View Single Post
Old 17-07-2017, 02:03 AM   #561
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Masonic, Canada
Posts: 5,390
Likes: 1,802 (1,146 Posts)

Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
Every time the troll asks the same ignorant question I shall provide the same informed response. As though this clueless blunderer thinks he's found a problem.
They Were Faked

Any geoscientist (and there have been thousands from all over the world) who has studied lunar samples knows that anyone who thinks the Apollo lunar samples were created on Earth as part of government conspiracy doesn't know much about rocks. The Apollo samples are just too good. They tell a self-consistent story with a complexly interwoven plot that's better than any story any conspirator could have conceived. I've studied lunar rocks and soils for 45+ years and I couldn't make even a poor imitation of a lunar breccia, lunar soil, or a mare basalt in the lab. And with all due respect to my clever colleagues in government labs, no one in "the Government" could do it either, even now that we know what lunar rocks are like. Lunar samples show evidence of formation in an extremely dry environment with essentially no free oxygen and little gravity. Some have impact craters on the surface and many display evidence for a suite of unanticipated and complicated effects associated with large and small meteorite impacts. Lunar rocks and soil contain gases (hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, neon, argon, krypton, and xenon) derived from the solar wind with isotope ratios different than Earth forms of the same gases. They contain crystal damage from cosmic rays. Lunar igneous rocks have crystallization ages, determined by techniques involving radioisotopes, that are older than any known Earth rocks. (Anyone who figures out how to fake that is worthy of a Nobel Prize.) It was easier and cheaper to go to the Moon and bring back some rocks than it would have been to create all these fascinating features on Earth. [After writing these words I learned that virtually the same sentiments had already been expressed by some of my lunar sample colleagues.]

1. The rocks contain volcanic beads formed in low gravity.

2. Many contain zap pits from micro-meteorites impacts.

3. They all contain solar isotopes showing exposure to solar winds and solar events.

4. Their exterior helium 3 is stronger due to shallow penetrating solar wind.

5. Water found within the beads is of very rare isotopes and ratios.

6. These samples were being analysed 50 years ago.

7. Even a single element compressed carbon is detectable as fake in 2017.

8. It is impossible to remove all traces of water/oxygen/nitrogen interaction from terrestrial weathering.

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?

2. Not sure what your point is here. Other than maybe you're wrongly suggesting that micrometeorites only impacted the moon's surface?

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.

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.

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. 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.

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?

7. Not sure what the point is. Other than proving that 'fake rocks' can be manufactured by humans (ok, posh expensive crystal structures then...)

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 am not saying moon rocks are fake. I am saying that they COULD BE faked.


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.
derekbuttery is offline   Reply With Quote