[meteorite-list] Mifflin, Amiss

Mon May 9 11:50:46 EDT 2011

Carl said: "This stone was found in Wisconsin"
How do you know that for sure Carl?Where you there?Have you visited the person who found it?
Sounds weak to me.
Greg S.

----------------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 02:58:42 -0400
> From: cdtucson at cox.net
> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com; jasonutas at gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Mifflin, Amiss
>
> Wow,
> I am not going to offer any long winded excuses here. I knew the minute my phone rang a few weeks ago that this was not going to go well.
> Imagine yourself enjoying a relaxing evening when your phone rings and it is Jason on the other end? Having never met this boy a call in and of itself seemed odd and when you consider that this is a boy that has admitted on this very list that he is not above recording and posting text messages from a so-called friend to make a point my first reaction to his claims was a question. " Jason, Are you recording this conversation"? His answer was "NO I am not". But I was very cautious about what I said to him as I know he probably had purchased this thing from Michael just to try and throw him under the bus as he had with others on this list before and now apparently me.
> All I can say at this time is that Jason isn't telling the exact or whole story here.
> for example he left out a key part of our curiosities. that being the fact that the stone I sent Greg was a fully crusted and unblemished fresh specimen that only Houdini would have know it was not a true Mifflin and once it was cut by Greg the look was questioned at the time before any of it was ever sold to anybody.
> it was decided by others and NOT by me that this was one of a known second lithlogy of Mifflin.
> At that point I was out of the loop as the only person that I sold to was my money partner Greg. And as Greg has acknowledged I have repaid him for what he paid me.
> This stone was found in Wisconsin and the reason I was ditched by, the finder has already been stated. he discontinued supplying us with more stones because by then many were offering far more that the $10 per gram we were paying. Whereas at first our $10 was more than anyone else was paying at the time.
> Further, I am almost certain that Jason knows who the seller/ finder is. he was probing me for proof of but as I said to him before. I was not willing to throw anybody under the bus without proof myself.
> To this day I believe this stone was found in Wisconsin and it is a statistical fact that many many strewnfields do in fact overlap. Whether Jason knows that or not.
> It has also already been pointed out that there are perhaps hundreds of found and uncut Mifflin's. Some of them may indeed turn out to be this second lithology. How will we ever know unless we check them all????
> As a similar example, Please remember that Calcalong Creek was not only found in the millbillillie strewnfield but it looked a whole lot like it as well until it was studied.
> I'm not at all sure whether it was from two different falls or not. perhaps Calcalong Creek collided with Milbillillie while in space and that caused the Earth collision? Again, I don't know. I was not there. Maybe they did fall together???
> What I will say again is that it is all being fully refunded, 100%.
> I would also like to say that proof beats mere opinions and opinions are a lot like something else we all have, Jason.
> Farmer was falsely accused of illegal mining. That is awful because yes, at first by his own admission. he was convicted and sentenced for that crime. But we all know now that it was overturned on appeal.
> Yes, this is a big deal . luckily it got fixed quickly. And looking at the bright side. perhaps it will turn out to be a second lithology afterall?
> Carl
> --
> Carl or Debbie Esparza
> Meteoritemax
>
>
> ---- jason utas  wrote:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > My story begins in the summer of last year. I saw some strange pieces
> > of 'Mifflin' on ebay that I thought looked funny. People were talking
> > about the meteorite having two lithologies, but...the slices and
> > individuals that I saw looked 'off.' A select few looked like
> > H-chondrites, and they had the telltale signs of wear that
> > freshly-imported Moroccan falls bear: worn edges, exposed metal flakes
> > on protruding corners (where the fusion crust had been worn off due to
> > improper packing), etc.
> >
> > At the time, I did nothing but send a private email to Anne Black
> > notifying her of my suspicions. I spoke with some other prominent
> > list-members addressing it, and they all agreed that the material
> > looked funny, but that nothing could be done about it given the
> > required burden of proof.
> >
> > So, I sat on my hands for several months.
> >
> > Just over a month ago, I saw a piece of the funny-looking 'Mifflin' on
> > ebay. It looked similar to some pieces that I remembered seeing on
> > ebay months before, and, being an end-cut, I was able to see both the
> > stone's funny-looking inside -- and the apparent metal grains on the
> > stone's exterior.
> >
> > I used the 'buy-it-now' option to purchase the end-cut, and it
> > arrived while Peter and I were in Morocco. When we returned, I
> > promptly shipped the end-cut off to Tony Irving of the University of
> > Washington; he agreed to analyze the stone posthaste.
> >
> > The results came back, but Tony wanted to wait until the probe was
> > recallibrated so that he could run it again to be sure.
> >
> > Lo and behold, he did confirm that my end-cut was an equilibrated
> > H-chondrite, with an olivine Fa of 18.6. For comparison, Chergach and
> > Bassikounou both have Fa contents of 18.4 and 18.6, respectively.
> >
> > University of Madison, Wisconsin performed most of the work on the
> > Mifflin fall. Between them and the Field Museum, over twenty separate
> > stones were analyzed. They were all L5. Mifflin is classified as an
> > L5, with an Fa of ~24.9 +/- 0.2.
> >
> > I then sent Tony the link to the ebay auction so he could confirm that
> > the piece that he had analyzed was indeed the piece that I had sent
> > him. He did.
> >
> > I purchased my end-cut from Bryan Scarborough (IMCA), who purchased it
> > from Michael Cottingham, who purchased it from Greg Catterton (IMCA),
> > who purchased the stone with Carl Esparza from the finder.
> >
> > Carl told me the following story over the phone:
> > He was contacted "out of the blue" by someone hunting in the Mifflin
> > strewn-field. According to Carl, the finder stated that he thought
> > there was a "conspiracy against him," because no one would offer him
> > more than $5/g. and he believed his finds were worth more than that.
> > So, according to Carl, he then offered the finder $10/g, and a deal was
> > struck.
> >
> > But...the finder asked that he not be paid via paypal or wire
> > transfer; he wanted cash mailed to a P.O. Box.
> >
> > So, Carl mailed the money to the P.O. Box and the first of two 'Mifflin'
> > stones was over-nighted to him the next day. It should be noted that
> > Carl included Greg Catterton as his partner in this deal, and Greg
> > sent over several hundred dollars to help pay for the stones.
> >
> > Unfortunately, as Carl said over the phone, his old computer recently
> > died, so he lacks the name and email address of the finder, as well as
> > the number/address of the P.O. Box to which he sent the money. Carl
> > is also unwilling to share the bank receipt from the transaction which
> > would prove that he did make a large cash withdrawal for the stones.
> > I asked Carl for the finder's phone number, but he told me that he had
> > recently tried to call the finder, himself, only to find that the
> > number had been disconnected.
> > He was unwilling to share the number with me, regardless.
> >
> > On the phone, Carl suggested that his source had likely ripped him
> > off, and he said that he believed that it was the reason why he had
> > been asked to send the money untraceably, as he did; Carl described
> > the situation as a "typical scam."
> >
> > He also suggested that the stones *might* be from an unrelated fall --
> > or could be the result of Mifflin being an 'Almahata Sitta sort of
> > fall.'
> >
> > I can't disprove either of those ideas, but they are unlikely for the
> > following reasons:
> >
> > 1) Almahata Sitta is a unique event in the history of meteoritics.
> > Different lithologies have been observed in many meteorites, but to
> > have individual stones of completely different and unrelated meteorite
> > types falling separately is unique. Out of the 1,238 accepted
> > observed falls in the meteoritical bulletin, only one has exhibited
> > individuals that have consisted of different meteorite types (for
> > example, H + L, Ureilite + EH, etc).
> >
> > And it's not that we haven't been looking for similar events; with
> > each and every fall, multiple stones are analyzed, and the simple fact
> > of the matter is that they are always similar...with *one* exception.
> >
> > So, Almahata Sitta is an exception. How much of an exception? 0.08%
> > of meteorite falls are like it. Less than a tenth of a percent.
> > Possible...but extremely unlikely. We also have to wonder about why
> > or how this hunter managed to find the only two H's from the fall that
> > were recognized. Over twenty other stones were studied and this
> > finder supposedly turned up two or three that were all H's. It's 'funny.'
> >
> > The other possibility that Carl advocated is that the stones may actually
> > have been found in Wisconsin -- and they may be part of a new fall that
> > somehow slipped under the radar. He initially suggested that they were
> > from the fireball widely seen across the Midwest on May 10th, but, at the
> > time, I had paypal records from Greg that stated that he had sent Carl the
> > money for the stones as early as April 24th.
> > So we ruled out that possibility..
> >
> > But, I agree; the stones could theoretically have come from a
> > different fall. The end-cut that I bought showed no visible signs of
> > weathering. No oxide, no anything. Given the weather in and around
> > Mifflin at the time of the fall, we can assume that the stones were
> > picked up within a week or so of having fallen. No AMS reports of
> > anything in the region for the given timeframe doesn't disprove
> > anything since meteorites often fall without much ado, but...two falls
> > in the same place *at the same time?*
> > Granted, it's possible. Not very likely, though.
> >
> > And you've still got to wonder about why no one else found any
> > H-chondrites while looking for Mifflin. It's not like meteorites were
> > laying thickly on the ground. Everyone who found stones out there put
> > considerable time into hunting -- and they all found only L5's. So if
> > Carl's source were telling the truth, and he did find the stones, it
> > seems best to assume that he wasn't hunting in the Mifflin
> > strewn-field, because, if he were, he would 1) probably have found
> > L5's, and 2) other people would probably have found H's as well.
> >
> > The conclusion I draw from this is that the truth has become
> > well-hidden. What is certain is that I have been refunded by
> > Bryan, and I know for a fact that Bryan has been refunded by
> > Michael Cottingham, who has in turn been refunded by Greg Catterton.
> >
> > What I have heard, however, is that Carl has been defending the
> > legitimacy of his stones, and is refusing to refund Greg Catterton.
> >
> > Regardless of whether the material is Mifflin or another meteorite
> > (from Wisconsin or from NWA -- it doesn't matter), the simple fact
> > of the matter is that the material sold by Carl has been shown to be
> > different from how it was advertised, and as such, he should be
> > willing to accept its return for a refund. If he wishes to get it
> > analyzed and sell it to others as a new meteorite, that is his
> > concern.
> >
> > I am fairly certain that Bryan, Michael, and Greg unknowingly sold the
> > material as Mifflin, believing that it was indeed what they sold it
> > as.
> >
> > That is my 2 cents.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jason Utas
> > ______________________________________________
> > 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