Post by vegasjames on Jul 28, 2013 15:48:43 GMT -5
WOW!!!! You really cannot stand to be proven wrong. Even with all the evidence posted against your incorrect claims you still have to give a sarcastic, half-hearted "I was wrong".
And I liove how you keep projecting your own actions on others. Heaven forbid someone disagree with me?
We have all seen what happens to people who even think of disagreeing with you. More like Heaven help them!!!!
But I still have to address one comment where you say "your cabs clearly show the mixture of minerals". Take a look at these pieces of variscite:
www.lithos-graphics.com/stones/variscite1.html
katsmeows.blogspot.com/2008/10/washington-dc-pics-of-day-day-6.html
www.johnbetts-fineminerals.com/jhbnyc/mineralmuseum/picshow.php?id=30613
These are just a few examples. But there are several points to be made here. First, variscite occurs in various colors. There can be more than one shade of green variscite within the same stone. This does not mean they are different minerals. Secondly, the presence of secondary minerals, which can also be alteration products of the variscite: 1. Does not mean the stone is not variscite. 2. That the mineral is a conglomerate of copper based ores. Copper based stones are not the only green stones on this planet. Look up the composition of emerald for instance.
If I have a piece of rutilated quartz does this change the fact that it is quartz just because it has some other mineral inclusion? Of course not. The same goes for variscite. Just because the variscite may contain some other mineral inclusions this does not mean it is not variscite.
What about turquiose (CuAl6(PO4)4(OH)8·4H2O)? Not all turquoise has the black lines from mineral oxide inclusions. Therefore is spider webbed turquoise not really turquoise because there is another mineral including it?
Like it or not several people who know stones have examined and tested the stone and came to the conclusion it is indeed variscite. Maybe the different shades of green are different green shades of variscite or maybe some are inclusions. Neither changes the fact that the main matrix is still variscite.
And I liove how you keep projecting your own actions on others. Heaven forbid someone disagree with me?
We have all seen what happens to people who even think of disagreeing with you. More like Heaven help them!!!!But I still have to address one comment where you say "your cabs clearly show the mixture of minerals". Take a look at these pieces of variscite:
www.lithos-graphics.com/stones/variscite1.html
katsmeows.blogspot.com/2008/10/washington-dc-pics-of-day-day-6.html
www.johnbetts-fineminerals.com/jhbnyc/mineralmuseum/picshow.php?id=30613
These are just a few examples. But there are several points to be made here. First, variscite occurs in various colors. There can be more than one shade of green variscite within the same stone. This does not mean they are different minerals. Secondly, the presence of secondary minerals, which can also be alteration products of the variscite: 1. Does not mean the stone is not variscite. 2. That the mineral is a conglomerate of copper based ores. Copper based stones are not the only green stones on this planet. Look up the composition of emerald for instance.
If I have a piece of rutilated quartz does this change the fact that it is quartz just because it has some other mineral inclusion? Of course not. The same goes for variscite. Just because the variscite may contain some other mineral inclusions this does not mean it is not variscite.
What about turquiose (CuAl6(PO4)4(OH)8·4H2O)? Not all turquoise has the black lines from mineral oxide inclusions. Therefore is spider webbed turquoise not really turquoise because there is another mineral including it?
Like it or not several people who know stones have examined and tested the stone and came to the conclusion it is indeed variscite. Maybe the different shades of green are different green shades of variscite or maybe some are inclusions. Neither changes the fact that the main matrix is still variscite.
