[meteorite-list] Lovina: most likely not a meteorite

[Jeff Grossman]

Yes, that is how it works.

Jeff

On 5/24/2011 10:14 PM, Michael Gilmer wrote:
> If Lovina is not a meteorite, then I would suggest that it remain in
> the Bulletin with a write-up, but should be labeled a
> "pseudo-meteorite" like Shirokovsky.
>
> Best regards,
>
> MikeG
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Galactic Stone&  Ironworks - Meteorites&  Amber (Michael Gilmer)
>
> Website - http://www.galactic-stone.com
> Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/pages/Galactic-Stone-Ironworks/218849894809686
> News Feed - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
> Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone
> EOM - http://www.encyclopedia-of-meteorites.com/collection.aspx?id=1564
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> On 5/24/11, Jeff Grossman<jngrossman at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Meteorites can be discredited.  We shall have to see about this one.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> On 5/24/2011 9:59 PM, JoshuaTreeMuseum wrote:
>>> Man, I knew that thing was too weird to be a meteorite. I wonder if
>>> the the MetBull will take it off their list or will they leave it,
>>> like they're doing with the Al Haggounia 001 aubrite kerfuffel.
>>>
>>> Phil Whitmer
>>>
>>> ___________________________
>>>
>>> Greetings:
>>>
>>> I just received a preliminary abstract on Lovina from Kuni Nishiizumi
>>> of UC Berkeley's Space Sciences Laboratory. Kuni, the abstract's lead
>>> author, concluded it is unlikely Lovina is a meteorite. The markers
>>> analyzed were beryllium and chlorine concentrations and the paucity of
>>> cosmogenic radionuclides (only Gibeon and Nantan show less). One more
>>> round of tests will occur and further conclusions will be drawn from
>>> the same. The abstract entitled "Lovina: is this a Meteorite?" will
>>> appear in the MAPS volume associated with the 74th Annual Meteoritical
>>> Society Meeting this coming August.
>>>
>>> It has been suggested by some diehards that the bubbling evident in
>>> the Lovina mass could have been the result of smelting, and that the
>>> lack of cosmogenic radiation could be explained by Lovina having been
>>> near the center of a much larger mass---as we know Lovina originated
>>> from at least a somewhat larger mass for the ziggurat structures to
>>> have formed. However, in the spirit of embracing the most likely of
>>> explanations, it seems compelling to conclude that the most likely
>>> explanation for an expanding host of anomalies is Lovina's terrestrial
>>> origin.
>>>
>>> Accordingly, I've decided to no longer offer Lovina as a meteorite and
>>> have asked my webmaster to take down references to the same on
>>> Macovich.com at her earliest possible convenience.
>>>
>>>
>>> All best / Darryl
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
> --