View Single Post
Old 17-07-2017, 09:17 AM   #564
truegroup
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Conspiracy research is all about proof, not assumption!
Posts: 17,117
Likes: 1,316 (1,030 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by derekbuttery View Post
MORE CUT N PASTED ANSWERS....
NO THEY AREN'T SILLY BOY. You are using that as a jibe to suggest I don't know my subject, they are MY answers.

Quote:
1. we can simulate "low gravity", I even think that earth had little to low gravity during it's formation, and IF the whack theory is to be believed for the formation of the moon, is it possible that they shared the same "low gravity" volcanically produced beads during this period of formation?
No. It isn't just the beads that show this lower gravity formation. Did you think that all up by yourself? It's puerile....vacuously ignorant and uninformed.

Quote:
2. Not sure what your point is here. Other than maybe you're wrongly suggesting that micrometeorites only impacted the moon's surface?
The fact you don't know what I am suggesting exposes your total ignorance, that is exactly what I am saying. No atmosphere means they get through. Not so much on the earth

Quote:
3. Nothing special here. Almost all non-earth rocks are exposed to the sun and her whimsical spewing of solar materials. Easily found and harvested by those that know what they're looking for.
Bullshit. The magnetosphere shields the Earth from this deadly outpouring. Magic harvesters noted. Are you really this thick that you don't understand what happens when the Sun erupts and spews out all its charged particles?

Quote:
4. Helium 3 is found 'trapped' within the earth's crust, so once more, extraction wouldn't be an issue if you knew where to find it.
Helium 3 is one of many isotopes found in Apollo rocks, but using a rock with it already in has terrestrial weathering. Magic He3 extractors and inserters noted. The Apollo rocks have billions of years of exposure. It would seem that with all your painfully inept understanding of this you resort to making ludicrous claims about every point.

Quote:
5. No. It's. Not. Hydroxyl can hardly be called 'water'. It's missing a Hydrogen atom for starters, and secondly the very fact the substance is discovered in some of earth's oldest crystalline features, the same / similar rock formations found in lunar surface materials.
There is no free water in Apollo rocks, no evidence of any interaction with any gases either. The water found locked within the apatite crystals and volcanic beads is a very rare isotope. I love the fact that after all this pissing hoooohaaa about there actually being water in the rocks created by wild eyed hoaxers as they seize on it as "proof" they are not from the Moon, old Delbut, comes along, smart as a conker and says it ain't water.

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v.../ngeo1050.html

They say it's water, I'll dismiss your ignorance in favour of their expertise.

Quote:
As for being a rare isotope, I need a little more reading time to approach this. BUT that said I am mostly convinced that we can create almost any isotope we like.
It's the combination of the nature of the isotope and the ratios found within the samples that is rare. Petrologists say so, therefore it is. Delbut doesn't know therefore pish.

Quote:
6. So? The atom bomb was impossible 117 yrs ago, was just a theory 100 years ago and became living reality July 16th 1945 (first successful test NOT the dropping of...). So what's the point regarding the testing of these rocks 50 yrs ago?
None too bright. Your opening salvo of poop was that they could create a diamond therefore they could create a rock A diamond is a single element. The fake is carbon that is compressed to create a diamond. Here, now, easily seen as man made. 50 years ago they couldn't do shit like this, which was when the samples were being analysed. Duuuuuh.

Quote:
7. Not sure what the point is. Other than proving that 'fake rocks' can be manufactured by humans (ok, posh expensive crystal structures then...)
BUT EASILY SPOTTED Are you really this clueless that you don't understand this painfully simple point? It's ONE element not multiple minerals.

Quote:
8. Again. Terrestrial weathering. Not sure what the point is here either. We're speaking of a possibility, not an actuality, of human forged lunar surface materials.
"I'm not sure" he says. Well Del, every single thing on this planet is exposed to atmosphere. Minutes after ejection, lava reacts with the oxygen....minutes! Water gets in and starts forming reactions with the minerals. Over even a few hundred years the changes are massive. You have some brainfarting idea that they just chuck some ingredients in some magic container and melt them altogether or some shit that my head can't comprehend.

Quote:
I'm not saying moon rocks are fake. I am saying that they COULD BE faked.
I don't give a fat fishes tit what you are saying Del, you are an internet nobody who knows less about this than my neighbour's rabbit.

Quote:
And still you HAVE NOT ANSWERED MY QUESTION. YOU HAVE RELIED ON CUT N PASTED GOOGLE BOUNCED INFORMATION.
Yes I have. You just blundered around trying to answer it and failed so miserably your post should have been stopped at the gate of death and put down with a whimper.

Quote:
I really don't care if 1,000s of scientists have studied the findings of Apollo 15s returned rocks. I am stating that lunar rocks could be faked. Geology can be faked. And science is fallible, and corruptible, and can be controlled if so wished.
I don't give a fat fishes tit what you "care about" Del, you are an internet nobody who knows less about this than my neighbour's rabbit. The thousands of scientists knew more than you about this when they were 3 year olds.

OWNED.

Last edited by truegroup; 17-07-2017 at 09:19 AM.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote