It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

page: 211
377
<< 208  209  210    212  213  214 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
If you're not interested in debating how they can and have found Moon and Mars rocks on earth, Antarctica specifically, then you really shouldn't be participating on ATS. Why don't you take the time to read the full post above and watch the videos. It won't hurt you.


Funny, I had a similar opinion on every occasion you and your little crew of miscreants ignore the scientific rebuttels to your deeply flawed theories. I see that now you have (slowly) come to realise that you don't have a chance in hell of ever winning an argument based on scientific fact, so you're now resorting to discussions that cannot be proven one way or another as proof of anything while doing your upmost to skew them as much as possible in order to try and put forward your points.
So metorites can be found on the Earth that originated from the Moon, try telling us something we don't know. I feel sorry for you if this is somehow news to you and can't help wondering why you even bother trying to discuss anything astronomy related when you consistantly demonstrate your lack of understanding in the subject.
The attempts being made here of trying to imply that the lunar rocks (which you were basically trying to imply don't exist before) are now simply meteorites that have been found is pathetic to say the least.
I still find it curious that time and time again you fail to address the specific points that have proven your previous points to be incorrect, why do you keep avoiding them? Could it be... because you wrong? I think it is somehow and so do the majority of people reading this thread.
The best response achieved has been some sort of dismissive remark that the data is invalid without a specific rebuttel involving calculations or figures, which in science is necessary to prove a point.
Face it, you're a nobody. You've probably underachieved immensely in your education and you're fed up with being looked down on by the people asking you for extra large portions of fries everyday, so once you've finished your shift you come on here and pretend your someone. You're not, you're insignificant and nothing more than an irritation, you're not onto anything, you don't know any big secret, you're not smarter than most and you're opinion is never going to matter to anyone. The Government isn't going to 'come and get you' because you're onto them and the only reasons anyone here acknowledges your presence is because it would be irresponsible to allow some of the younger more naive people who may read the thread think you may have a point.
Now instead of whining that people arn't answering the points you and your friends have recently brought up, try living by these standards and answering the various points brought up over the last few weeks you keep doing your best to avoid.




posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
your little crew of miscreants ignore the scientific rebuttels to your deeply flawed theories.


So you've ignored the previous page of debate.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You don't want anyone to read the post about how they've discovered Moon AND Mars rocks in Antarctica ?
Fair enough, it is devastating to the Apollo believers.

By the way, what part/s of the professors speech do you disagree with? Or are you like the previous posters who didn't even bother to watch how they discovered Moon / Mars rocks in Antarctica.


Google Video Link


edit on 6-10-2010 by ppk55 because: added important previous initial post



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Again, I remind you about the Constellation Program. But going to the Moon is very expensive and requires a lot of political and public support, if there isn't much, then it simply won't happen.


Im glad you brought this up, I've been meaning to cover this as well.
Ready for another Apollo "truth" to crash and burn?

I'll Spend Your Tax Money the Way I Want to Whether You Like it or Not!






Because of the on-going dispute over the future of human space exploration, I have been reminded of the longstanding perception that in the 1960s NASA’s Apollo program enjoyed great public support. That is a misconception. The belief that Apollo enjoyed enthusiastic support during the 1960s and that somehow NASA has lost its compass thereafter still enjoys broad appeal . This is an important conception, for without the active agreement of political leaders and at least public acquiescence no exploration effort may be sustained for any length of time.




The level of popular support that most people believe the public held for the Kennedy decision to undertake the Moon landings are, therefore, perceived as something that must be gained for the present space exploration agenda to succeed. Repeatedly a chorus of remorse for the lukewarm popular support enjoyed by specific space exploration activities is followed with a heavy sigh and the conclusion, “if only our current efforts had the same level of commitment enjoyed by Apollo, all would be well.”




Apollo—wrapped as it was in the bosom of American virtue, advocated by the most publicly wholesome of astronaut heroes, and hawked by everyone from journalists to Madison Avenue marketers—enjoyed consistent popularity. There is some evidence to suggest this, but it is, on the main, untrue. From the 1960s to near the present, using the polling data that exists, there is little evidence to support an expansive lunar exploration and colonization program. One must conclude from these results that the United States undertook and carried out Apollo not because the public clamored for it during the 1960s, but because it served other purposes. Furthermore, this polling data suggests that should the United States mount another human mission to the Moon in the future it will also be because the mission serves a larger political, economic, or national defense agenda.






While there may be reasons to accept that Apollo was transcendentally important at some sublime level, assuming a generally rosy public acceptance of it is at best a simplistic and ultimately unsatisfactory conclusion. Indeed, the public’s support for space funding has remained remarkably stable at approximately 80 percent in favor of the status quo since 1965, with only one significant dip in support in the early 1970s. However, responses to funding questions on public opinion polls are extremely sensitive to question wording and must be used cautiously.


So lets not use budget and public support as a whipping boy for the inability to land men on the moon this day and age... OK?



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 



PPK, once again you read, but you don't comprehend. Blinded by the FERVENT desire to be "right' about Apollo....when you are shown to be WRONG EACH AND EVERY TIME!

Now, thanks to the spamming and subject-changing (and inadvertently, PROOF of Apollo) by Foos (although that obviously wasn't his intention, but HIS failure at reading comprehension is fairly evident as well).

"JARRAH WHITE" is either a bloody idiot (because, by now, anyone with two neurons to rub together can see his crap videos posted on YouTube for the pure drivel that they are) or else, he delights in punking, fooling, (insert your favorite Aussie idiom here to describe) having a go at gullible people.

I'm not sure...because IF he is a "genius" (as thread OP contends) then he certainly doesn't show any of that capacity in the videos....he does show one example of "genius" though, I suppose. Much like any person who manages to fool an audience so cleverly.....circus pioneers Barnum and Bailey come to mind, for example.


Thanks to Foos, he merely dribbles out more pablum, and YOU bought it, hook line and sinker....with this new (actually, it isn't "new") 'argument' about Antarctica. The fact that idiot(?) J. White attempts to bamboozle people with his fluff videos means that, as I suggested, either he is too stupid to know any better, or is counting on his audience to be too IGNORANT of science and specifically this rather obscure aspect of the field of archeology. The knowledge of meteorites that have survived entry through the atmosphere (because they were large enough initially, not to be completely consumed by the friction, and heat generated) and have a remainder land on Earth is NOT "new" information ---- for anyone who bothers to pick up a science magazine, or even watch any variety of science documentaries.

If you wish, I could provide a BLOW by BLOW account of exactly where, when and how often J. White goes south in his "arguments"....but, that really won't be necessary IF you just bother to fully read the links, that not only Foos, but you, yourself, have snipped and cited already. NOT just the mined quotes, but in their entirety.

When you've finished with that, then do some more research, and tell everyone HOW MANY, and by WEIGHT, meteorite fragments have been collected, just from Antarctica (hint: I spotted a reference that said "about 30"), and THEN compare to the total amount of material returned via the Apollo missions.

Also, along with that research, look into the conditions encountered by the "rocks" as they entered the atmosphere, and when subjected to those extreme temperatures, determine (from the sources) what sorts of changes they underwent that make them VERY distinguishable from the Apollo Lunar samples, collected by hand, and returned aboard the CM capsule, sealed hermetically in the collection containers, that preserved the in situ vacuum conditions on the Moon's surface.

Finally.....in the decades since the meteorites were first discovered (not only in Antarctica, mind you ---- but, because of the conditions there, most that have managed to land on that continent have been better preserved, at least in the last few thousand years --- in the "deep freeze" conditions. Other parts of the planet, they are subjected to much more erosion, and are less-well preserved. Keep in mind, as well, that the planet is 3/4 WATER!).

....since they were discovered there, and it was realized that they were extraterrestrial in origin, their ACTUAL point of origin was open to conjecture. Since, there were no KNOWN samples from anywhere else, not the Moon, not Mars, not an asteroid, to compare. ALL the geologists could do is, knowing the extent of samples, and varieties that exist on Earth, they could determine that what were found in Antarctica were NOT like anything formed on this planet (not ever found, nor seen anyway....and you'd think that a large consensus of geologists would know their stuff, even if they disagreed now and then. People make CAREERS out of many fields, and no one person can be expert at them all --- so, colleagues discuss, and reach educated conclusions).

The composition of any meteorite sample (and they can be confidently determined to have been subjected to the high temperatures of entry through the atmosphere) showed only (prior to Apollo) that they arrived from off-world. AFTER Apollo, then comparisons could be drawn, and some meteorites determined to be likely of Lunar origin.

Mars?? Well, there are no confirmed examples of Martian rocks here on this planet....only the scientific equipment onboard the robotic probes that have landed there, to compare with. However, there IS a great deal of agreement amongst those learned people that a few examples are very probably from Mars...they don't resemble anything formed here, and they don't resemble anything from the Moon (now that we know so much more about our closest neighbor).

Speaking of "close neighbors" ---- it helps, in the way to visualize the orbital and celestial mechanics responsible for any off-world meteor impact to occur, when you recall the organization of the Solar System. For the most part, the "deepest" gravity well will be the Sun...in the "center"....most mass, and hence, highest gravitational pull.

Also, one has to remember the EARLY Solar Systems' violent past, and the millions (billions? Hundreds of billions?) of collisions that occurred as debris was "swept" clean by impacts. The meteorites that are found here have likely been in space for millenia....the Moon, since it's closest, likely would have a greater number of objects that originated there, blasted off the surface by ancient, violent impacts....BUT, the "thing" that hit the Moon, too, would be fragmented, and the pieces that flew off, to hit the Earth later, could all be mixed together.

Same with Mars....or, something that may have originated in the Asteroid Belt. Or farther out....drawn inwards, perhaps, because of the "gravity well", orbiting for who knows how long, until eventually, by pure chance, collision with Earth.

For all we can surmise, there could be debris still out there that began its journey from Venus, or even Mercury. Just as there are likely pieces of the Earth too, hitting other bodies. It is never going to be possible to know every detail, of the entire ~4 billions years (or more) of the Solar System's existence. BUT, learning, exploring, and investigations and study will get more answers than sitting in one's home, watching stupidly IGNORANT Apollo "hoax" videos made by some 20-something know-nothing....or even a 60-something know-nothing. BUT, J. White IS that 20-something.....and he's a virulent pest.

Every country has their "village idiot" example, du jour....We have Sarah Palin, and Australia has Jarrah White.....








ANYONE who has



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 08:01 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55

Originally posted by AgentSmith
your little crew of miscreants ignore the scientific rebuttels to your deeply flawed theories.


So you've ignored the previous page of debate.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You don't want anyone to read the post about how they've discovered Moon AND Mars rocks in Antarctica ?
Fair enough, it is devastating to the Apollo believers.


Wow


Do you guys have some sort of 'Ultimate Quote Mining Championship Award' you're all fighting for?

What I actually said in context was:


Funny, I had a similar opinion on every occasion you and your little crew of miscreants ignore the scientific rebuttels to your deeply flawed theories.


I wasn't talking about the meteorites originating from the Moon, which I address seperately when I said:



So metorites can be found on the Earth that originated from the Moon, try telling us something we don't know. I feel sorry for you if this is somehow news to you and can't help wondering why you even bother trying to discuss anything astronomy related when you consistantly demonstrate your lack of understanding in the subject.


How embarrasing for you that your only method of argument is to quote mine and lie, because you have no valid point


I've noted your sudden interest in the meteroites originating from Mars, I take it you are taking note of this so you can deny the Mars mission in 2030?



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Do you guys have some sort of 'Ultimate Quote Mining Championship Award'


When you say something you say it, regardless.

What is amazing is how a professor can find Moon rocks and Mars rocks on earth, specifically Antarctica.

If they can find Moon / Mars rocks on earth, then how how do we know they came from Apollo and not from Antarctica?

This seems to be a subject no one wants to talk about judging by the last page of responses.
Come on, let's talk about it without insults or derogatory remarks.

The detailed video from Professor Monica Kress is posted above.
www.physics.sjsu.edu...

Dr Monica Kress
Assistant Professor
Department of Physics and Astronomy
College of Science
San Jose State University


edit on 6-10-2010 by ppk55 because: grammar correction



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


Oh, sheesh!!! This is juvenile, by now....


If they can find Moon / Mars rocks on earth, then how how do we know they came from Apollo and not from Antarctica?


I see, rather than reading my earlier response, you resort to more lying and pointless, irrelevant deflection?

Thousands...yes thousands of professionals around the world who have had occasion (by now) to examine the Apollo lunar samples KNOW, and have no doubt, as to how they were acquired. Never has anyone said, after being granted the opportunity to study them, that they questioned their origin, nor did they question the method.

But, since it was glossed over before, a direct challenge to YOU, based on the quoted question above:

>>>>>How many kilograms of found meteorites of Lunar origin were found in Antarctica, total? And, how many kilograms of Lunar samples were returned by the six Apollo landing missions?



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Thousands...yes thousands of professionals around the world who have had occasion (by now) to examine the Apollo lunar samples KNOW, and have no doubt, as to how they were acquired. Never has anyone said, after being granted the opportunity to study them, that they questioned their origin, nor did they question the method.

Never? No doubt? I guess you missed this little gem from last year:


Fake Dutch 'moon rock' revealed
BBC News
28 August, 2009

A treasured piece at the Dutch national museum - a supposed moon rock from the first manned lunar landing - is nothing more than petrified wood, curators say.

It was given to former Prime Minister Willem Drees during a goodwill tour by the three Apollo-11 astronauts shortly after their moon mission in 1969.

When Mr Drees died, the rock went on display at the Amsterdam museum.

At one point it was insured for around $500,000 (£308,000), but tests have proved it was not the genuine article.

The Rijksmuseum, which is perhaps better known for paintings by artists such as Rembrandt, says it will keep the piece as a curiosity.

"It's a good story, with some questions that are still unanswered," Xandra van Gelder, who oversaw the investigation that proved the piece was a fake, was quoted as saying by the Associated Press news agency.

"We can laugh about it."

The "rock" had originally been been vetted through a phone call to Nasa, she added.

The US agency gave moon rocks to more than 100 countries following lunar missions in the 1970s.

US officials said they had no explanation for the Dutch discovery.

news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


This has been dealt with at least THREE TIMES previously in this very thread. Please go back and read all 200 odd pages, Thank you for providing the perfect example of what we've been talking about: this thread is a zombie.



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


Oh, not that idiocy again????

It's humorous only because it makes the former Dutch PM look like a fool.

The story also has many of the details wrong. The piece of petrified wood was NOT "vetted" by NASA!!

Also, the U.S. ambassador (to the Netherlands) at the time seems to have been a fool (or gullible, maybe the vicitm of a practical joke?):


...the U.S. ambassador gave the Dutch prime minister what he said was a moon rock. When an expert saw the rock in the museum, he didn't think it was real. Geologists have identified the moon rock as petrified wood.


Get the story right, or else, let the fantasies prevail and remain ignorant; it's a personal choice.

(Salient points of fact: The ambassador ----NOT NASA ---- said it was a "moon rock". This, in 1969!!!! When the "gift" was given. Ummmm.....NASA still had the Lunar samples locked up, for study, under controlled conditions....NOT roaming around the planet to give to various nations' leaders. Second, by happenstance an EXPERT wandered by, in the Dutch museum, and noticed quite quickly that it didn't appear to be what it was labelled to be. I'd say it was a very good prank, or else, pure sutpidity all around...not sure which).



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Professor Monica Kress' research that Moon and Mars rocks have been found in Antarctica has not been posted before.

The video is above. Why won't any of you comment on it.

Original post with ALL the videos
www.abovetopsecret.com...




edit on 6-10-2010 by ppk55 because: added all the videos no one wants to comment on



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Why do you keep pretending like people are afraid of answering the questions about the moon rocks? In my first reply I posted a bunch of questions, in my further replies a bunch of quotes with threads where people had already discussed it.

If anything it just seems you don't want to go to the effort of having to open new threads, or doing something that might actually contribute to the knowledge of ATS. IE ... a well structured amount of information about the idea of the moon landing hoax.

Originally I just thought it was FoosM that wanted to keep the thread running. Kinda getting the idea this might just be a promotional thread for Jarrah White.

And what particular information do you think needs answered in those videos?

edit on 6-10-2010 by Pinke because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 09:52 AM
link   

"I will eat all your brains - hahahah!": Evil Zombiemoon will make you insane!

ps. Thats definitely not off topic mods
- not in this thread.
edit on 6-10-2010 by cushycrux because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


To recap:

Foos claims (many pages back) that the Apollo astronauts were taken from the CM atop the Saturn V just prior to launch. So an empty spacecraft went into space. At the time they left, a prerecorded tape was started that had the mission on it, transmitted in some way so as to fool the men at Mission Control.

Now, the problem with that arises when we look at Apollo 12. After launch, the ship was hit by lightning twice, and it caused a power surge, knocking out many systems. It was then the famous "SCE to Aux" quote was born.

But the events bring up a question. If the vehicle was unmanned, with a prerecorded tape playing, how did they know the ship was going to be struck by lightning at that exact moment so as to fake all the problems that occurred right afterward?

Foos, we await your explanation.....



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
reply to post by DJW001
 


Professor Monica Kress' research that Moon and Mars rocks have been found in Antarctica has not been posted before.

The video is above. Why won't any of you comment on it.

Original post with ALL the videos
www.abovetopsecret.com...


I'm only speaking for myself here, but I respond to nothing that is just "on a video".

If you are too stupid to watch that video and convey what it is saying, then there is really no reason to say anything to you.

I think even the ATS rules say you should only use videos as secondary evidence, not primary arguments.

So if you have a point to make, make it. I refuse to be used just to increase hits on Jarrah White's videos. (which, after all, is all you guys are doing)



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 



Professor Monica Kress' research that Moon and Mars rocks have been found in Antarctica has not been posted before.

The video is above. Why won't any of you comment on it.


Dr. Kress can confirm that meteorites found in Antarctica and elsewhere originated on the Moon by comparing them to the lunar samples brought back by NASA (and the Russians). This has been pointed out in the many replies we have made to you. What is your response to that? You keep pretending no one has pointed that out.


jra

posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
You don't want anyone to read the post about how they've discovered Moon AND Mars rocks in Antarctica ?
Fair enough, it is devastating to the Apollo believers.


In what way is it "devastating" to Apollo believers? If anything they're further evidence that Apollo happened. You see, it wasn't until 1982 that a meteorite found in Antarctica was first identified as being from the Moon. And it was only discovered as originating from the Moon when it was compared to the Apollo samples.

However, the samples found in Antarctica can not be passed off as samples taken directly from the Moon, due to the extreme heat they experience when flying through Earth's atmosphere and the hundreds to thousands of years of weathering.


jra

posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


I really wish people would look deeper into this, but HB's just jump on it without giving it much of a thought and think they have evidence of a hoax.

The petrified wood was NOT given to the Dutch Prime Minister by the Apollo 11 Astronauts or even by NASA themselves.

Firstly, It was a private gift from a US Ambassador to the former Dutch Prime Minister. I'd like to stress the former part. Willem Drees was no longer PM in 1969 when he was given this petrified wood.

Secondly, US ambassador gave the petrified rock to the former PM in 1969. NASA didn't give out the gift rocks to other Countries until after Apollo 17 in 1972.

Thirdly, the petrified wood was 98grams. The largest Apollo samples given to other Countries were 1.1grams and encased in clear plastic.

So looking at these facts, it's clear that there was no attempt by anyone to purposely pass this off as a Moon rock. To me it seems it was the museum that acquired some of Drees possessions that misidentified the rock and didn't bother to check to see if it really was a Moon rock or not.



posted on Oct, 6 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Blew Moon addendumdeedum



We know moon rocks found on Earth are from the Moon because of Apollo
We know mars rocks found on Earth are from Mars because.... a probe that hasnt sent any materials back?

I ask the question, how do we know those same "mars" rocks are not from another planet?
We still have Venus, Mercury, the Asteroid belt, we have other moons such as Phobos and Deimos, and well... our own Moon.

You get the feeling that he only reason they say the rocks might come from Mars is because for a long time we wanted money to go to Mars? Oh look signs of life! Oh look signs of water!


Dr. Laurie Leshin has been interested in Mars rocks since she was a ten-year-old girl, when the Viking images of the Martian surface caught her attention. At the time, it was her dream to touch the Martian Rocks; today, she is one of the few scientists who have been fortunate enough to study and personally handle Mars rocks.


NASA is like Disneyland, it makes dreams come true for little boys and girls.


Since we have yet to send a human to collect samples from Mars, all of our “Mars rocks” come from Martian meteorites that have landed on earth. There are an estimated three-dozen meteorites from Mars. One may question how scientists are able to differentiate between meteorites from Mars and meteorites from other planets and the rest of space. Several years ago, small black particles were identified in meteorites. These particles were tested, and the concentration of the gases in the particles was a perfect match to the concentration of the gases in the Martian atmosphere. Therefore, scientists conclude that the rocks are from Mars.




These Martian rocks have enabled scientists to study three important aspects of Mars. Firstly, since the rocks are igneous, and formed fairly recently (geologically speaking) this proves that there are active volcanoes on Mars. Therefore, Mars is geologically alive. Secondly, chemical analysis has revealed water crystals in Martian asteroids. Mars has a water cycle as complex as the water cycle of Earth. Therefore, Mars is hydrologically alive. Lastly, and possibly most significantly, some scientists speculated that they found fossils in Mars rocks. Although recent studies have shown that these fossils were not actually real, they have opened the door to the possibility of life on Mars and have forced people to question, “Is Mars biologically alive?”


Oh so basically its not necessary to send men to confirm if those rocks are from Mars? You just need probes? So the same can be true for the moon, just send probes... wait, how many probes did we send to the moon before Apollo?


while she was in Antarctica, and it was a lot of snow! In fact, it is because Antarctica is completely covered in snow that Dr. Leshin and several other scientists endured the harsh weather conditions and lack of amenities to spend six weeks in the highest, driest place on Earth. In search for meteorites, Dr. Leshin would speed across the arctic flatland on a snowmobile. Dark meteorites stood out on Antarctica’s icy white surface, so Dr. Leshin could easily identify and collect samples. All together, she and other scientists found over 400 meteorites. That made the lack of bathing, (they could not shower once the entire six weeks), small living quarters, (one 6’x 6’ tent for two people) and almost unbearably cold temperatures, (temperatures dropped to as low as –20° F with a wind-chill of –80° F), well worth it!


Dang! It only took six weeks to find 400 meteorites?



Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Brian H. Mason, 92, a Smithsonian scientist who was internationally known for his study of meteorites and moon rocks and who was the first to discover that a rock found in Antarctica came from the moon, died of renal failure Dec. 3 at his home in Chevy Chase.



In 1962, he wrote what became a standard text on meteorites, and in 1970, he co-wrote a 179-page report on the lunar rocks collected by Apollo astronauts. He edited a seminal book of mineralogy that described every mineral known to science, where each was found and all its physical properties, an exhaustive work in 1,800 pages.



While examining meteorites collected by U.S. expeditions to Antarctica, he wrote in his notes that they seemed to be rocks from the moon, an idea that astrophysicists had said was impossible.



Oh so.. ummm, OK.



Unwilling to show up other scholars in the field, his published comment was that they "had a passing resemblance to certain Apollo 15 lunar rocks." Within a year, other scientists agreed. It wasn't the first or last time his work forced a reconsideration of an entire field.



As principal investigator of the Apollo moon rock findings, his interest in extraterrestrial matters was so great that while watching astronaut Neil Armstrong on the lunar surface, he groused that Armstrong "was talking to President Nixon when he would have been better occupied picking up rocks."


You got that right, I can only imagine what other scientists like Astronomers were saying.



www.nasa.gov...
www.washingtonpost.com...



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 208  209  210    212  213  214 >>

log in

join