[meteorite-list] Hammer fall term (flogging the dead horse with wild abandon)
Shawn Alan
photophlow at yahoo.com
Wed Jun 13 01:54:59 EDT 2012
Mike G, Regina and Listers
Mike G I have to commend you on the explanation on the term Hammer stone and Hammer Fall and Micheal Blood puts it best at this link http://www.michaelbloodmeteorites.com/MMT.html
Since I been collecting those terms have been in use. I fell the both come in hand in hand. You can not have one with out the other in those terms and I agree by adding that term to a meteorite can add value. Historic history adds value to a meteorite. Rarity adds value. Even nick names have added value to meteorites. At the end of the day, people collect Hammer Stones and people collect meteorites from Hammer Falls and just because some people on the List do not collect Hammer Stones or Hammer Fall's, does not mean they have the right to say it is non since, silly, or useless word cause scientists do not use that term. But again, people are entitled to their own opinion and people are aloud to collect meteorites as they see fit for their collection.
Shawn Alan
IMCA 1633
eBay Store
http://www.ebay.com/sch/ph0t0phl0w/m.html?
[meteorite-list] Hammer fall term (flogging the dead horse with wild
abandon)
Michael Gilmer meteoritemike
at gmail.com
Tue Jun 12
22:04:45 EDT 2012
* Previous message: [meteorite-list] Ensisheim 2012,
latest news
* Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject
] [ author ]
________________________________
Hi Gang,
Flogging dead equines is my specialty, along
with waking sleeping canines. ;)
This is long. Those who are tired of
this discussion, please hit your
delete button now.
I'm not saying
that every person who uses the term "hammer fall" is
100% innocent of
marketing gimmicks. I cannot speak for every dealer,
just myself. I use the
term. I have used it for years. One of the
first things that really
interested me about collecting was -
different types and hammers. When I was
new, I tried to amass a
complete type collection. That is a common error
many newbies make,
because we don't realize what an expensive
and difficult
process it is
to complete a type collection that includes all rare types.
So, I
eventually abandoned the type collecting and moved over to hammers.
I love hammers. I won't pretend to love them as much as Captain
Blood, but his website and enthusiasm did influence me. And thanks to
the internet, a wealth of information is available about all meteorite
falls, including hammers. I couldn't get enough hammers, and I still
can't completely slake my thirst for meteorites that hit things. I
won't
rest until I have a piece of Lorton.....and Grimsby.....and so
on. Both of
those are unattainable at the moment. But given
patience, some portion of
those specimens (especially Lorton) may be
traded out into the private
market - Just like the core section of the
Hodges stone from Sylacauga.
But I digress. My point is, some of us use the term "hammer fall" to
express
the following information :
1) the meteorite in question is
a fall, and not a find.
2) the fall is an event where one or more stones
struck a manmade
construct or a living thing.
Having said that, if
the fall is not a single-stone event, then other
stones from that same fall
may have hit nothing of consequence. They
might have fallen in a field, in a
forest, in a desert, on a
mountainside, etc. Those stones are *not* hammer
stones and should
never be referred to as such.
The stone(s) that
actually did strike something manmade (or living)
are "hammer stones".
If *any* stone from a fall strikes something manmade (or living), then
that fall is a "hammer fall" and all stones from that fall can be
referred to as originating from a "hammer fall". However, as stated
before, only the actual stones that hit something manmade or living
are
"hammer stones".
This is a simple concept and I don't see where all the
confusion
arises from. Maybe as a collector and dealer I am too close to the
forest to see the trees on this one. I cannot go back in time and
look
at this as a newbie would.
Let's use one of the most famous hammer falls
as an example here - Sylacauga.
Sylacauga is a hammer fall. It is also a
witnessed fall. Given the
fact that it set legal precedents and is the best
documented case of a
human being struck, it may one day be referred to as a
"historical
fall". But I think the term "historical" is premature for
Sylacauga.
Let's wait another 50 years or so and then revisit the historical
debate for this one.
The Hodges stone is a hammer stone.
The
stone found by Julius McKinney is *not* a hammer stone.
Both stones
originate from a hammer fall. The usage of the hammer
fall phrase does
not
bestow hammer stone status upon the McKinney
stone. The McKinney stone will
never be a hammer stone, regardless of
what term is used to describe the
Sylacauga meteorite fall. We can
call it a fall, a witnessed fall, a hammer
fall, or late for dinner -
but the Hodges stone will always be the sole
hammer stone from this
event.
I think we are the ones making this
complicated and we are creating
the very problem we are debating by
splitting hairs and nitpicking the
semantics. Is there really a problem with
people being duped into
paying more than they should for a specimen because
a dealer used the
term hammer-fall?
How many people have been duped
by this? Who are they? Where are
they? Is there someone reading this who can
come forward and say -
"YES, I was ripped off by a dealer who sold me a
specimen from a
"hammer fall" and I was led to
believe that I was getting a
piece of
the actual hammer-stone, when I actually got a piece of a stone
that
struck nothing."
I know there are some people who are adamantly
opposed to the usage of
"hammer fall". Mike Farmer has clearly stated that
he hates the term
and has nothing but disdain for it and those who use it.
That much is
clear. A few others on this List have also stated their
opposition to
the term. The opposition has stated that the term is
misleading at
best and that people (newbies?) will be confused by the term.
Ok. I
get that. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But who is being
tricked or confused? Where are the victims of this crime?
Yes,
someone could be confused by the term. People get confused by
lots of
things. For example, writers and media people love to confuse
"meteor" with
"meteorite". We have all seen numerous examples
of
people confusing those
two terms and incorrectly using one to refer to
the other. But, where are
the buyers who were tricked or confused
into buying a specimen because the
term "hammer fall" was used?
Like I said previously in another post,
many meteorite terms are
confusing to some people. Terms used to describe
the state/condition
of fusion crust can be confusing. Terms used to describe
orientation
features can be confusing. Definitions of "historical fall" can
vary.
What exactly defines a "historical fall"? Or, what is a "rare type"?
Or what is "rare"? What is "pristine"? What criteria define "fresh"
or
"weathered"? The vast majority of this terminology is subjective
when used
outside of scientific circles.
"Highly shocked"? Says who? S4 or S5 is
shocked. Is it "highly
shocked"? If so, should we refer to S1 or S2 as
"lightly shocked" or
"moderately shocked"?
Weathered is just like
shocked - what is highly weathered, what is
moderately weathered, and what
is lightly weathered? Some W2 or W3
stones look more weathered than other
stones of the same weathering
grade.
The majority of collectors are
not scientists or academics. So should
they obey the same peer-reviewed
rules that scientists use when
preparing abstracts for a conference? I'm not
saying they should or
they shouldn't. But I do take exception when someone
states that
anyone or everyone who uses the term "hammer fall" is being
deceptive
or misleading. In my case, and I can only speak for myself, I use
it
denote a fall that contains stones that struck something manmade or
living. No deception intended.
So, what makes a hammer? There is
another debate.....
Best regards,
MikeG
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Galactic
Stone & Ironworks - MikeG
Web: http://www.galactic-stone.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
Twitter: http://twitter.com/GalacticStone
RSS: http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
-----------------------------------------------------------
On
6/12/12, cdtucson at
cox.net <cdtucson at
cox.net> wrote:
>Regine, MikeG,
>I hate
to beat a dead horse but,....
>There actually could be such a
thing as a "Hammer Fall".
>Take Carancas for example;
>This fall was not only observed but, it hit a
man made water
well and killed
>a couple of animals while excavating a
crater.
>This fall is generally accepted as a Hammer Fall
because we believe it was
>one huge stone that crashed and
exploded.
>So, then the question is; Is this a hammer stone
as well?
>Of coarse it is. That is IF it was indeed caused by
one single stone that
>exploded on impact. This is a fact
that is in dispute amongst Scientists.
>There may have been a
swarm of stones that hit at once. We do have evidence
>of
this in stones that were found that were nearly fully fusion crusted. Had
>it been just one single stone where did the nearly fully
crusted stones
>come from?
>This lends
doubt that in fact all of the stones are "Hammer Stones".
>However, from a sales standpoint. Having one of these ultra rare fully
>crusted stones would not be such a bad thing to have. I
would think they
>would be far more rare and therefore far
more valuable to both the collector
>(museum) or Scientist
for the simple reason of aesthetics and that it does
>make
for an interesting argument about how many stones did fall.
>As for the use of the word Michael Blood coined "Hammer". He could just of
>easily have used any number of other words to describe this
end result.
>Swatter, clapper, striker or anything else one
does with an object in his
>had while hitting something.
>
>The other really funny term is the use
of the word "Fall" at all.
>I mean try to explain that to a
newby? I mean after all, Aren't all
>meteorites Falls in the
true sense of the word. How else could they have
>gotten
here?
>So, the use of this term necessitates an explanation.
You have to explain
>that not all meteorites are falls. A
newby would look at you like you are
>nuts. The word " fresh
fall" would make more sense but, most of the time the
>"Fresh" is left out. Even when a stone is called a "fresh Fall" science can
>only determine the time it fell within years not hour or
minutes so even
>then... If you "find" a stone. How do you
really know when it "fell". You
>did find a "fall" but was it
"fresh"? Or does it just look "fresh"?
>Too Funny.
>
>
>Best,
>
>Carl
>meteoritemax
>
>
>--
>Cheers
>
>---- "Regine
P." <fips_bruno at
yahoo.de> wrote:
>>Well, I'm referring to an
overall suspicious odour when it comes to
>>"hammer falls"
on sales pages. It is so imprecise - as many other things
>>related to it. What comes to my mind right now is that I
downloaded a
>>small jpg once from a website on hammers
when I started getting interested
>>in the historic side
of meteorites. I was new to the subject and took the
>>picture as a genuine photograph of a man from the New Concord area sitting
>>on a dead colt which seemed to be collateral damage. I
researched my arse
>>off only to find out that the photo
is not related and the incident most
>>likely never
happened. The unreliability of the New Concord horse kill has
>>been discussed several times on the list in the
meantime, yet the picture
>>is still on the website. I
hear you say these things are completely
>>unrelated, and
perhaps they are. And in the end this might all be peanuts
>>even. Actually, right now, I ask myself what the heck
I'm doing here. I
>>actually enjoy doing
>>the detective work on which account is true and which is
doubtful! But
>>why anyone actively wants to play a part
in the confusion other than to
>>cash in is a mystery to
me.
>>
>>Enough said, Best wishes,
>>
>>Regine
>>
>>
>>
>>>________________________________
>>> Von: Michael
Gilmer <meteoritemike at
gmail.com>
>>>An: Regine P. <fips_bruno at
yahoo.de>
>>>CC: Meteorite List <meteorite-list at
meteoritecentral.com>
>>>Gesendet: 20:20
Dienstag, 12.Juni 2012
>>>Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list]
Hammer fall term
>>>
>>>Hi
Regine,
>>>
>>>I can't argue
that point. I can only say that we (as meteorite buffs)
>>>should do our best to educate the newbies, or make resources available
>>>that will educate the newbies. I think many of us do
that. I also
>>>think we could do better if we really
tried. But I don't think
>>>everyone who uses the term
"hammer fall" is engaging in marketing or
>>>trying to
mislead people for financial gain. Maybe some dealers do
>>>that. If they do, I don't agree with that and they should stop. But
>>>the term "hammer fall" probably isn't going away,
and if it does, it
>>>will be replaced by another term
that means the same thing.
>>>
>>>And we can't excuse people for making rash purchases. The buyer does
>>>bear some responsibility to educate themselves
before spending money
>>>on a meteorite (or anything).
I guess this gets back to some of the
>>>most
fundamental lessons of collecting things. Do one's homework.
>>>Buyer beware. Know your seller. Check references (or
feedback). :)
>>>
>>>Best
regards,
>>>
>>>MikeG
>>>
>>>--
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>Galactic Stone & Ironworks - MikeG
>>>
>>>Web: http://www.galactic-stone.com
>>>Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
>>>Twitter: http://twitter.com/GalacticStone
>>>RSS: http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>On 6/12/12, Regine P. <fips_bruno at
yahoo.de> wrote:
>>>> But what if said police
chief won the lottery and would like to
>>>>
purchase the
>>>> crumbs because the thing fell in
his town?
>>>> Of course the term is not that
confusing to meteorite buffs, but to
>>>> new
>>>> collectors or people who just want to own the
one rock from space.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers, Regine
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----
Ursprüngliche Message -----
>>>>> Von: Michael
Gilmer <meteoritemike at
gmail.com>
>>>>> An: Regine P. <fips_bruno at
yahoo.de>
>>>>> CC: Meteorite List <meteorite-list at
meteoritecentral.com>
>>>>> Gesendet:
19:27 Dienstag, 12.Juni 2012
>>>>> Betreff: Re:
[meteorite-list] Hammer fall term
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Regine,
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree in principle with what
you are saying here, I really do. No
>>>>>
meteorite fall should ever be pigeon-holed or categorized solely
>>>>> because a stone
struck something, and
therefore that stone has a
>>>>> higher financial
value. That completely defeats the purpose of
>>>>> collecting meteorites.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me clarify a few of the points you
raised :
>>>>>
>>>>> " agree with the "hammer fall" term being misleading, and so far
>>>>> haven't met
>>>>>> anyone who is very fond of it
>>>>>> except those who actually see it as a market opportunity."
>>>>>
>>>>> I know
of several collectors who use it, and they are not dealers and
>>>>> have no financial interest in using the
term "hammer fall". Before I
>>>>> became a
dealer, I was using it to describe my personal specimens. I
>>>>> still use it because of what it means to
me, and some other
>>>>> collectors, not because
it is marketing. Maybe others use it for
>>>>>
marketing purposes - I would not argue against that.
>>>>>
>>>>> "On the flip
>>>>>> side I have met a few who were
seriously confused by the term: The
>>>>>>
Sylacauga police chief for example, who sent me a link to an Ebay
>>>>>> auction, thinking the speck pictured
was a piece of the rock which
>>>>>> hit
>>>>>> Mrs. Hodges "
>>>>>
>>>>> I would expect our dear police
chief to be confused - he is not a
>>>>>
meteorite collector, he is a policeman. Police officers use
lots of
>>>>> terminology that is confusing to people who
are not a part of the
>>>>> law-enforcement
community. Criminals are often referred to as
>>>>> "actors" - that is confusing to me. Is a man a bank robber, or is
he
>>>>> pretending to be one?
>>>>>
>>>>> "
"Hammer fall" on the other hand is simply a sales term which
>>>>>> does the opposite of creating
historical awareness: It completely
>>>>>>
overshadows all the other aspects (historical or other) of a
>>>>>> meteorite
>>>>>> shower."
>>>>>
>>>>> I suppose it could, for some people. I
don't see it that way.
>>>>>
>>>>> " I'd find it
fairly irritating if anyone
used the term
>>>>> "L'Aigle
>>>>>> hammer fall", because one of the pieces
(presumably) hit a man on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> arm. "
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree 100%. In my mind,
L'Aigle is a "historical fall" if one
>>>>> must
>>>>> label it. L'Aigle will always have supreme
importance that goes far
>>>>> beyond anything
(or person) that may have been struck by a stone. Of
>>>>> course, it's still a "hammer fall" to some collectors, but I think
>>>>> most hammer-heads would agree that L'Aigle
is a fall of great
>>>>> historical importance
first, and a "hammer fall" in the least.
>>>>>
>>>>> " A more recent example is Sutter's Mill -
is it an important fall
>>>>>> because one of
the rocks struck a garage door? "
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed not. Sutter's Mill is not defined as
a hammer, and never
>>>>> should be. But, to some
collectors, the stone that struck Officer
>>>>>
Matin's garage has additional value because it did strike a mandmade
>>>>> construct. Of course, this additional value
is entirely secondary to
>>>>> the real value of
the fall, which is scientific first, cultural
>>>>> second, and hammer a distant third (if at all).
>>>>>
>>>>> I
agree completely with your sentiment here. But to say that a
>>>>> segment of the collector
community is
engaging solely in shameless
>>>>> and
>>>>> misleading marketing because we choose to
use a certain term to
>>>>> describe a fall is
not true. We can strike the term "hammer fall"
>>>>> from human memory forever, and that does not change the fact that a
>>>>> Sutter's Mill stone struck a garage, or a
Park Forest stone
>>>>> penetrated
>>>>> a house. Somebody will come along and
create another term to
>>>>> delineate such falls
from a fall like Tamdakt that fell in a remote
>>>>> area. That new term may or may not sound like "hammer fall", but
the
>>>>> meaning will be the same. And people
would then argue over the
>>>>> semantics of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best
regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> MikeG
>>>>> --
>>>>>
-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Galactic Stone & Ironworks - MikeG
>>>>>
>>>>> Web: http://www.galactic-stone.com
>>>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
>>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/GalacticStone
>>>>> RSS: http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
>>>>>
-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On
6/12/12, Regine P. <fips_bruno at
yahoo.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Sorry to come
up with the subject
>>>>>> matter again, but I
keep thinking about this every now and then and
>>>>>> would like to add my two cents on it this time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with the "hammer fall" term being misleading, and so
far
>>>>> haven't met
>>>>>> anyone who is very fond of it
>>>>>> except those who actually see it as a market opportunity. On
the
>>>>>> flip
>>>>>> side I have met a few who were seriously confused
by the term:
The
>>>>>> Sylacauga police chief for example,
who sent me a link to an Ebay
>>>>>> auction,
thinking the speck pictured was a piece of the rock which
>>>>>> hit
>>>>>> Mrs. Hodges (it was instead part of the one found by Julius
>>>>>> McKinney,
>>>>>> which has an interesting story by itself and, as far as I'm
>>>>>> concerned,
>>>>>> deserves more attention than a footnote).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm quite keen on the stories
>>>>>> behind hammer stones and the idea that something ancient from
out
>>>>>> there
>>>>>> is hitting something random and creates a connection between
the
>>>>>> sublime
>>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>> the mundane. "Hammer fall" on the other
hand is simply a sales
>>>>> term which
>>>>>> does the opposite of creating
historical awareness: It completely
>>>>>>
overshadows all the other aspects (historical or other) of a
>>>>>> meteorite
>>>>>> shower. I'd find it fairly irritating if anyone used the term
>>>>> "L'Aigle
>>>>>> hammer fall", because one of the pieces (presumably) hit a man
on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> arm. A more recent example is Sutter's Mill - is it an
important
>>>>>> fall
>>>>>> because one of the rocks
struck a garage door? I feel these
falls
>>>>>> deserve different attributes in
their headline, something which is
>>>>>>
perhaps attributable to all or most of the specimens of the fall,
>>>>>> such
>>>>>> as the historic significance, the classification,
characteristics or
>>>>>> man
>>>>>> hours included in searching for the
pieces in the strewn field. As
>>>>>>
mentioned before, I'm not referring to the actual stone which hit
>>>>>> something, as the
>>>>>> designation is significant in
identifying the rock as being the
>>>>>>
single
>>>>>> piece falling on something man
made.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Regine
>>>>>>
______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>
________________________________
* Previous message: [meteorite-list] Ensisheim 2012,
latest news
* Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject
] [ author ]
________________________________
More
information about the Meteorite-list mailing list
More information about the Meteorite-list
mailing list