realrockhound
Cave Dweller
Member since June 2020
Posts: 2,823
Member is Online
|
Post by realrockhound on Apr 30, 2022 17:27:41 GMT -5
So I just had what I think is a really good idea. What if you had a channel that was dedicated to confirmed material from each state and locality? For example. Let’s say you click on that channel, and it links to a list of all 50 states, countries, etc… clicking can take you to a list of all confirmed materials by members from that state listed in alphabetical order. Members who have confirmed material, can post pictures of said material in the rough, slabs, cabochons, etc. the whole thing would take some time to build. But over time you could build a massive catalog of confirmed materials from their localities and name. I can’t count the amount of times I’ve seen material mislabeled online. So I think it would be cool if there was a place you could go and start cross referencing material. Considering sometimes deposits don’t always share the same characteristics. I dunno, just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 30, 2022 20:42:19 GMT -5
Nice concept, but not sure on practicality. Big problem I see is getting proper ID to begin with on some stones. For example, how often do we see people calling any copper ore or copper mineral mixes "chrysocolla"? I have even seen people call malachite "chrysocolla", and I had some supposed "expert" call some material I have that all tests say is turquoise, but he called it "crapcolla". He obviously was not an expert as this is too hard and too dense for chrysocolla but fits naturally hard turquoise. It tests high in phosphorus consistent with turquoise, but is not found in chrysocolla. And I can dissolve the stone with concentrated hydrochloric acid, which is consistent with turquoise. On the other hand chrysocolla cannot be dissolved with hydrochloric acid. So, there is a lot of guessing that goes on with rock IDs, but rarely any actual science to back up IDs.
So, I can see this working with some stones that are easy to confirm such as a quartz crystal, but other stones can be a problem as they often get misidentified. As other examples satin spar being called selenite, candy rhyolite being called chalcedony, rainforest jasper that is actually a rhyolite and not a jasper, bumblebee jasper that is actually a calcite and not a japser, banded calcites being called "omyx", the various chalcedonies referred to as agates that are not agates......
|
|
realrockhound
Cave Dweller
Member since June 2020
Posts: 2,823
Member is Online
|
Post by realrockhound on Apr 30, 2022 20:53:18 GMT -5
Nice concept, but not sure on practicality. Big problem I see is getting proper ID to begin with on some stones. For example, how often do we see people calling any copper ore or copper mineral mixes "chrysocolla"? I have even seen people call malachite "chrysocolla", and I had some supposed "expert" call some material I have that all tests say is turquoise, but he called it "crapcolla". He obviously was not an expert as this is too hard and too dense for chrysocolla but fits naturally hard turquoise. It tests high in phosphorus consistent with turquoise, but is not found in chrysocolla. And I can dissolve the stone with concentrated hydrochloric acid, which is consistent with turquoise. On the other hand chrysocolla cannot be dissolved with hydrochloric acid. So, there is a lot of guessing that goes on with rock IDs, but rarely any actual science to back up IDs. So, I can see this working with some stones that are easy to confirm such as a quartz crystal, but other stones can be a problem as they often get misidentified. As other examples satin spar being called selenite, candy rhyolite being called chalcedony, rainforest jasper that is actually a rhyolite and not a jasper, bumblebee jasper that is actually a calcite and not a japser, banded calcites being called "omyx", the various chalcedonies referred to as agates that are not agates...... I was more or less talking about rocks like, Biggs picture jasper, eagle rock, plume, graveyard point plume, vistaite jasper, etc. also.. like I said, it would have to be confirmed, like either the person collected from the area, or other that can be confirmed.
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 30, 2022 21:42:33 GMT -5
Nice concept, but not sure on practicality. Big problem I see is getting proper ID to begin with on some stones. For example, how often do we see people calling any copper ore or copper mineral mixes "chrysocolla"? I have even seen people call malachite "chrysocolla", and I had some supposed "expert" call some material I have that all tests say is turquoise, but he called it "crapcolla". He obviously was not an expert as this is too hard and too dense for chrysocolla but fits naturally hard turquoise. It tests high in phosphorus consistent with turquoise, but is not found in chrysocolla. And I can dissolve the stone with concentrated hydrochloric acid, which is consistent with turquoise. On the other hand chrysocolla cannot be dissolved with hydrochloric acid. So, there is a lot of guessing that goes on with rock IDs, but rarely any actual science to back up IDs. So, I can see this working with some stones that are easy to confirm such as a quartz crystal, but other stones can be a problem as they often get misidentified. As other examples satin spar being called selenite, candy rhyolite being called chalcedony, rainforest jasper that is actually a rhyolite and not a jasper, bumblebee jasper that is actually a calcite and not a japser, banded calcites being called "omyx", the various chalcedonies referred to as agates that are not agates...... I was more or less talking about rocks like, Biggs picture jasper, eagle rock, plume, graveyard point plume, vistaite jasper, etc. also.. like I said, it would have to be confirmed, like either the person collected from the area, or other that can be confirmed. Again, "confirmed" is not always a correct ID. For example, I have been in so many debated on some rock boards about what the material is at the Gemfield claim, which is primarily candy rhyolite also known as sandstorm rhyolite. The owners of the claim though have it listed as chalcedony, which is a very different stone. The sign at the entrance even says it is chalcedony. I have explained to people on the rock boards over and over that chalcedony does not have the flow banding seen in the rhyolite that makes up the majority of the deposit, and I have posted geological journal articles multiple times discussing the rhyolite of the location. And I have explained the chemistry differences and differences in how the two form multiple times. Still, some people want to keep arguing that the rhyolite from the site is chalcedony because this is what the claim owners claim, and filed the claim under as what was being mined. So here is a case of something that is supposedly a "confirmed ID" that is in reality an incorrect ID. And such "confirmed" identifications happen a lot more than most people realize.
|
|
realrockhound
Cave Dweller
Member since June 2020
Posts: 2,823
Member is Online
|
Post by realrockhound on Apr 30, 2022 21:49:56 GMT -5
I was more or less talking about rocks like, Biggs picture jasper, eagle rock, plume, graveyard point plume, vistaite jasper, etc. also.. like I said, it would have to be confirmed, like either the person collected from the area, or other that can be confirmed. Again, "confirmed" is not always a correct ID. For example, I have been in so many debated on some rock boards about what the material is at the Gemfield claim, which is primarily candy rhyolite also known as sandstorm rhyolite. The owners of the claim though have it listed as chalcedony, which is a very different stone. The sign at the entrance even says it is chalcedony. I have explained to people on the rock boards over and over that chalcedony does not have the flow banding seen in the rhyolite that makes up the majority of the deposit, and I have posted geological journal articles multiple times discussing the rhyolite of the location. And I have explained the chemistry differences and differences in how the two form multiple times. Still, some people want to keep arguing that the rhyolite from the site is chalcedony because this is what the claim owners claim, and filed the claim under as what was being mined. So here is a case of something that is supposedly a "confirmed ID" that is in reality an incorrect ID. And such "confirmed" identifications happen a lot more than most people realize. I can tell you’re the kinda guy who just likes to be right.
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Apr 30, 2022 22:21:09 GMT -5
Again, "confirmed" is not always a correct ID. For example, I have been in so many debated on some rock boards about what the material is at the Gemfield claim, which is primarily candy rhyolite also known as sandstorm rhyolite. The owners of the claim though have it listed as chalcedony, which is a very different stone. The sign at the entrance even says it is chalcedony. I have explained to people on the rock boards over and over that chalcedony does not have the flow banding seen in the rhyolite that makes up the majority of the deposit, and I have posted geological journal articles multiple times discussing the rhyolite of the location. And I have explained the chemistry differences and differences in how the two form multiple times. Still, some people want to keep arguing that the rhyolite from the site is chalcedony because this is what the claim owners claim, and filed the claim under as what was being mined. So here is a case of something that is supposedly a "confirmed ID" that is in reality an incorrect ID. And such "confirmed" identifications happen a lot more than most people realize. I can tell you’re the kinda guy who just likes to be right. ROTFLMAO!!!!! Ironically, your comment about me shows that to be true of you.
The difference is that I do not need to be right. I simply do not comment as fact on things I do not know about or do not evidence to back.
Apparently, you did not want anyone's opinion when you asked your question, you simply wanted someone to agree with you so you could feel that your idea was wonderful so you could feel better about yourself. Sorry I disappointed your ego.
|
|
realrockhound
Cave Dweller
Member since June 2020
Posts: 2,823
Member is Online
|
Post by realrockhound on May 1, 2022 0:54:48 GMT -5
I can tell you’re the kinda guy who just likes to be right. ROTFLMAO!!!!! Ironically, your comment about me shows that to be true of you.
The difference is that I do not need to be right. I simply do not comment as fact on things I do not know about or do not evidence to back.
Apparently, you did not want anyone's opinion when you asked your question, you simply wanted someone to agree with you so you could feel that your idea was wonderful so you could feel better about yourself. Sorry I disappointed your ego.
Whatever you gotta tell yourself big buy. The diaries you write tell the story of a man who wants to flaunt his all knowing intelligence. You did it here, and have done it in other threads. Don’t get your panties in a wad when someone addresses it. If your self or others don’t like my suggestion, so what. I’m sure as heck not going to lose any sleep over it. With that said, my intentions weren’t to insult you. So I apologize if I did.
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on May 1, 2022 2:27:19 GMT -5
ROTFLMAO!!!!! Ironically, your comment about me shows that to be true of you.
The difference is that I do not need to be right. I simply do not comment as fact on things I do not know about or do not evidence to back.
Apparently, you did not want anyone's opinion when you asked your question, you simply wanted someone to agree with you so you could feel that your idea was wonderful so you could feel better about yourself. Sorry I disappointed your ego.
Whatever you gotta tell yourself big buy. The diaries you write tell the story of a man who wants to flaunt his all knowing intelligence. You did it here, and have done it in other threads. Don’t get your panties in a wad when someone addresses it. If your self or others don’t like my suggestion, so what. I’m sure as heck not going to lose any sleep over it. With that said, my intentions weren’t to insult you. So I apologize if I did. Thanks for proving my point about you once again. If I knew you were so sensitive I would have warmed up your bottle before feeding you my opinion.
Obviously you keep resorting to personal attacks because you were expecting everyone to jump in and stroke your over inflated ego by telling you what a great idea you had. Instead, the only person to respond pointed out a potential flaw based on your original post, which did not specify any specific sites such as Biggs. etc. You did not bring that up until after I brought up the potential flaw, which we both agree that some materials get misidentified. And for some reason the one that got their panties so up in a bunch that I am surprised they did not reach your throat and choke you was YOU. I was simply trying to help out by pointing out a potential flaw and you simply could not handle that anyone would question this idea that you apparently thought was flawless because that is what our over inflated ego needs. It needs stroking, not contradiction.
I am going to show you YOUR quote from YOUR original post:
"What if you had a channel that was dedicated to confirmed material from each state and locality?"
As we can all see, YOU were asking for opinions. And so I gave mine, starting about by saying "nice concept" because I liked the concept. I just happened to see a potential flaw that needed to be addressed and you decided to go off on me with personal attacks all because I expressed an opinion of I like your idea but this one potential flaw I see needs to be addressed. Actually I was quite surprised that you would react, and really overreact the way you did over my expressing my opinion of I like your idea but the misidentification that we both agree happens could be an issue. I was trying to be helpful, and you lose it over my comment.
Whatever, I am done. Obviously you have your false opinion about me that you are going to stick to come hell or high water because I dared express my opinion about a potential flaw. And it is clear that you are going to continue with the personal attack bullshit since you obviously do not like being contradicted in any way. So I am done with this thread. Go ahead and continue ranting away if you wish. I will try to make sure not to express any what I consider helpful opinions to you in the future as to not set you off again.
|
|
realrockhound
Cave Dweller
Member since June 2020
Posts: 2,823
Member is Online
|
Post by realrockhound on May 1, 2022 2:34:55 GMT -5
Whatever you gotta tell yourself big buy. The diaries you write tell the story of a man who wants to flaunt his all knowing intelligence. You did it here, and have done it in other threads. Don’t get your panties in a wad when someone addresses it. If your self or others don’t like my suggestion, so what. I’m sure as heck not going to lose any sleep over it. With that said, my intentions weren’t to insult you. So I apologize if I did. Thanks for proving my point about you once again. If I knew you were so sensitive I would have warmed up your bottle before feeding you my opinion.
Obviously you keep resorting to personal attacks because you were expecting everyone to jump in and stroke your over inflated ego by telling you what a great idea you had. Instead, the only person to respond pointed out a potential flaw based on your original post, which did not specify any specific sites such as Biggs. etc. You did not bring that up until after I brought up the potential flaw, which we both agree that some materials get misidentified. And for some reason the one that got their panties so up in a bunch that I am surprised they did not reach your throat and choke you was YOU. I was simply trying to help out by pointing out a potential flaw and you simply could not handle that anyone would question this idea that you apparently thought was flawless because that is what our over inflated ego needs. It needs stroking, not contradiction.
I am going to show you YOUR quote from YOUR original post:
"What if you had a channel that was dedicated to confirmed material from each state and locality?"
As we can all see, YOU were asking for opinions. And so I gave mine, starting about by saying "nice concept" because I liked the concept. I just happened to see a potential flaw that needed to be addressed and you decided to go off on me with personal attacks all because I expressed an opinion of I like your idea but this one potential flaw I see needs to be addressed. Actually I was quite surprised that you would react, and really overreact the way you did over my expressing my opinion of I like your idea but the misidentification that we both agree happens could be an issue. I was trying to be helpful, and you lose it over my comment.
Whatever, I am done. Obviously you have your false opinion about me that you are going to stick to come hell or high water because I dared express my opinion about a potential flaw. And it is clear that you are going to continue with the personal attack bullshit since you obviously do not like being contradicted in any way. So I am done with this thread. Go ahead and continue ranting away if you wish. I will try to make sure not to express any what I consider helpful opinions to you in the future as to not set you off again.
Funny how triggered you got over a simple comment. Another diary. Send me a pm if you want to settle this like men. Until then, I’ll continue to treat you like the woman you are.
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on May 1, 2022 3:52:36 GMT -5
Am I gonna have to stop this car boys?
|
|
|
Post by rockjunquie on May 1, 2022 6:26:42 GMT -5
Alright guys.... I hope y'all are done.
I hate to stir the pot, but I do believe that vegasjames has a valid point AND you, Carl realrockhound, had a good idea. We have tried several times to steer a thread in a cumulative direction as far as ID, but as James has pointed out-- there are often OPINIONS about what materials are that are not backed up by fact. Happens all the time and James gave good examples of it.
So, you are both right. Great concept, but not all people are honest in their reporting or they are simply misled.
If I might be so bold and not press any buttons- I might add that James' "diaries" often contain hidden gems of wisdom.
You are both an asset to this forum, so let's play nice, Gentlemen.
|
|
CLErocks
spending too much on rocks
Member since October 2021
Posts: 342
|
Post by CLErocks on May 1, 2022 6:40:26 GMT -5
Am I gonna have to stop this car boys? 🤣🤣🤣
|
|
|
Post by Peruano on May 1, 2022 6:48:33 GMT -5
Many sites have some geographic index capabilities and carefully screened some of them are credible. May I point out the Nebraska Natural Resources site for agates with a great geographic index to their collection and a lexicon of names used in reference to agates. snr.unl.edu/data/geologysoils/agates/agatesdatabase.aspxIn science we often used the term "unedited and unreviewed" for things not adequately verified. Alas much of what we read on the internet is "unedited and unreviewed".
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,455
|
Post by Sabre52 on May 1, 2022 9:42:37 GMT -5
Afraid I agree with some of the others. Lowell and I faced this problem when creating the Index. Confirmation is in many cases, difficult, and common names and trade names are so confusing. Often, and I have been guilty of this, a new discovery is simply named by the finder, miner, or the first person to post or sell it. This is further complicated by the variation we find in many materials and the fact that similar conditions can produce almost identical materials from different locations. For example, Kinradite Poppy Jasper from the SF bay area can be mirrored on the Olympic Peninsula and in Hunters Valley, CA., all widely separated locations. Personally, I think all lapidary material should be labeled only by description of type and Location ie. Morgan Hill Poppy Jasper or Stone Canyon brecciated Jasper, Hornitos brecciated jasper. Botswana agate, Utah Red Horn Coral etc. Problem is, in the Hornitos area for example, there are probably a couple dozen at least, different poppy jasper types, some resembling poppy from other locations. To label them Hornitos Jasper, or Hornitos Poppy Jasper is OK but so confusing to someone trying to confirm the identity of an individual slab. Shoot, one Hunters Valley pit has material almost identical to Ocean Jasper. Moss agate of a single type can be found in dozens of locations and almost impossible to tell apart. Again, similar geology can produce similar materials. I'd guess, many materials could be confirmed by the finder or miner but stuff you buy, trade or even get form a friend is kind of a crap shoot sometimes. Overall though, it is a very difficult problem to tackle.
|
|
victor1941
fully equipped rock polisher
Member since November 2011
Posts: 1,975
|
Post by victor1941 on May 1, 2022 10:06:12 GMT -5
I liked the Index and would like to see it return. I could post pictures of material collected around College Station, Texas in the mid 60's as surface material but am not qualified to properly label them. I think "unedited and unreviewed" are good descriptors unless lab analyzed and identified.
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,455
|
Post by Sabre52 on May 1, 2022 12:18:23 GMT -5
Vicor, The database is still posted here under science articles etc. subset identification.
|
|
|
Post by Son Of Beach on May 1, 2022 13:08:15 GMT -5
Vicor, The database is still posted here under science articles etc. subset identification. This?
|
|