There are some serious problems with this claim: 1. "In total, Jamie Wallis at Cardiff University and a few buddies received 628 stone fragments collected from

There are some serious problems with this claim: 1. "In total, Jamie Wallis at Cardiff University and a few buddies received 628 stone fragments collected from rice fields in the region. However, they were able to clearly identify only three as possible meteorites." In other words, the researchers weren't in on the collection activity, and may not possess the expertise to distinguish meteoritic material from ordinary earthly rocks (that determination is not easy). 2. "One stone, for example, had a density of less than 1 gram per cubic centimetre, less than all known carbonaceous meteorites." And it didn't occur to these people that it wasn't a meteorite? Low-density meteors don't normally get to the ground -- they are much more likely to vaporize in the atmosphere. A low-density sample like this is immediately suspect. Conclusion: Three identifications out of 628 samples, one of the three is not likely to be a real meteorite, terrestrial contamination cannot really be ruled out, and this work is neither refereed AFAIK nor published in a normal scientific journal. I call shenanigans. Reference: http://arxiv.org/abs/1303.1845 http://arxiv.org/abs/1303.1845