'Moon rock' given to Dutch museum by Apollo 11 astronots is petrified wood!

reply to post by KyoZero

Attack a nice person like you? No way!

Do I believe in the other space missions? Let me tell you a story. In 1969, I was let out of grade school to watch the Apollo 11 moon landing and for 35 years I never had any doubts about it. Until a few years ago, I pretty much believed everything the government said. I guess that was a bit naive. Due to lingering unanswered questions about 9/11, I spent six long months investigating every aspect of the government's official story. I was so shocked by discovering what I firmly believe to be overwhelming evidence that 9/11 was an inside job that I vowed to never blindly accept what I previously took for granted. Anyway, the answer to your question is yes, I believe in other space missions, especially unmanned. But I find it highly suspicious that 40 years later, no other country has sent a manned spacecraft to the moon. Even our own return was recently canceled after numerous design and engineering problems -- including rocket engine vibration problems and the inability to replicate an Apollo-type heat shield (according to a GAO report.) To me, this is like Ford saying they're having trouble re-creating a 1970 Pinto.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by GoldenFleece

 

And Neil Armstrong's refusal to be interviewed ever since then doesn't help.

Interviewed by whom? Idiots like Bart Sibrel?

How about anyone but ONE NASA oral history project?

BTW, like myself, Bart Sibrel started off believing in and making a conventional documentary about the Apollo missions. But like 9/11, once you get into the details and specifics, the official story becomes highly implausible. When NASA "lost" 13,000 original Apollo tapes that were 4X the quality of anything ever seen, that clinched it.

reply to post by Phage


I am seriously asking here. Why would a U.S. ambassador give out petrified wood as a gift to anyone? I am having trouble finding a country that has no trees and has never heard of trees so this practice seems a little strange.

Can anyone of the people defending NASA explain this at all? Please?

reply to post by GoldenFleece
Hi Fleece,
I'm not quite sure what you mean about the tapes you mention, (I have heard about them) but do you mean they don't exist, or that they do, but would not hold up to scrutiny? And what about Saturn V that took Apollo 11 off the Earth, it barely cleared the launch tower, but it did and went into space, beautiful imperfection. For those of us watching in 1969, there was no drama but a spectacle for all to see, the drama would only come out later.

reply to post by K J Gunderson

It's a good question that probably won't be answered to everyone's satisfaction. Here's what we know; a piece of petrified wood was given to Drees by Middendorf. It seems that Drees believed it to be a Moon rock. No real Moon rocks were given to anyone until the 1970's. That's it, that's all we know. We don't know if Middendorf told Drees it was a Moon rock or if Middendorf believed it was a Moon rock (he didn't say much about it). But you are free to speculate.

But I fail to see how this has anything to do with "defending" NASA (if that's what you call denying the Moon landings were hoaxed).


[edit on 2/26/2010 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


Are you seriously trying to claim you are not a NASA defender, Phage? Do you think I can only read one thread at a time? It is not like I just started reading threads here and if NASA is involved, you are there to defend whatever story they have sold. Your shock at my saying that only serves to make you appear dishonest for no good reason.

I asked why and I was truly hoping for an answer. You did not even try but you did fill up a whole post. Forget that I asked why then and I will just hope maybe someone else can actually attempt to answer me.

reply to post by K J Gunderson

I'm not shocked by your accusation, I hear it a lot (and worse) and I'm pretty used to it.

BTW, I did not deny (or agree) that I am a "NASA defender". I said I don't see how this has anything to do with defending NASA. It looks more like something having to do with the U.S. State Deparment.

I thought I said I don't know why Middendorf gave Drees a piece of petrified wood. Is that clear enough for you? And, as I said, go ahead and speculate about it all you want. If you think it's evidence that the Apollo 11 landing was a hoax, so be it.

There. I "filled up" another post.




[edit on 2/26/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

I'm not shocked by your accusation, I hear it a lot (and worse) and I'm pretty used to it.

BTW, I did not deny (or agree) that I am a "NASA defender". I said I don't see how this has anything to do with defending NASA. It looks more like something having to do with the U.S. State Deparment.

You are shocked but do not deny it? What kind of convoluted thinking is that? Do you know your post history? You spend more time defending NASA than anything else. Just go look. That would make you a NASA defender. You do not even want to try and deny it but you feign shock? Whatever you need to do to demonize me because you know damn well it is a really good question and you have no clue what the answer is.

It is ok to just say "I do not know." Apparently it is upsetting your whole applecart.

I thought I said I don't know why Middendorf gave Drees a piece of petrified wood. Is that clear enough for you? And, as I said, go ahead and speculate about it all you want. If you think it's evidence that the Apollo 11 landing was a hoax, so be it.

There. I "filled up" another post.

LOL. Do you see how many qualifying statements you make before you can get to that "I do not know." Obviously you are missing the point. You do not just say "I do not know." You preface it with two paragraphs of nonsense in order to minimize it as much as possible.

The simple answer is that you do not know. If being a NASA defender is upsetting to you, I suggest you find another hobby. I do not make you defend them. I did not think it was an accusation or an insult either, just a fact. Why you take fake offense to it is beyond me.

All I wanted was an answer or the simple statement that you do not know. That is it. That is all. I am used to your nonsense answers by now and that is why I tried to be clear about exactly what kind of answer I was looking for.

I thought that I could actually just have an innocent back and forth with you. Obviously not. Good day.

Originally posted by smurfy
reply to post by GoldenFleece

 

Hi Fleece,
I'm not quite sure what you mean about the tapes you mention, (I have heard about them) but do you mean they don't exist, or that they do, but would not hold up to scrutiny?

I think it's NASA who believes they wouldn't hold up to scrutiny. How could they possibly lose 13,000 original Apollo tapes that are much higher quality than anything ever seen? It's absolutely mind-blowing. This is the original AP article about the missing tapes.

reply to post by K J Gunderson
There is assumption on your part in making the "giant leap for mankind" that NASA and Middendorf are of the same entity, they weren't. The real story is how someone was given a tree fossil portrayed as Moonrock, and NASA is not part of that story..so far.







[edit on 26-2-2010 by smurfy]

reply to post by K J Gunderson

Well that's a nice bunch of nonsense but you should read more carefully. I said I was not shocked.

reply to post by smurfy

While you are correct that NASA and Middendorf aren't the same entity, there doesn't seem to be any dispute that "it [the 'moon rock'] 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."

Not only that, Rijksmuseum officials claim they vetted the authenticity of the 'moon rock' with a call to NASA. How NASA managed to verify a chunk of petrified wood is anyone's guess.

Originally posted by smurfy
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

There is assumption on your part in making the "giant leap for mankind" that NASA and Middendorf are of the same entity, they weren't. The real story is how someone was given a tree fossil portrayed as Moonrock, and NASA is not part of that story..so far.







[edit on 26-2-2010 by smurfy]

I never said they were. I did not ask why NASA lied about it or presented it. I asked why Middendorf did.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

Well that's a nice bunch of nonsense but you should read more carefully. I said I was not shocked.

Cool. I was really hoping you were going to say that I missed the part where you attempted to give me a real answer to my actual question somewhere in those two posts but instead this is all you got? You can have it. Please stroke your ego on someone else now as I have no more need for you.

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by smurfy
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

There is assumption on your part in making the "giant leap for mankind" that NASA and Middendorf are of the same entity, they weren't. The real story is how someone was given a tree fossil portrayed as Moonrock, and NASA is not part of that story..so far.







[edit on 26-2-2010 by smurfy]

I never said they were. I did not ask why NASA lied about it or presented it. I asked why Middendorf did.

Then why this post,

"I am seriously asking here. Why would a U.S. ambassador give out petrified wood as a gift to anyone? I am having trouble finding a country that has no trees and has never heard of trees so this practice seems a little strange.
Can anyone of the people defending NASA explain this at all? Please? "