Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums
Odinxgen

Comprehensive: Sed-Type Meteorite candidate

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Dear reader,

I want to preface this forum post with my deepest and sincerest thank you. Simply by reading this post you assist our entire community by discussing an important topic when it comes to meteorites, Sedimentary meteorites. It is not my intention here, now to convince or change opinions. 

My intention is to open up a dialogue, as it were, between ourselves. If sedimentary meteorites exist, there is no route to verify them and if you read my previous posts you will see that if mine is a true sediment meteorite, it is not received well. But I think everybody here is greatly knowledgeable in rocks, like I am, and there is no help for me at least from the academics, the labs, or researchers in institutions like them.

Let's pursue this with a clean and clear mind, I know it is tiresome to explain why someone is wrong and they won't listen. But this is not the lens we should view this from. It's not everyday that a sandstone with such a strong claim comes forward. This is fact and our community has let one after another slip when it comes to these stones. Frank Cross was wrong once about a copper bearing, this made it easy for people to ridicule him for bringing forward another "observed fall" (or 3) Even though the copper bearing WAS an observed fall, perfectly reasonable right?

Well here we are in 2019, over 50 years later, and while infrequent, a google search on the old meteorite mailing list will reveal that multiple sandstones with ONE very important thing in common have come forward and been met with the same fate as I have met. Ridicule. This one common factor is A white crust. this crust is obvious in my stone and thankfully it does not react to hydrochloric acid, ruling out calcium coating. 

Is it not true that the fusion crust is the most important identifier of a potential meteorite? In the field, do we rely on oxygen isotope data and other sciency tests far beyond me, or physical traits and instinct? This is why I am posting John's stone, as a tribute to this perfect launch pad for our discussion. To argue that this does not look like a meteorite is the argument of a blind man. Our disbelief of meteoric origin of this stone comes from one man. Haack, and his strange isotope data. Don't take my word for it, look it up like I have, I know that this is refutable and I won't try and convince anyone of this at all! But the physical traits are nuts to me! not only physical traits but it is in the epicentre of the event, And is not a stone belonging to this area. Sounds good to me.

Moving past John's stone I want everybody to examine these photos fairly and honestly(**-Edit The images in the gallery Are my stone and all except 1st one here are John's stone from Tunguska event), Please, if you would. I can demonstrate fusion crust easily, and I would like to ask this community to help me prove this. There is no institution, or person that can, I have tried and been laughed at to the point where I actually kind of hate this stone. But right now no geologist can positively ID this stone and they usually rely on all of the fringe things that can happen to a sandstone and saying well it's probably just one of those freak stones!(This was a real thing said to me by a Geologist with a PhD.) 

I will not accept this, and I know that these "freak occurrences" Are EXPECTED in a sed-type. If you don't believe me then refer to the amazing research available, because the deeper I dug the more that was revealed to me. So with that I will shut up, and I am waiting to hear from certain people especially but everybody is welcome to comment but Please keep it to what I would need to do to correctly I.D. If it is a sandstone that's terrestrial that's fine, but I need to be able to prove this. I have heard all opposition to this but there are facts that support my claim that are not being discussed because I have no idea why honestly. Given the strong white crust at the top and the conical teardrop shape(ish?) I think that it's more than fair to finally have a good look at these mythic legends, The White-grey crusted sandstone was thrown out in the past, and people in this community shake their head and say, he should have kept it (Frank Cross). Well here we go I found one and at the end of the day is finding the meteorite not the hardest part!?

https://imgur.com/gallery/jVLSDLv

Happy hunting and warm regards,

-Odin

20190730_022611.jpg

Anfinogenova Y Fig1.JPG

image.png

IMG_0140.JPG

IMG_0141.JPG

IMG_0142.JPG

IMG_0143.JPG

S 3 F 3.jpg

Edited by Odinxgen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received permission from authors of the papers behind a pay wall to share them for the purpose of identifying stones as well as parts of our conversations if anybody is interested message me and let me know why, and I will send what I can via message or whatever works best.

-Odin

10.1016@j.pss.2007.12.014.pdf 1605.01892.pdf 1706.06093.pdf 2014 Anfinogenov Icarus.pdf 2015 Anfinogenov Bonatti Icarus.pdf 2016 Haack Icarus.pdf 6388.pdf 15740-18093-1-PB.pdf brack2002.pdf cavosie2018.pdf foucher2010.pdf Mineralogical_alteration_of_artificial_m.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odin,

There has never been a meteorite found at the Tunguska event in 1908. Perhaps you have it misidentified and could correct.

billpeters

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, billpeters said:

Odin,

There has never been a meteorite found at the Tunguska event in 1908. Perhaps you have it misidentified and could correct.

billpeters

Yes I can,

The John's stone reference is not to claim meteoric origin of that stone, It is in the epicentre of the Tunguska event. And Also you have your opinion, mine is that John's stone IS a meteorite, especially after speaking to Yana... Or Dr. Anfinogenova regarding this. And these photos of John's stone fragments are from the lab that own rights to it. 

John's stone has screwed up Oxygen Isotope data that is refutable but that data is the only reason it is not considered a meteorite as far as I know.

Edited by Au Seeker
Editing profanity, some young kids visit the forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the oxygen isotope date, I see it this way and this is perfectly reasonable. The stone was not found for almost 100 years, contamination is likely right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Response to the Comment by Haack et al. (2015) on the paper by Anfinogenov et al. (2014): John's stone: A possible fragment of the 1908 Tunguska meteorite
Yana Anfinogenova, John Anfinogenov, Larisa Budaeva, Dmitry Kuznetsov
(Submitted on 6 May 2016 (v1), last revised 22 Sep 2016 (this version, v4))
The article provides an open discussion and a critical feedback to the comments of Haack et al. (2015) and emphasizes a significance of the first macroscopic evidence for a candidate meteorite of a new type: planetary-origin meteorite composed of silica-rich sedimentary rock. Discussion concerns the arguments for (i) candidate parental bodies including the Earth, Mars and icy moons of Saturn and Jupiter; (ii) PGE anomaly versus glassy silicate microspherules and quartz grains anomaly in the area of the 1908 Tunguska catastrophe; (iii) isotopic heterogeneity of unmixed silicate reservoirs on Mars; (iv) possible terrestrial loss or contamination in the noble gas signatures in meteorites that spent time in the extreme weather conditions; (v) cosmogenic isotopes and shielding; and (vi) pseudo meteorites. We conclude that the list of candidate parental bodies for hypothetical sedimentary-origin meteorites includes, but is not limited by the Earth, Mars, Enceladus, Ganymede, and Europa. A parental body should be identified based on the entire body of evidence which is not limited solely by tests of oxygen and noble gas isotopes whose signatures may undergo terrestrial contamination and may exhibit significant heterogeneity within the parental bodies.
Comments:    11 pages, 49 references
Subjects:    Earth and Planetary Astrophysics (astro-ph.EP)
Cite as:    arXiv:1605.01892 [astro-ph.EP]
     (or arXiv:1605.01892v4 [astro-ph.EP] for this version)
Submission history
From: Yana Anfinogenova [view email] 
[v1] Fri, 6 May 2016 11:18:08 UTC (140 KB)
[v2] Sun, 29 May 2016 12:46:45 UTC (140 KB)
[v3] Sat, 25 Jun 2016 06:46:32 UTC (146 KB)
[v4] Thu, 22 Sep 2016 03:10:34 UTC (146 KB)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing you posted resembles a meteorite at all.  Not sure what your aim is repeating these same claims over and over and over on this forum; you're going to get the same responses here and anywhere else meteorite enthusiasts gather.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2019 at 11:39 AM, Mikestang said:

Nothing you posted resembles a meteorite at all.  Not sure what your aim is repeating these same claims over and over and over on this forum; you're going to get the same responses here and anywhere else meteorite enthusiasts gather.

My point is valid. A sedimentary meteorite is not only possible but I have one now. The fact that meteorite enthusiasts such as yourself cannot identify what is clearly a meteorite is not my fault. Others that are versed on this topic agree with me and also, I believe John's stone is a meteorite and the same ignorance applies there as well. I am very well researched on this topic and just because you don't understand the topic does not mean I do not. Mikestang kindly do not respond, I dont't care what you or anybody else has to say. I have done this work myself and "meteorite Enthusiasts" have proven useless for any help whatsoever. I won't continue to try and educate you on some basic realities surrounding sandstone, figure it out yourself. I am not wrong and the discovery of Majorite and Ringwoodite will prove 100% that the HP phases of pyroxene and olivine could not be in this stone unless it IS in fact a meteorite. But you don't know jack crap about this and you will still die on your ignorant hill that I am wrong. Lol my friend I am not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been laughed at and made fun of more than I have even thought possible in my life, but I stand firmly behind all of the statements I am making and I look to you for your best interpretation of these things, and for advise on how I could get proof being a man with no money, and no equipment other than a sharp eye, and a mind for looking at the very broad picture.
So if I haven't offended you with my endless chains of drivel and incohesive observations. Than let me formally and as to this date fully lay out exactly why I think this may be a meteorite.

1. It's shape, this sandstone has no hard edges on it whatsoever. when it was complete it looked like a perfect teardrop, the specimen when it was complete was a perfect meteorite. Teardrop shaped with an obvious orientation which I will mention later.

2. The little things, excluding a black fusion crust, every single other meteoritic feature we look for in the field is present. There are flowlines, there are ridges, and there is regmaglypts. and further than this all of these individual features are following the potential orientation of this meteorite. Nobody has looked closely at these things because people think its absurd of me to propose that this is a meteorite. but look for them and they are there and quite easy to recognize, but the size of the sand grains is very deceptive. lighting is important in order to reveal them.

3. The mineral inclusions, I cannot speak to the origin of this stone. I don't know where it may have come from, but all the minerals you identified should be in a sandstone meteorite if the meteorite originated from Mars. They are in the Martian meteorites, excluding quartz and garnet. But I will say this, Pyroxene and olivine are present for sure. this stone is very low in Iron and that is uncommon especially with the olivine inclusion. My interpretation of the minerals is this.
That a type of burnt glass is present.  And that the previously unknown brown crystal accumulate in the pocks, is likely a polymorph of olivine and Pyroxene which belongs to the Garnet family called Majorite. And if Majorite is present then upon proper examination we would likely find ringwoodite as well.
Gold, the metal that my detector picked up. I assumed this was a false reading from my detector. as the stone didn't show any indication of metal. But I have found a vein Gold in color that is truly gold, unlike more impure forms of it this vein is dark gold in color and easily observable but I have no idea if I could differentiate the gold from the iron pyrite minerals readily. what's even crazier about this is that they are dark gold Crystal inclusions and not native metal.

4. Mineral veins. Now this something truly you would be perfectly qualified and able to observe yourself with the resources you have now, The mineral vein that I am going to call unconsolidated 1 is, well, unconsolidated. The grains are not fully melted, this happens a lot in Carbonaceous Chondritic meteorites as broken surface will heat disproportionately for a short time, the temperature may reach 2800 c. But because this change is fast the veins don't fully melt. I sanded down a window on the vein cluster I showed you and it revealed that the grains in that vein fit this criteria. and going back to an earlier point if this stone was affected by terrestrial heating process the process would have taken years to accomplish and the grains could not possibly be unconsolidated, but further than this the vein I showed you cannot be a layering band because it ends prematurely inside the stone. there are also mineral eyes inside the stone.

5. Orientation, this is the biggest indicator for us to rely on, that this is a candidate for a meteorite. We cannot simply refuse to observe and understand the shape of this stone as while there are terrestrial processes that may create similar features it's important to remember that we are looking at multiple features that individually are difficult to determine their cause and effectively ignoring the aerodynamic features of this sandstone is non scientific. If you would agree that this is a candidate meteorite, then the shape of the stone is of the utmost importance as to the classification afterword's, and to proving what I believe only remains to be proven. now I won't try and explain the shape or aero dynamics of this stone. But to prove orientation in a meteorite we would simply examine the meteorite for a conical structure and for a trailing end. both of these features are present and they bring together all of the other features as the orientation explains how the regmaglypts formed in the way they did, the flow lines are consistent, and the weight distribution and shape of this stone is also not difficult to understand. 

6. A note, I admittedly have caused great damage to this stone. I don't regret it, I knew what I have been holding on to was at the very least a potential meteorite from the day I found it. If I hadn't destroyed the parts I did I would never have revealed the information I needed to layout all of this information. And to you Graham, and anybody reading this, you may not know that this is a sandstone meteorite. And that is okay, I don't know either, but There is no argument to be made that this is not a worthy candidate for closer analysis. I have yet to hear a single grounded argument that these features are terrestrial and that when one considers all of these initial observations together does it not make it a formidable pseudometeorite at the very least. I have no regrets about the damage I have caused to this stone, it is similar to the damage caused to me by the complete stonewall I encountered likely because of my race and because I am not a wealthy individual. I have no doubt that if I were a successful white professional of some kind my find would have been received with curiosity and enthusiasm for the importance of the implication of it. I have been let down not by a lack of my own drive and will, but by a society that would rather see more poor and in the ditch begging for change then intelligent and capable of making such a discovery by my own initiative. I have no doubt that this is the work of the Lord, and in His holy name let this stone be revealed for what it is. and the truth become apparent.
 

The first few images of this sandstone show the validity of my claim "This stone is perfectly ablated and Oriented" 

Where the first image is to demonstrate the teardrop shape, but is not top down. the second image demonstrates that my claim of flow lines is valid and is consistent with proposed orientation, the sixth image is the potential trailing end.

 

Moving on past these, The 9th image is an image if the interior, showing what cannot be weathering rind, but a crust, the reason for this is that the immediate area under the crust is also affected by a higher degree of metamorphism that makes it much harder and less friable than the delicate interior. (I know people on here will screech bloody mary here, they are wrong and Obviously I understand this subject because I can say this pre-emptively, No the interior is not weak, its quite hard just much less so than the crust lol)

 

The 13th image shows a melt pocket similar to what you might find on a carbonaceous chondrite which I would consider the closest relatives to this type of meteorite if this sandstone is in fact a meteorite. Immediately surrounding the melt pocket is what I believe to be a fairly easily identifiable Majorite cluster undoubtedly surrounded by the greyish and white HP polymorph of olivine called Ringwoodite. This remains to be tested but if this is a meteorite that is what they are, So you know, I have no doubt I am right. The rest are just different angles or demonstrations of these things to validate my above statement and to make fact that certain features of this stone cannot be ignored, regardless of your opinion. 

Feel free to contact me regarding your find, if it has brought you here, then you likely need information as I did, and now have. I have already explained to about 2 dozen people why their sandstone is not a meteorite and if you do have one that is sedimentary I know how you will be able to ID it, but a word of warning, This is something better handled in small pieces, don't just tell someone it's a meteorite. Its better to use my identification of this stone as a road map. Find a geologist willing to analyze the minerals. that will be the only reliable test unless the stone is fresh.

 

If you don't think sedimentary meteorites are possible, then just frick off. 

I don't want to hear about how with zero explanation for all of these things this sandstone is perfectly natural it is not. And while imprinted sandstone does happen this process makes the outer layer smoothed. this stone is displaying EVERY indicator of a meteorite even the OPTIONAL orientation which is valid and if you want a more detailed description on this then contact me, I wont respond to ridicule as its childish and absolutely more harmful than good in this specific case. Yes I understand you have seen hundreds of igneous meteorites, you've never seen a sandstone one, so contribute or stay silent, this is important. As always

Cheers,

Odin

20190730_022611.jpg

20190730_120327.jpg

20190730_120437.jpg

20190730_120549.jpg

20190802_101607.jpg

20190802_101723.jpg

20190802_101817.jpg

20190802_101827.jpg

20191102_233700.jpg

20191102_233710.jpg

20191104_101554.jpg

20191104_101558.jpg

20191104_101611.jpg

20191104_101639.jpg

20191104_101647.jpg

20191104_101727.jpg

20191104_101752.jpg

20191104_101830.jpg

20191104_101839.jpg

20191104_101933.jpg

20191104_101959.jpg

20191104_102003.jpg

20191104_102008.jpg

20191104_102011.jpg

20191104_102046.jpg

20191104_104522.jpg

20191104_104527.jpg

20191104_104545.jpg

20191104_104553.jpg

20191104_104600.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:idunno:

It looks just like a hunk of sandstone to me.

What is your objective here?

We have all given our opinions and you won't accept them. Now you are writing volumes in your defense. It is going to be up to you to prove your theories. I can't see how your dissertations to us get you any closer to that goal.

Why don't you invest the time and effort into finding a real one? 

How about focusing on pitching your sandstone to the scientific community?

It seems your objective is making someone "believe". You are using a lot of calories towards that goal.  Now your posting is getting more abusive because you don't like our opinions. It is clear you are emotionally invested in the quest.

The disconnect here is we are not your therapists and we don't care about your emotions. We are rock and meteorite guys. So it is getting a bit weird. 

Why don't you make these appeals to people who might be interested in them? I am not sure why you keep hammering at us for validation. The only thing that is clear is that it has become an emotional thing for you. 

While you are trying to make someone believe your stone is a meteorite we are out finding real ones. It is my opinion that this is the reason for your abusive posts and emotional behavior. I believe that you want the acceptance of this group and to be recognised as a "meteorite hunter".

In order to do that you are going to have to go out and find a rock that looks like a meteorite. It is my prediction that you will be frustrated with any other approach.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • well done 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please study some geology Odxin, and try not to get some mad when other forum members are only trying to point you in the right direction. :inocent:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lool it's not for you, obviously nobody cares to give me the benefit of the doubt that my research has been credible whatsoever. So sit in your corners and watch me do it myself.

 

20191104_1017271.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not like you, I am completely accurate and listen to me. Just because you look at these features and scoff to me that just means not only are you completely unable to recognize meteoritic features based on an understanding of atmospheric entry as opposed to "is it a black crust, no? not meteorite" (lol) You could witness the fall find the location and completely miss it. Haha you have made fun of me and ridiculed me on here, I don't care about your opinions, why should I? But it's motivated me to see it through. You all have no evidence this is terrestrial, you cannot because it is not. You refuse to listen, and you want me to be wrong to justify your ridicule. But I was right from the beginning and here the claims Ive made are being verified right now. I have not abused you, Ive turned your own foolishness upon your own heads. As I said from day 1 The stone speaks for itself and you so called hunters have been less then helpful. God iIS in this with me and I am praying for the truth, because you have resisted it as faithfully as you possibly could.

I don't hate you, I just don't care what you think, you have no facts, and you won't accept my research or do any yourself. -_-

20190802_101607.jpg

20190802_101723.jpg

20190802_101817.jpg

20190802_101827.jpg

20191104_101839.jpg

20191104_101959.jpg

20191104_102011.jpg

20190802_101817.jpg

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol yeah it's sad, y'all supposed to be meteorite professionals but you can't recognize one that was right in front of your face. Billpeters, why don't you or any of the adamant nay sayers put forth your evidence I am wrong. This should be easy but has not happened at all at least in regards to these features that I have just demonstrated with photo evidence. Sooo arrogant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol these people don't know what they are talking about. I have shown my cards, so prove me wrong or keep it down -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have to prove you wrong, you have to prove you right.  Take it to a lab, if you can even get one to waste spend their time looking at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a former fifth sixth grade science teacher, I like how you circled the pics, ie, clearly crusted white.  I would also require the students to provide a reference or two,  As they get older, like seventh / eight grade, now they would have to use these citations and write a paragraph or two so that the citation is connected to the picture, such as why the clearly crusted qhite makes it a meteor.  High school may go to what makes this clearly crusted white meteor is so different from the quadrillions of rocks that are found on earth with clearly encrusted white.  Earlier than fourth grade may be fine without the citations.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odinxgen,

This is a warning to you to not be giving forum members grief because you don't like their opinions, it's not their responsibility to prove what you have is a meteorite, and they don't even have to give you their opinion but some have and you need to be fine with that or else!

Anyone on this forum for the most part have never claimed to be an "expert" on all types of meteorites, no member here to my knowledge is a scientist specializing in meteorites, which is what they would have to be to certify what you have is a meteorite and even if some were they would have to have the object in hand and do many, many tests to determine that is or that it is not, no one here can do that for you....and what you have even if it is a meteorite will never be scientifically a meteorite until such scientist/s do those tests and prove that it is and give you written certification to that fact, until that happens it's just an usual rock!!

Also you stated that members here are being racist towards you, to my knowledge no one here even knows what your race is or the color of your skin, nor to my knowledge has anyone even mentioned anything racist towards you..IF I have missed that being said PLEASE direct me to where such was stated and I will contact that member and it will not happen again!!

Also you stated that members here are putting/looking down towards you because you have no money, again I have never seen nor read anyone saying anything about your financial status, again if I have missed such statements PLEASE direct me too where that was stated!

I will not warn you again about verbal abuse towards other members, if any members here are truly attacking you and I miss it, let me know and I will put a stop to it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much patience toward these people that think belief is fact. That wanting will make it so...and now he has a prayer....Good luck 

fred 

  • Like 1
  • wow 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/6/2019 at 10:01 AM, fredmason said:

So much patience toward these people that think belief is fact. That wanting will make it so...and now he has a prayer....Good luck 

fred 

Fred, do you know anything about the theoretical class of meteorites?

I'm talking about sed-types. If you do please list the traits these meteorites should have and compare that with everything I've said.

Just because this would blow your fricking mind if it was true does NOT make it impossible, and in fact the further I get into the research, the more I learn about them. The more this stone sings meteorite. Yeah it's a sandstone, and a sandstone I a sandstone. But let's talk about the obvious crust, which is not weather rind, Not even similar. Or The obvious imprinting. Or the complete ablation of the stone? The stone would have to have been sitting somewhere that allowed for a complete aerodynamic shape, it could not have been sitting on the trailing end because the flow of melt follows my identified orientation. Or lets talk about that beautiful white crust in the first image, that is obviously a strong contrast to the tan interior and is a ccrust less than 1mm thick and on top of that there is some kind of effect that encrusts it to about 1-2 cm... all of this is research backed and are facts about what the hypothetical sandstone meteorite would be. The inclusion of Majorite is a bonus and this is in cue right now to be proven. 

Your feelings don't matter, facts do. I have laid out the facts here for the last time, I have no idea how much time I have left in this world. Im on the streets now and I've placed my faith in God, and whatever happens, God is good. I prayed for a meteorite that was rarer than any other one, and I got it. I've dedicated myself to faithful research and He is my guide. My current situation is temporary ending with death or a miracle. either way, God is with me in this and I'm not afraid of you Fred.

-Odin

  • wow 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you be afraid of me???
This forum has gone far from its intent....
go with God

fred

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Odinxgen said:

Fred, do you know anything about the theoretical class of meteorites?

I'm talking about sed-types. If you do please list the traits these meteorites should have and compare that with everything I've said.

Just because this would blow your fricking mind if it was true does NOT make it impossible, and in fact the further I get into the research, the more I learn about them. The more this stone sings meteorite. Yeah it's a sandstone, and a sandstone I a sandstone. But let's talk about the obvious crust, which is not weather rind, Not even similar. Or The obvious imprinting. Or the complete ablation of the stone? The stone would have to have been sitting somewhere that allowed for a complete aerodynamic shape, it could not have been sitting on the trailing end because the flow of melt follows my identified orientation. Or lets talk about that beautiful white crust in the first image, that is obviously a strong contrast to the tan interior and is a ccrust less than 1mm thick and on top of that there is some kind of effect that encrusts it to about 1-2 cm... all of this is research backed and are facts about what the hypothetical sandstone meteorite would be. The inclusion of Majorite is a bonus and this is in cue right now to be proven. 

Your feelings don't matter, facts do. I have laid out the facts here for the last time, I have no idea how much time I have left in this world. Im on the streets now and I've placed my faith in God, and whatever happens, God is good. I prayed for a meteorite that was rarer than any other one, and I got it. I've dedicated myself to faithful research and He is my guide. My current situation is temporary ending with death or a miracle. either way, God is with me in this and I'm not afraid of you Fred.

-Odin

Odin, i wish you the best with your miracle, as long as it brings you what you need. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hardtimehermit said:

Odin, i wish you the best with your miracle, as long as it brings you what you need. 

As usual no response to the facts, I don't need your fricking sympathy. 

I'm surviving, and I'll get by right or wrong but I know Im right, and I will go to whatever length I need to to prove it even paying $2000 I don't have for the lab testing. If i'm wrong you can all get a laugh at the guy who had the audacity to think he may have found a sandstone meteorite and reach out to meteorite hunters for help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, fredmason said:

Why would you be afraid of me???
This forum has gone far from its intent....
go with God

fred

Fred, it's a meme. 

You have nothing to say, Where are your arguments against what I just said. If you don't have solid answers to these questions then simply don't post here. The geologists here can't answer them but at least they are able to admit i'm not wrong about these observations. You have 0 knowledge about this topic and that's my point. I don't care what your opinion is. I want real, scientific answers that I can prove, and demonstrate so that I can continue to connect these dots that were not already connected. These traits are unified around this stone but I am standing on the shoulders of giants here. YOU have no clue what your talking about and you people are making up traits of this stone to fit your narrow perspective of meteorites which is not intuitive but only learned through repetition and observing meteorites others where able to prove. for all the shade the cliquey members here are throwing my way, search my posts. not one person is or has grappled the facts I keep having to repeat. What Ive said is the truth, if you can't accept this then just don't post, calling me a liar is disgraceful, I am not. And If I thought maybe you had the right answer I would agree and say so. So far none of you has, but you're all pretty fricking sure I'm wrong and with no solid arguments whatsoever against the realities surrounding this stone. I'm still not afraid of you.

 

-Odin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...