It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Ove38
How do you know it's the same LM ?
How do you know it was broadcasted from the moon ?
BTW moon rocks don't look like that ! they look like this
originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: turbonium1
Still waiting for your evidence, any at all, that shows Middendorf stating clearly and unequivocally that he gave the fossil to Drees.
Still waiting for any proof whatsoever that the rock was even linked to the card in any way before two artists put them together for an art exhibit.
originally posted by: turbonium1
That's why we have to take everything into account - the available evidence, mainly - and assess if his story is valid, or not valid, to that point.
And that's why his account is a problem for you, and all the Apollo-ites...because if it is the truth, it supports the hoax argument. With all of the evidence showing that it IS the truth, you make up ridiculous, far-fetched scenarios, which you call "possible'. Same as winning the 'Mega-Millions State Lottery' (MMSL) is possible. Same as winning the 'MMSL' lottery for 30 weeks in a row is "possible".
No. All of the evidence indicates that Middendorf DID NOT KNOW it was petrified wood. Nothing supports your claim that the card was not linked to the fake 'moon rock', it matches perfectly, in all details.
Middendorf said he got the fake 'moon rock' from the State Dep't, gave it to Drees, and said he didn't know anything about it not being real.
The first sentence ... "With the compliments of...US Ambassador of the United States of America'...
Do you understand the term "With the compliments of..."? It means something is linked to the card, which is a gift, which is given "With the compliments of" someone, or some group.... The card would also have been placed with that gift, perhaps above it, or below it, of course.
So the card is...ahem...'linked' to the gift...
The card names Middendorf as the person who gives out this gift, as well.
The card states the gift is to commemorate the visit of the Apollo 11 astronauts to the Netherlands.
A gift was given by Middendorf to Drees, which was a fake 'moon rock'. A moon rock would be the perfect gift to commemorate the visit of astronauts who collected rocks from the moon, no?
I've explained the reason why it has no description of ANY kind.
Why do you think his name would need to be put on the card? He had the card and 'moon rock', in his possession, so why is it relevant to name him on the card, other than you just saying it's relevant?
It wasn't protected because they took it out of the display it was presented in, obviously, and that's why the card is not 'linked' to it anymore, physically, on the display.
And you should know by this point why it doesn't need the word "Gift" put on the card, in order to know it is, indeed, a gift....right?
You don't understand the point here...
It is not 'an obligation'. They are giving out a fake 'moon rock' in a private ceremony, which has nothing to do with 'official' presentations to QEII, etc., which are public ceremonies.
And certainly that would have made him an excellent candidate for passing off fake moon rocks, I'd say!
Certainly there would be a motive to pass off a fake moon rock, if they had faked the Apollo 11 moon landing .
However, it would need quite a stretch to accept Middendorf had a motive, or even any grounds, to create and give out a fake moon rocks, if it had been a real moon landing.
It doesn't even work in a logical sense, to think a moon rock would be used for personal gain, as it has no value, and it also assumes there IS something to gain, and Middendorf knew about those potential gains, and that he desired those gains.
The US Government also had the means, capability to create the fake moon rock, far more than Middendorf. It isn't important to the issue, but I wanted to mention that point, anyway..
As I said earlier, if Middendorf was behind it, he would've said the gift was already known to them, as a token, not a genuine 'moon rock'. He would say someone must have thought it was a real moon rock, over the years, etc. Middendorf is immediately off the hook, and solves the whole problem, with nobody the wiser.
originally posted by: onebigmonkey
have one on my website from Apollo 16 that shows rocks and craters visible in LRO images but not in pre-Apollo photographs. How did they do that?
1) Orange Juice on the camera lens
2) Rings for fishrope on the astronauts backpack.
3) Inpossible sound, astronaut throw something away against the lunarmodule and you here that sound
originally posted by: captainpudding
a reply to: DJW001
Oh God, I made it 5 minutes in before my brain shut off out of self preservation. They're just going on about how signal degradation from video being broadcast 384,000km is somehow evidence of a hoax
originally posted by: choos
a reply to: dragonridr
its quite funny indeed..
he did mention that it was ALL LIVE which is why there were no "do-overs" for mistakes made..
so he has straight out thrown the slow motion theory out the window..
a reply to: onebigmonkey
The fact that there is confusion about when that smearing occurs is insignificant -...
They do not claim themselves that they know it was smeared in the LM between EVAs,