• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

I want to hear more about the moon minerals that the US and Soviet Unions were trying to access, and how faking the moon landings in the Nevada desert or whatever, helped the US to access these precious moon minerals? Given there has been for almost 60 years since, exactly zero lunar mining, processing, shipping, etc. happening, and nothing of note is going to happen for some time…. What exactly was the point of faking the moon landing to make the world think the US had first put a man on the moon?

Vixen, you silly goose, what new madness is this you’ve injected into the thread?

That'll be tricky, as it has already been made clear that the OP doesn't know anything much about lunar rocks, other than some nonsense about them being shiny or glassy (CBA to go look up the exact wording).
 
I notice also that, once again, rather than linking to the image itself she's linked to a page where it might be found. Is it another case where she's simply posted the image at the top of her Google results?
It's a page of artwork on a theme of starry skies. She deliberately posted something that's not a photograph to 'prove' black and white film can photograph stars. It's all part of the wind-up to keep the thread on-topic. Where of course the topic is her.
 
That'll be tricky, as it has already been made clear that the OP doesn't know anything much about lunar rocks, other than some nonsense about them being shiny or glassy (CBA to go look up the exact wording).
I think possibly you're referring to this?
Again, the lunar rocks are rather like the reflectors, they don't actually prove the topic at hand.
I also found these:
Firstly, we have rocks falling to Earth from outer space all the time. Secondly, they do not need to be collected by hand.
I understand similar rocks can be found in Antarctica. You do know the Moon and the Earth once split off from each other, so aren't that different in structure, except that the Moon is largely dehydrated.
A while back I asked Vixen what the consequences of an object in orbit encountering the Earth's atmosphere would be. She hasn't answered.

If she thinks rocks that have fallen to Earth are not that different to rocks collected on the moon it would explain why she might think moon rocks are shiny.
 
Maybe they were planning to sell the lunar mining rights, caveat emptor?
The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, to which the U.S. and the Soviet Union were both signatories, allows the free use of the Moon and forbids attempting to establish sovereignty. Any nation can mine the Moon. No nation can forbid any other nation from mining the Moon. The modern legal interpretation is that it's akin to commercial fishing in international waters.
 
The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, to which the U.S. and the Soviet Union were both signatories, allows the free use of the Moon and forbids attempting to establish sovereignty. Any nation can mine the Moon. No nation can forbid any other nation from mining the Moon. The modern legal interpretation is that it's akin to commercial fishing in international waters.
As seen in "Deadliest Catch".*

*Not those kind of crabs.
 
The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, to which the U.S. and the Soviet Union were both signatories, allows the free use of the Moon and forbids attempting to establish sovereignty. Any nation can mine the Moon. No nation can forbid any other nation from mining the Moon. The modern legal interpretation is that it's akin to commercial fishing in international waters.
As I said, caveat emptor, kemo sabe?
 
A while back I asked Vixen what the consequences of an object in orbit encountering the Earth's atmosphere would be. She hasn't answered.

If she thinks rocks that have fallen to Earth are not that different to rocks collected on the moon it would explain why she might think moon rocks are shiny.
Moon rocks are not shiny, either recovered from the Moon or from Antarctica and elsewhere on Earth. Granted there are many types of Moon rock, but none of the mineral formations are shiny as recovered.

The only shiny one is the piece of lunar basalt at the National Air and Space Museum that has been worn smooth and shiny by the touch of millions of visitors.

As I wrote previously, there are lunar spherules. They are shiny, but also mostly transparent. They are molten drops of material that has been heated in impacts, risen above the surface, formed a sphere (as liquids do in free fall), hardened, and then landed back on the surface. These spherules are the cause of the prominent retroreflective properties of the aggregate lunar surface. They occur chiefly in sizes of 10-500 μm, or in other words, dust grains.

Our planetarium has a piece of lunar anorthosite that can be examined from just a few centimeters away. It has some grains of material that might be considered crystalline. But they are only fractions of a millimeter in size and do not make the entire specimen seem shiny. Coincidentally here in Utah we have a type of granite that closely resembles lunar anorthosite, only with much larger grains. We use it architecturally. It clads the capitol and the Mormon temple. In general these composite forms are shiny only when polished.

Lunar meteorites cannot be mistaken for rocks recovered from the Moon. Meteorites exhibit the fusion crust from their high-temperature passage through Earth's atmosphere. They also exhibit aerodynamic flow lines from the same experience. Hoax claimants say the fusion crust could be chipped off to reveal the pristine interior structure. This would still not make them look like rocks from the Moon. Moon rocks have a different kind of crust indicative of their exposure to the space environment. Further, the vast majority of lunar meteorites are only tens of grams. Removing the fusion crust leaves you with almost no material. In contrast the Apollo samples average in the hundreds of grams and range up to more than 11 kg.

Further, lunar meteorites exhibit signs of their tenure on Earth. They show oxidation and water infiltration, things that cannot happen on the Moon and which contaminate most of the interior material. We know they're still Moon rocks because they show microscopic evidence of long-term exposure to cosmic rays, something that doesn't happen to Earth rocks and cannot be erased by time on Earth.
 
Moon rocks are not shiny, either recovered from the Moon or from Antarctica and elsewhere on Earth. Granted there are many types of Moon rock, but none of the mineral formations are shiny as recovered.

The only shiny one is the piece of lunar basalt at the National Air and Space Museum that has been worn smooth and shiny by the touch of millions of visitors.

As I wrote previously, there are lunar spherules. They are shiny, but also mostly transparent. They are molten drops of material that has been heated in impacts, risen above the surface, formed a sphere (as liquids do in free fall), hardened, and then landed back on the surface. These spherules are the cause of the prominent retroreflective properties of the aggregate lunar surface. They occur chiefly in sizes of 10-500 μm, or in other words, dust grains.

Our planetarium has a piece of lunar anorthosite that can be examined from just a few centimeters away. It has some grains of material that might be considered crystalline. But they are only fractions of a millimeter in size and do not make the entire specimen seem shiny. Coincidentally here in Utah we have a type of granite that closely resembles lunar anorthosite, only with much larger grains. We use it architecturally. It clads the capitol and the Mormon temple. In general these composite forms are shiny only when polished.

Lunar meteorites cannot be mistaken for rocks recovered from the Moon. Meteorites exhibit the fusion crust from their high-temperature passage through Earth's atmosphere. They also exhibit aerodynamic flow lines from the same experience. Hoax claimants say the fusion crust could be chipped off to reveal the pristine interior structure. This would still not make them look like rocks from the Moon. Moon rocks have a different kind of crust indicative of their exposure to the space environment. Further, the vast majority of lunar meteorites are only tens of grams. Removing the fusion crust leaves you with almost no material. In contrast the Apollo samples average in the hundreds of grams and range up to more than 11 kg.

Further, lunar meteorites exhibit signs of their tenure on Earth. They show oxidation and water infiltration, things that cannot happen on the Moon and which contaminate most of the interior material. We know they're still Moon rocks because they show microscopic evidence of long-term exposure to cosmic rays, something that doesn't happen to Earth rocks and cannot be erased by time on Earth.
Great breakdown by JayUtah. The point about cosmic ray tracks and micrometeorite pitting on genuine Apollo samples is crucial—it's physical evidence of direct space exposure that terrestrial weathering or atmospheric fusion crusts simply can't replicate or erase.
 
I have contributed personally to that shineyness.
As have I, many times. Hoax claimants say it's just an ordinary rock and that's why it's not radioactive. But if the real lunar surface is "highly radioactive" as claimed, then how could NASM credibly say they have one you could touch?

Some days I try to think like a hoax claimant but my spouse complains when I slam my head in the car door too many times in order to do that.
 
As have I, many times. Hoax claimants say it's just an ordinary rock and that's why it's not radioactive. But if the real lunar surface is "highly radioactive" as claimed, then how could NASM credibly say they have one you could touch?

Some days I try to think like a hoax claimant but my spouse complains when I slam my head in the car door too many times in order to do that.

There's something so special about touching history. It's like Roman coins, my 'O' level history teacher had some that he brought in so we could hold them and it connects you to history in a way that just reading about it can't. I had a few, but they along with some more valuable precious metal ones 'dissappeared' during the one house move we used professional movers). Honestly, anyone that looks at the absolute amazing achievement, on behalf of all of us, that the Apollo Astronauts achieved and thinks "I want to try and pull this down", well, I can only pity them.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom