam
> ______________________________________________
> 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
>
>