China space probe returns with rare Moon rocks

BBC ^ | June 25, 2024 | Laura Bicker & Kelly Ng, in Beijing and Singapore

[rx]

Are you really accusing these many sources to be liars or dupes?

I think, by contrast, that you've been duped.

[Campion]

I very clearly said that the petrified wood "moon rock" was either a joke, or a substitute used to cover up a theft.

One fake "moon rock" out of several hundred given to various countries does not prove that they are all fake. That's a textbook example of false generalization.

[Campion]

Furthermore, there isn't enough moisture in lunar regolith

You've never seen dry dust cohere like that? Seriously? I have. Sand is not a good analogue; it's far too coarse.

[Campion]

Oh, and your "Chinese lunar lander" picture looks like artwork to me. Who was there to take the picture, since it shows the lander ... landing?

Google Lens thinks it came from Al Jazeera, not the Chinese space agency.

Here is the real, unretouched, complete with sun glare, AS11-40-5873. Aldrin's OPS actuator just looks metallic to me. I'd say your two photos are just lit differently, which is why the OPS actuator looks lighter in one than in the other.

[rx]

It's pretty clear that clear evidence and logic comprise a foreign language to you. You said all moon rocks (given to people) were encased in lucite blocks. I gave you proof otherwise. They clearly weren't. You implicitly claim many news sources clearly were dupes and liars without an iota of evidentiary support. Bzzzzt!   Fail!

If you look at that list of sources vouching with their reputations the story of the US Ambassador to the Netherlands and the three Apollo astronauts on-site to commemorate the occasion as they presented the petrified wood chunk to the Dutch museum, you can't address the contradiction to your claim straightforwardly. (Many Dutch citizens were very insulted!) The astronauts had to know their gift was false. You're unique in calling it a joke, and I've seen no one calling the situation the result of theft. I believe it proves something you apparently choose not to fathom.

And your claim of the lighting being the issue, you gloss right over the other differing colored item, such as at the lower right of that side-by-side comparison. If the items are not the same (and there are multiple--see the red ovals; within an inch, same-colored items (in the very same lighting) are "somehow" different!), NASA has foisted a lie many times onto the world. And if NASA has been shown to foist multiple lies, well, sorry, it's game over.

With billions of dollars having been spent on Apollo, do you reall think self-respecting NASA engineers would send this (right, below) to the moon, claiming the silver foil protected the astronauts from solar radiation? The areas not covered by silver foil were precisely where the two astronots would have been (if they'd truly been fully exposed to solar radiation on the lunar surface, against which now is claimed by NASA scientists, that many inches thick of lead lining (or the like) is required).

  Bzzzzt!   Busted!

There are dozens such clear anomalies (lies). Just like 9/11, COVID+"vaxxes", JFK assassination, etc., etc., it doesn't hold up that there aren't multiple examples of very coordinated hoaxes that our high-level "betters" just wouldn't foist onto the public!

BTW...
“So, here’s Neil Armstrong, talking about landing on the moon with a microphone (ostensibly transmitting from inside the lander on its descent to the lunar surface, to NASA ground control), and yet he is sitting practically on top of a rocket engine that is putting out sound levels of about 140 or 150 decibels. Now we know that that is absolutely impossible to overcome that sound level inside the lunar Lander with a normal human voice.”
--Neil Kaysing, Rocketdyne Apollo documentation specialist

[Kaysing:] "Having seen hundreds of rocket firings when I was employed by Rocketdyne, I know that the jet of ...the lunar lander would have created an enormous crater. It would have scoured the moon’s surface. It would have tossed up rocks, sand, everything, and created a crater, maybe so large that the entire lunar lander could have sunk into it. After all, we're dealing with a 10,000lb. thrust engine which was pointed directly at the surface, lowered to the surface. And yet, if you look at pictures of the lunar lander on the moon, there is no disturbance whatsoever under the lunar lander’s rocket."
[Interviewer:] "and no dust [was] deposited in the pads, the cup shaped pads."

Kaysing: That’s another good point.

Here's looking under the Apollo 11 jet. Notice the striations don't emanate from that jet! The regolith looks, as it does in many places, to have been groomed as meticulously as a professional baseball infield. And there's one of its absolutely pristine, dust-devoid pads.   Bzzzzt!   Busted!

Everyone's been programmed to believe the lies, but you've been shown some of the clear evidence of the deceptions. It's long past time to wake up and get into the proper "lane."

[generally]

Great post.

Thanks for the ping.

[rx]

[Y]our "Chinese lunar lander" picture looks like artwork to me. Who was there to take the picture, since it shows the lander"?

See the lander on the left?   See the picture-taking rover at right?   I thought so.

Now, about the Apollo 11 crew all saying they couldn't see any stars, can you see the stars in the first two of the three photos here?   Bzzzzt!   Apollo fail exposed!

[cgbg]

You have some FRiends here.

My favorite web site on this topic:

https://www.aulis.com/investigation.htm

[rx]

"One fake "moon rock" out of several hundred given to various countries does not prove that they are all fake. That's a textbook example of false generalization."

Golly, did you see me type that whatever Lucite baubles--as you say--among "several hundred given to various countries" were all fake?

Do you suppose that any other such bauble was likely to have been cut or broken open to be tested for evidence of anything that might not be lunar rock? I don't think you've proved anything with your comments, except that logic does escape you.

Instead of me being guilty of making "a textbook example of false generalization," you've simply put words into my keyboard that I didn't type, and "gone to town with it."

I believe there have been unmanned missions to the moon that almost certainly must have brought back actual moon rock, so I wouldn't--and never did--claim that every chunk of rock labeled "moon rock" given to anyone by NASA must be a fake.   Bzzzt!   FAIL!

We know simply that the Apollo 11 (Low Earth Orbit) astronauts and US Ambassador to the Netherlands presented a supposed "moon rock" to their hosts, which was tested to be petrified wood, showing NASA to have perpetrated a hoax--among several--which, when taken together, prove the all the Apollo missions to be have frauds and a multi-year and multi-billion-dollar laundered-money hoax foisted onto the world.

[rx]

Thanks for the comment and link, cgbg!

Sometimes I feel very few FReepers read beyond others’ one-liners, but I know you’re one of the good ones who do much more. That’s also true for the folks I occasionally ping to my rants.