New England Meteoritical Report fraud Mendon Massachusetts

 Take the liberty of writing to you. The company is New England Meteoritical lab@meteorlab.com http://meteorlab.com/ METEORLAB2001dev/testing.htm The company can engage in external publicity to provide meteorite identification services, charges $ 20. But this cost is impossible to provide meteorite identification. The following is a famous American university professor to my letter to prove. “Regarding the costs of meteorite identification: If we want to classify a stony meteorite, we have to first make a thin section. That costs anywhere from $25 to $75 depending on the source and the quality of the section. Microprobe time at UCLA is currently $50.70 an hour. It also costs money for the lab helper to cut the stone initially for the thin section. Even if my analysis time and microscope time is free, it still costs us about $120 to classify a stony meteorite. If we decide to classify a stone we ask for this much money plus 20 grams of the stone or 20% of the total mass, whichever is the lesser amount. ” Because the censorship of more than 99.5% of the rocks are not meteorites, so a liar as long as the declaration of the stones are false on it. These liars do not need to do any identification work. Because the correct rate of crook in any case can reach 99.5%. So the company used this feature to cheat the American people 20 dollars. Including many children who love astronomy. I was one of the victims, I paid $ 20 after they replied that my meteorite was fake. I asked them to provide evidence that the company initially threatened and intimidated me, and then returned my $ 20 appraisal fee. This fully shows that the company is a liar. His website does not see any phone numbers and addresses. There is only one mailing address. In order not to provide phone numbers, or even do not accept the Federal Express and other courier companies, because these companies require the provision of telephone numbers. The following is my refute his e-mail, "Dear R Kempton, Director: In your first e-mail,"“Thank you for sending the samples for meteorite testing. Your samples were examined with reflected light petrographic microscopy for meteoritic structures, inclusions, clasts, chondrules, texture, and chemically tested for Ni. I’m sorry, but all observations and testing were negative, the samples are not meteoritical. These are not meteorites or of Martian or Lunar origin. The samples are igneous rock fragments. The dominant mineralogy is plagioclase feldspar and minor biotite. The samples tested negative for Ni. There are no meteoritic structures, clasts, or inclusions in the samples. They are terrestrial in formation and not meteorites. ” The most striking difference between Achondrite Ureilite and Earth igneous rocks is the presence of carbon and iron. Reflected light petrographic microscopy can only recognize transparent crystals. How do you determine that there is no iron or carbon in the sample? I give you the sample is obviously rock, there is no need to test nickel to distinguish meteorites. Only the identification of iron meteorites requires testing of nickel. The above two points are common sense! You are not even know the common sense to do meteorite identification? Can only show that you are lying! I ask you to provide a reflected light petrographic microscopy of the photos, you say"“No, we only use the SEM for classification.Your samples are not meteoritical. They are not meteorites.We only needed the petrology microscopes to determine this. I'm sorry, they are not meteorites.” If you use Scanning Electron Microscope, Scanning Electron Microscope how could not photos? In addition, you only accept me 23 dollars, allowing me to enjoy Scanning Electron Microscope service? Does your company have an Scanning Electron Microscope? Ironically, you say at the end of the message that you use the petrology microscopes. In general, we think the petrology microscopes are reflected light petrographic microscopy. Your email is contradictory to the content of your first email. The above statement shows that you are lying! You said"I have reexamined your specimens with the petrology microscope. These are not meteorites. Any geologist will tell you that they are igneous rocks cooling intrusively from a melt. As to plagioclase, yes, there is plagioclase and other minor mineralogy in the rock fragments. Why is that surprising to you? Plagioclase feldspar is one of the most common minerals in terrestrial rocks - AND it is the most common mineralogy assemblage in meteorites.” Again, the Achondrite Ureilite is ultrabasic. Ultrabasic rocks are a class of igneous rocks. This is common sense. How do you see in the petrology microscope that the sample does not contain iron and carbon? Do you have the latest invention? Or lie? You say my sample is igneous rocks, you do not lie. You say my sample is not Achondrite Ureilite, you are lying. Because you simply do not have the ability to judge whether the sample of iron and carbon. In short you are lying! I almost every e-mail you are asked to confirm that you identify the sample is I sent to you the sample. You always avoid the problem. This is very suspicious! I almost every e-mail requires you to provide evidence. You always avoid the problem. This is very suspicious! There are indications that your company is a liar! I ask you to refund me $ 23 and mail me my samples free of charge. And compensation for me, I mail the sample to you of cost (40 dollars). Otherwise I will hire the United States lawyer, accuse you of fraud! Best regard, Tom" I sent this e-mail and expect him to provide evidence. But received the threat of each other, he thought the Chinese government does not allow the sale of meteorites, so he intends to inform the Chinese government to threaten me. So he gave me the following mail. “Dear Tom, Please send me the US university that you say examined your rocks. I send your rocks and emails to Chinese Embassy in New York today with your contact information and pictures of your mailing and Customs Form that you signed. They will contact you and your fraud attempts and sending rocks from China. I will also send samples of your rocks to the three Chinese universities with your emails for their determination. After they have talked to you I will refund your $23.00 Please let me know when the Chinese Embassy has contacted you for your refund and we will process it. Is this ok with you? Sincerely,” I wrote to him, “Dear R Kempton, Director: What you do is your freedom. I have no right to interfere. My advice is to immediately refund me $ 23 and $ 40. And returned my sample to me. Otherwise,I'll hire an American lawyer to sue you and tell the media in the meteorite world to write about your fraud. Best regard, Tom” I received the reply is, “Dear Tom: That is good, please tell me when the Embassy contacts you and I will refund your $23.00 as a courtesy as I know you don't understand. Please tell me the name of the US university that you said examined and tested for you in your email. I've asked for this three times now, why do you not send this? I sent you three Chinese universities that you can send your samples to. Why do you not do this? That's ok, we will send pieces of your rocks to them for you. We will send to the three universities that we sent to you in the last email. What you do with your time is your freedom but these are not meteorites. I can publish your information and photographs of your Earth rocks on the web for you to see, I can do this if you want. You send samples to know if they were meteorites. They are not. You don't like the answer, they are not but we are just the messenger. So you accuse us of fraud and make threats because we tell you they are not meteorites? Really? Will mail the documents and rock samples today to your Embassy for you. They can return them and explain how serious this is. You are a citizen of China and have accused a citizen of the United States of Fraud. It is very bad to make threats Tom. It is up to you Tom if you want to use your time to continue this. There has been no fraud, your rocks will be sent to the Chinese Embassy for you. You have stated that you will hire a US Attorney. I wait for your Attorney to contact us and will not use any more of my time to answer your emails. Sincerely, R. Kempton, Director New England Meteoritical” Five hours after I received the letter, I received a refund of $ 23. All I ask for is evidence that my rocks are not evidence of meteorites. The other side gave me a threat and a refund. He is unable to get evidence. I believe that any person with sound intelligence can have the right to judge - this company is a liar. The company still refuses to return my samples or reply to my e-mail. These samples are my personal property, I would like to ask you under the United States law, the company has the right to dispose of my sample? Looking forward to your reply. Best regard, Tom ---------