[meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15

Sat Mar 23 22:09:53 EDT 2024

She could be talking about me. I was being very disrespectful.

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024, 7:00 PM John Lutzon via Meteorite-list <
meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:

>     Hello Anne,
>
>   In most cases, I Agree. In this case, both parties were respectful but
> had different views of
>  several implications of information divulgence. I enjoyed their points
> and the results.
>
>   Meteorite related aspects and meteorite discussions on a Meteorite-List,
> Brilliant!!
> John Lutzon
>
> > On 03/23/2024 2:19 PM EDT Anne Black via Meteorite-list <
> meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hey Everybody,
> >
> > When you have a disagreement with somebody, did you ever consider
> resolving it PRIVATELY?
> >
> >
> > Anne Black
> > IMPACTIKA.com
> > impactika at aol.com
> >
> >
> > On Friday, March 22, 2024 at 08:27:09 PM MDT, Mendy Ouzillou via
> Meteorite-list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I’m not getting in the middle of these discussions. I will simply make
> the following 3 statements + 1 opinion:
> >   1. Here is Mohamed’s exact statement: “Hi all members liste , I have a
> nice carbonaceous Nwa 15758 CK6 paired ,if anyone interested please
> contacte me.” Notice that he used the word “paired” making no claim it was
> part of the TKW of NWA 15758.
> >   2. This discussion about “pairing” has been going on for forever. The
> Global Meteorite Association has a policy to guide transparency:
> https://gmeta.org/standards/descriptive-terms/pair-pairings. Mohamed
> could have use better terminology to clarify the type of pairing, but I
> personally did not see his description as problematic and applauded his
> transparency.
> >   3. On a related note, when a north African (or any seller) offers
> material for sale that is unclassified, there is NO issue with doing so.
> They are under no obligation to get material classified before trying to
> sell. As long as both parties are transparent, and they agree to the terms
> of the transaction, there is no injury to either party.
> >
> > My opinion is that our community is sufficiently large that we cannot
> know every seller, much less their intent. Most of us do repeat business
> with sellers we trust, but that in no way means that all other sellers have
> ill intent. Like anything transaction in life – caveat emptor.
> >
> > My regards to the community,
> >
> > Mendy
> >
> > From:Meteorite-list <meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com> On
> Behalf OfMark Lyon via Meteorite-list
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2024 9:50 PM
> > To: humboldt bay jay <humboldtbayjay at gmail.com>
> > Cc: Meteorite-list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15
> >
> > Jason Humboldt,
> >
> > You just have to learn to tune out Jason utas. He has been doing this
> for years. He isnt going to change. You should have seen some of the
> messages he sent me before i blocked him. The first time I met him he went
> in my display room in tucson and started complaining about me selling taza
> (nwa 859) because it was his dad's classification. Then he claimed he was
> just using it as an example because he thought he overheard me attacking
> dustin Dickens (a friend of mine) for pairing meteorites. More recently, he
> made damaging accusations about omolon specimens actually being brahin. Not
> caring how it affected a Russian group who had just spent months travelling
> and collecting the materials. He always thinks he is right, and he very
> seldom is. For the record, you did not attack a Moroccan seller. You
> politely told him not to use your classification, which was probably a
> single person classification with low total known weight. Anyone with
> common sense can see that this is different from huge finds like hah346 and
> jikhara 001 and erg chech and whatever else he complained about. I didn't
> read his whole message because I have heard it all before. Collectors want
> to know they are getting these, and not another meteorite. People are not
> using these names to be dishonest but to accurately describe what they are
> selling. It would be doing the community a disservice not to use these
> names.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024, 9:04 AM humboldt bay jay via Meteorite-list <
> meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > I appreciate the immense amount of time I anticipated you would spend
> on your reply.
> > >
> > > Thinking extensively about this, I wondered why you tried to shame me
> as a hypocrite, even when you have witness to me striving for best
> practices. Having autism I often struggle to understand people's intention.
> Many times I have gone wrong assuming the worst in people's actions. So one
> of my strategies is to try to think of the best possible intention that
> someone could have. I admit sometimes it is difficult with your approach
> (and attempt to shame me) but since your critique was not sound I came to
> reason that you saw an injustice that I perpetrated against Benzaki Mohamed
> and you felt the need to "punch the bully in his face". A fierce sense of
> justice that sometimes leads me to act foolish is also part of my condition
> so I was able to have sympathy with this realization. Now that you have
> responded I can more clearly see your intention. So here is my considered
> response.
> > >
> > > To the community: I am happy to assist with meteoritics in any way
> that I can. If you have material that you feel might be paired with mine I
> am happy to look at any information and give my honest response. It would
> be unethical and dirty feeling to do otherwise. I have not made it to where
> I am in life by acting in short term interests. Relationships are life long.
> > >
> > > To Benzaki Mohamed: I am sorry if I shamed you. I am often blunt and
> act quickly. Jason's best point is that I should have reached out to you in
> private first. If you send me images or any supporting information I am
> happy to give you my honest opinion. You would then have my full support
> marketing the material as paired if it checks out.
> > >
> > > To Jason: I forgive you. I know what it is like to have conflict with
> the world.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Jason
> > >
> > > On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 5:50PM Jason Utas <meteoritekid at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > Hello Jason,
> > > >
> > > > As long as material is described accurately, I don't care what you
> do. I only butted in here because it annoyed me to see you attacking a
> Moroccan seller who is probably selling accurately paired material, while
> you’re openly doing the same thing with other meteorites. Glass house +
> throwing stones, not cool.
> > > >
> > > > I'm saying that it should be fine for you to buy and sell HaH 346
> and Jikharra 001 as those meteorites as long as you've accurately IDd them.
> But not if you're going to tell other people they can't do the same thing.
> That's the rub.
> > > >
> > > > Your points -
> > > >
> > > > 1 & 4) Why does it matter where you got your HaH 346? It didn't
> matter to you where Benzaki got his NWA 15758.
> > > >
> > > > Your posts didn't address the origin of Benzaki Mohamed's CK in any
> way, or whether or not his material is paired with NWA 15758. Based on
> everything you've shared here, you don't know or care about whether or not
> Benzaki's material is paired with yours. Your concern is "your NWA number"
> and protecting that investment. I can empathize with that, but your #1 and
> #4 bullet points don't agree with your actions:
> > > >
> > > > Did you ask Benzaki where his material had come from before you sent
> that public complaint? No. Did you confirm that it came from a different
> finder, the same place, or a different place? No. When it came to
> 'protecting your NWA number,' none of that mattered. Sure, the onus is on
> him to show it's paired, but you didn't give him a chance.
> > > >
> > > > You were preemptively trying to avoid any possible / probable
> pairings to 'protect your investment.' I understand your motivations, and
> think many dealers would take your side, but it's ethically questionable,
> at best. TKWs affect meteorite values, and if you're aware of significant
> pairings, (main) masses, etc., and you hide that information from your
> customers, that's dishonest. Sure, new things can turn up, but what if a
> dealer sold you a "main mass," and you later found out that they were aware
> of a larger specimen all along?Would you care? Would you be annoyed? What
> would you think?
> > > >
> > > > ...Is what you're doing here any different?
> > > >
> > > > You asked me what I would do. I sold some NWA 15364 (nakhlite) a
> while back. When describing it, I said: "Northwest Africa 15364 is one
> member of a large pairing group including, but not limited to: Hassi
> Messaoud 001, Bir Moghrein 002, Qued Mya 005, NWA 13368, NWA 13669, NWA
> 13764, NWA 13786, NWA 14369, NWA 14962, and NWA 15200. The published total
> known weight of these finds is approximately 4.3 kilograms. It is probable
> that additional pairings will be approved in the future." That was ~as
> accurate as I could describe the meteorite's pairings and TKW, to the best
> of my ability. I spent a bit of time looking at the analytical data for
> each of them in the Bulletin, finding photos of each of them, and trying to
> make sure I got it right. I guess I could have omitted mentioning the
> pairings, to make my pieces seem more rare? Would that be honest? I'd say
> no. But a few dealers are definitely doing that with some of those
> pairings...
> > > >
> > > > It hurts collectors. Last week, I saw someone comment on a
> Facebook post, excited because he'd purchased multiple pieces of the above
> nakhlites. He thought he'd bought pieces of different meteorites, not
> pieces of paired stones. He seemed disappointed to learn otherwise. It's
> great for the sellers, not so good for collectors. And it's not a new
> issue. The first similar instance I remember was in an ancient met-list
> thread back in the early 2000s, when someone tried to sell a meteorite
> paired with NWA 869. NWA...900ish, if I recall... It's probably been 15
> years. Hmmm...
> > > >
> > > > http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com/2004/nov/0989.html
> > > >
> > > > http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com/2004/nov/1120.html
> > > >
> > > > http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com/2004/nov/0961.html
> > > >
> > > > My email doesn't go back that far, had to find it on Google. NWA 900
> is another 869 pairing, but the problem was NWA 904.
> > > >
> > > > I've never really sat down and thought about it, but a significant
> part of the NWA market is based on dealers pleading or feigning ignorance
> about pairings and TKWs to collectors. It's ~accepted conduct, and it’s
> totally unethical. Dean Bessey called it out back in 2004, and nothing's
> changed.
> > > >
> > > > 2 & 5) We're talking about scientific descriptions of rocks. Little
> rocks are rocks. Big rocks are rocks. Size doesn't matter.
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately, larger finds and falls are widely distributed, tend
> to get less scrutiny, and get mislabeled often. Those three big meteorites
> you're using as examples are some of the biggest problems, because they're
> such large finds. Sure, it can be fun: I couldn't tell you the number of
> interesting things I've pulled out of lots of "NWA 869" over the years. And
> you should keep an eye out for the fresh L3s in shipments of HaH 346. Many
> of them still have skid-marks, and there's nothing quite like a W0 type-3.
> If you're on Facebook, you've probably seen the multi-kg lots of a totally
> new brecciated eucrite being offered as Jikharra in the past week or so, at
> Jikharra prices. But the mistakes aren't always unintentional, and they
> don't always favor the customer. And it's no one's responsibility to catch
> them, so...it just happens. Boatloads of random, unclassified meteorites
> are sold as NWA 869, HaH 346, Taza, Ziz, etc. Every big DCA meteorite. Ever
> since Agoudal was discovered, ~fresh pieces keep coming up as Taza, at
> inflated prices. A ~300 gram lot sold on eBay just a few weeks ago. There
> are some on eBay right now. Both of those irons are pretty big finds. A
> fake Tissint even turned up in a Heritage Auction a year or so ago. "But
> it's a big find" = not a good argument for arbitrary pairing.
> > > >
> > > > The issue is accuracy, and material getting misrepresented, and I
> don't have a good answer. The Meteoritical Society has its official pairing
> guidelines here, Section 4.2:
> > > > https://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/docs/nc-guidelines.htm
> > > >
> > > > The rules say that you need proof of pairing. Proof. Either
> fragments physically fit together, or you have in situ photos -- or you
> shouldn’t assume rocks are paired. That would theoretically ensure that no
> mistakes are made. And when scientists are in charge of things, like in
> Antarctica, that's what happens. Everything gets analyzed.
> > > >
> > > > No meteorite dealers follow the guidelines. 0.Historically, our
> community has assumed that a dealer who got a meteorite analyzed could
> reliably "self-pair" other meteorites to that specimen. The reasoning was
> that a lab had analyzed a sample, and the dealer could directly compare the
> analyzed specimen to others, so there was little room for error. It "helps
> to ensure authenticity." But, in reality, this practice gave dealers a
> carte-blanche to "pair" any meteorites that looked grossly similar. As long
> as you got one rock classified, no one would question anything you called
> paired. It's great. It can be really convenient if you get something
> analyzed and more of it turns up later. But...it also opens the door for
> problems.
> > > >
> > > > From a practical standpoint: we're never going to get air-tight
> documentation for most finds, large or small. And it would be ~impossible,
> and a huge waste of resources, to analyze every specimen of something like
> NWA 869. Or even NWA 15758. It doesn't work. In the end, everyone does
> their own thing, both collectors and scientists trust dealers to pair
> things correctly, and most things wind up being correctly identified. Many
> don't, though. It ultimately comes down to the given dealer, their
> experience, their judgement, and their honesty. And no one is perfect, and
> dishonest people exist, so material will be mislabeled. It is inevitable.
> > > >
> > > > You and I are both familiar with how NWA meteorites are bought and
> sold: single finds are often divided and sold on by any number of sellers
> and resellers. ~Identical lots of the same find turn up simultaneously with
> multiple dealers, often with a few odd meteorites mixed in. That's
> completely normal, and NWA sellers are frequently aware of others who are
> also offering the same material. The way you responded to Benzaki Mohamed
> denied all of that, and was demeaning.
> > > >
> > > > There's no good reason to assume Benzaki's material either is or
> isn't NWA 15758 until you see it for yourself. He's a pretty well-known
> dealer; I'd want to see the stones for myself, but, without knowing any
> other details, I'd be inclined to think he was right about the pairing.
> Kind of like how you're saying it would be okay to trust Benzaki if he was
> selling a lot of a larger find like Jikharra 001. And like how everyone
> trusts you to ensure that all of the fragments you're selling as NWA 15758
> are paired, even though probably just one piece was analyzed. ...And how
> everyone would trust you if you bought Benzaki's new lot and said it, too,
> was paired with NWA 15758...
> > > >
> > > > Everyone is relying on your experience, your judgement, and your
> integrity, to determine whether or not those fragments are all paired. Yet
> you're telling Benzaki, or his supplier, or maybe even the actual finder of
> NWA 15758, that they can't do the same thing, in this one case. Not because
> they're unfamiliar with the find, not because they don't have the same
> amount of experience as you, not because they're dishonest -- but "because
> of the resources you invested into getting the meteorite classified."
> > > >
> > > > I don't agree with that.
> > > >
> > > > I guess you're also arguing that NWA 15758 is different because it's
> "just 1 kg." But...is it? I haven't reached out to Benzaki to check out
> this new lot, but it sure sounds like that might not be true.
> > > > 3) I don't see a difference between labeling a specimen as "someone
> else's" approved DCA number versus selling a specimen like that. Either
> way, you're assigning an identity to a meteorite. It's the same thing in
> the long run, especially if you're posting the photos publicly. If you
> think one is wrong, then the other should be, too. I don't have an issue
> with folks doing that as long as there's no doubt that the ID is correct,
> but I'm also not the one attacking someone else for doing it. Case in
> point: I agree that your large eucrite looks to be paired with Jikharra
> 001. But, if you're going to play that card, and post it as "likely paired"
> on your website, it should be fine for Benzaki to say the same thing about
> his CK / NWA 15758 if he believes it. Right? If not, you're holding Benzaki
> to a higher standard than yourself.
> > > >
> > > > By now, you've had some time to look into this. Did you ask for
> photos of Benzaki's CK? Did you figure out if his lot is from the same area
> as yours? From the same finder? Do they look like the same material? Do you
> think they're paired? What is the real TKW of NWA 15758? Is it just the ~1
> kg in the Bulletin? How much more is out there? None? Just this one lot?
> More?
> > > >
> > > > You asked me what I would do. If it were my meteorite, I'd want to
> know. And I wouldn't want to hide that information from potential buyers. I
> don't think that would be honest.
> > > >
> > > > If it turned out that Benzaki was right about the pairing, you
> attacked him for correctly labeling a meteorite. I'd say you should
> probably apologize to him.
> > > > Sorry this got so long.
> > > > Jason
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 8:03PM humboldt bay jay <
> humboldtbayjay at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I am sending this again as I realized I only replied to you and
> not the list as well. This turns out good for me because it offers a chance
> to better compose my thoughts. I was running errands when I sent the first
> email. To begin again:
> > > > >
> > > > > Jason,
> > > > > I see what you are saying, and it is a reasonable point but I
> disagree. These are the reasons:
> > > > > 1. I can elaborate that "since you never contacted me" means I
> would have been happy to provide assistance and the name if the vendor
> would have done so with some images of supporting information such as
> sourcing from the same finder.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. There is a clear difference between multi ton finds that have
> ample documentation and a kilo find that has had little publicity. Even
> then I agree that best practices are to communicate leading me to
> > > > >
> > > > > 3. Point out that you were part of one of my conversations about
> this in regard to the likely Jikharra specimen you are referencing.
> You stated that "The Jikharra’s obviously that." You are also well aware
> that I am not selling any of the obviously Jikharra until my own
> classification is approved because you were part of the discussion.
> > > > >
> > > > > 4. You don't actually know where I sourced my material because you
> did not ask. For example the metbul mentioned many kilograms traded as
> Ghadamis that was not in Marcin's possession. Since I bought and traded
> Ghadamis before the name HaH 346 was approved, how do you think I should
> have handled the situation differently?
> > > > >
> > > > > 5. In regards to nwa 869 the following quote is from themetbul"At
> least 2 metric tons of material comprising thousands of individuals has
> been sold under the name NWA 869 in the market places of Morocco and around
> the world." along with the appropriate caveats due to its abundance-
> "Scientists are advised to confirm the classification of any specimens they
> obtain before publishing results under this name." So again I do not feel
> you are making an apples to apples comparison with your critique of my
> logic.
> > > > >
> > > > > We all obviously respect your encyclopedic understanding of
> meteorites so perhaps you can share with us your framework for best
> practices in these situations.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Jason
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 1:21PM Jason Utas <meteoritekid at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > Hello Jason,
> > > > > > To be consistent, you should remove the HaH 346 and NWA 869
> specimens you have listed for sale on your website. Those classifications
> were submitted by other dealers; your stones are unclassified individuals
> from DCAs with no evidence of their find locations, etc.
> > > > > > On your "featured" page, you also have a specimen listed as a
> "likely Jakharra 001 Pairing." Similar issues aside, relying on that
> standard, it should be okay for Benzaki Mohamed to call his specimens
> "likely NWA 15758 pairings."
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Jason
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 7:09AM humboldt bay jay via
> Meteorite-list <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Thank you Benzaki Mohamed for swiftly reaching out to me. I
> appreciate your attention to this matter. All is good.
> > > > > > > Best regards to everyone,
> > > > > > > Jason Whitcomb
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 10:29PM <
> meteorite-list-request at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Send Meteorite-list mailing list submissions to
> > > > > > > >  meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > > > > > > >  https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > > > > > > >  meteorite-list-request at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > > > > > > >  meteorite-list-owner at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
> specific
> > > > > > > > than "Re: Contents of Meteorite-list digest..."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Today's Topics:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >  1. Meteorite Picture of the Day (paul at tucsonmeteorites.com)
> > > > > > > >  2. Re: Very sad news (Ruben Garcia)
> > > > > > > >  3. Re: Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 14 (humboldt
> bay jay)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Message: 1
> > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 00:35:54 -0700
> > > > > > > > From: <paul at tucsonmeteorites.com>
> > > > > > > > To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Picture of the Day
> > > > > > > > Message-ID: <
> B9FA8D09888B415E9BF201CB08E98D1B at secureserver.net>
> > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thursday, Mar 14 2024 Meteorite Picture of the Day: HAH 346
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Contributed by: J?r?me de Creymer
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.tucsonmeteorites.com/mpodmain.asp?DD=03/14/2024
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Message: 2
> > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 16:17:06 -0700
> > > > > > > > From: Ruben Garcia <rrg85382 at gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > To: bernd.pauli at paulinet.de
> > > > > > > > Cc: Meteorite Mailing List <
> meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Very sad news
> > > > > > > > Message-ID:
> > > > > > > >  <CAGSP0MWZt2RtT_w=
> JXHjTi60UojwDGVDoReUF4jfJd7PaiMF8A at mail.gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Bernd,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I've know John for a very long time. This is very sad
> indeed. Thank you for
> > > > > > > > posting this.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ruben Garcia
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 4:03?PM bernd.pauli--- via
> Meteorite-list <
> > > > > > > > meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Dear List,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It is my sad duty to inform you that John Blennert has
> passed away :-(
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > John, rest in peace!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Bernd
> > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > URL: <
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240313/55acab68/attachment-0001.htm
> >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Message: 3
> > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:53:43 -0700
> > > > > > > > From: humboldt bay jay <humboldtbayjay at gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite-list Digest, Vol
> 261, Issue 14
> > > > > > > > Message-ID:
> > > > > > > >  <
> CAAt9en4eeBOF8M_4p5anUOO9wO9+_QQV1E9-1MBjdnJ6yVhFtg at mail.gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Benzaki Mohamed,
> > > > > > > > Since you have never reached out to me about my
> classification, Nwa 15758
> > > > > > > > CK6, I politely request that you do not use this name. I
> invested time and
> > > > > > > > resources into having it analyzed and if you wish to sell
> your material as
> > > > > > > > a named meteorite I suggest you do the same. Thank you in
> advance.
> > > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 10:29?PM <
> > > > > > > > meteorite-list-request at meteoritecentral.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Send Meteorite-list mailing list submissions to
> > > > > > > > > meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help'
> to
> > > > > > > > > meteorite-list-request at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > > > > > > > > meteorite-list-owner at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
> specific
> > > > > > > > > than "Re: Contents of Meteorite-list digest..."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Today's Topics:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1. Meteorite Picture of the Day (paul at tucsonmeteorites.com
> )
> > > > > > > > > 2. Meteorite carbon (Benzaki Mohamed)
> > > > > > > > > 3. Very sad news (bernd.pauli at paulinet.de)
> > > > > > > > > 4. Claims of Extrasolar Spherules from Pacific Ocean Site
> CNEOS
> > > > > > > > > 2014-01-08 Disputed (Paul)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Message: 1
> > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 00:35:54 -0700
> > > > > > > > > From: <paul at tucsonmeteorites.com>
> > > > > > > > > To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> > > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Picture of the Day
> > > > > > > > > Message-ID: <
> E402350C7FB04BC489E974C560D88522 at secureserver.net>
> > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Wednesday, Mar 13 2024 Meteorite Picture of the Day: Hamlet
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Contributed by: Anne Black
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.tucsonmeteorites.com/mpodmain.asp?DD=03/13/2024
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Message: 2
> > > > > > > > > Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 22:16:15 +0000
> > > > > > > > > From: Benzaki Mohamed <kemkemexpedition at gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > To: Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Meteorite carbon
> > > > > > > > > Message-ID:
> > > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > >
> CAGZKZ4-7HUfr2N7mzy4hApuFExCsSJU66gN+v9AjUXJkT8TxCw at mail.gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi all members liste , I have a nice carbonaceous Nwa
> 15758 CK6 paired ,if
> > > > > > > > > anyone interested please contacte me.
> > > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > > URL: <
> > > > > > > > >
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240311/7131a467/attachment-0001.htm
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Message: 3
> > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:48:20 +0100 (CET)
> > > > > > > > > From: bernd.pauli at paulinet.de
> > > > > > > > > To: "meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com"
> > > > > > > > > <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> > > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Very sad news
> > > > > > > > > Message-ID: <825781290.98647.1710366500765 at www.ud-mail.de>
> > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Dear List,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It is my sad duty to inform you that John Blennert has
> passed away :-(
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > John, rest in peace!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Bernd
> > > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > > URL: <
> > > > > > > > >
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240313/b5109823/attachment-0001.htm
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Message: 4
> > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:16:00 -0500
> > > > > > > > > From: Paul <etchplain at att.net>
> > > > > > > > > To: Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > Subject: [meteorite-list] Claims of Extrasolar Spherules
> from Pacific
> > > > > > > > > Ocean Site CNEOS 2014-01-08 Disputed
> > > > > > > > > Message-ID: <088038b3-ec22-4815-b8fc-d187f665a8a7 at att.net>
> > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Recently, a preprint has been posted to the arXiv site that
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > disputes proposal that Be,La,U-rich spherules recovered
> form
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Pacific Ocean Site CNEOS 2014-01-0 are from an extrasolar
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > origin. Instead, they argued to be microtektites of
> terrestrial
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > lateritic sandstone.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The preprint is:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Desch, S., 2024. Be, La, U-rich spherules as
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > microtektites of terrestrial laterites: What goes \\
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > up must come down. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.05161.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.05161
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2403/2403.05161.pdf
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The proposed extrasolar spherules are discussed in:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Loeb, A., Adamson, T., Bergstrom, S., Cloete, R.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Cohen, S., Conrad, K., Domine, L., Fu, H., Hoskinson,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > C., Hyung, E., Jacobsen, S., Kelly, M., Kohn, J., Lard,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > E., Lam, S., Laukien, F., Lem, J., McCallum, R.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Millsap, R., Parendo, C., Petaev, M., Peddeti, C.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Pugh, K., Samuha, S., Sasselov, D., Schlereth, M.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Siler, J.J., Siraj, A., Smith, P.M., Tagle, R., Taylor,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > J., Weed, R., Wright, A., and Wynn, J. 2023.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Discovery of Spherules of likely extrasolar composition
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > in the Pacific Ocean site of the CNEOS 2014-01-08
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > (IM1) bolide. arXiv preprint 2308.15623
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.15623
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.15623.pdf
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Loeb, A., Adamson, T., Bergstrom, S., Cloete, R.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Cohen, S., Conrad, K., Domine, L., Fu, H.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hoskinson, C., Hyung, E., Jacobsen, S., Kelly, M.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kohn, J., Lard, E., Laukien, F., Lem, J., McCallum, R.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Millsap, R., Parendo, C., Petaev, M., Peddeti, C.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Pugh, K., Samuha, S., Sasselov, D., Schlereth, M.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Siler, J.J., Siraj, A., Smith, P.M., Tagle, R., Taylor, J.,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Weed, R., Wright, A., and Wynn, J. 2024. Recovery
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > and classification of spherules from the Pacific Ocean
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > site of the CNEOS 2014 January 8 (IM1) bolide.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society 8: 39.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2515-5172/ad2370/meta
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Related paper, reprint and press release:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Desch, S., and Jackson, A., 2023. Critique of arXiv
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > submission 2308.15623, "Discovery of Spherules of
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Likely Extrasolar Composition in the Pacific Ocean
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Site of the CNEOS 2014-01-08 (IM1) Bolide", by A.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Loeb et al arXiv:2311.07699
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.07699
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.07699.pdf
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 'Alien' spherules dredged from the Pacific are probably
> just
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > industrial pollution, new studies suggest. LiveScience,
> Nov. 16, 2023
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> https://www.livescience.com/space/extraterrestrial-life/alien-spherules-dredged-from-the-pacific-are-probably-just-industrial-pollution-new-studies-suggest
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gallardo, P.A., 2023. Anthropogenic Coal Ash as a
> Contaminant
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > in a Micro-meteoritic Underwater Search. Research Notes of
> the
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > AAS, 7(10), p.220.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> http://ispcjournal.org/journals/2024/32/PhC_vol_32_Lomas.pdf
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yours,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Paul H.
> > > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > > URL: <
> > > > > > > > >
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240313/4f81045c/attachment-0001.htm
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Digest Footer
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > End of Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 14
> > > > > > > > > ***********************************************
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -------------- next part --------------
> > > > > > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > > > > > > > URL: <
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240313/5e27a1cd/attachment-0001.htm
> >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Subject: Digest Footer
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > > > > > > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > End of Meteorite-list Digest, Vol 261, Issue 15
> > > > > > > > ***********************************************
> > > > > > > ______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > > > > > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > > > > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > > ______________________________________________
> > > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > ______________________________________________
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> > ______________________________________________
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/attachments/20240323/6855c63c/attachment-0001.htm>