Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

AS11 Astronauts give fake moon rock to dutch


  • Please log in to reply
77 replies to this topic

#31    chadster

chadster

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 292 posts
  • Joined:26 Jul 2006

Posted 28 August 2009 - 11:49 PM

View PostKacen, on 28 August 2009 - 04:00 AM, said:

It's apparent to me the object's source got mixed up.

Also honestly I could tell that's not a moon rock by looking at it. It's brown and it's too smooth. A moon rock would be grey and with many craggy bumps and such.


Its always something other than the obvious isnt it?


#32    Gravitorbox

Gravitorbox

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,558 posts
  • Joined:22 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States

Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:11 AM

View Postchadster, on 28 August 2009 - 11:49 PM, said:

Its always something other than the obvious isnt it?
What are you getting at?

"Everything we did was criticized. For about thirty years we lived with the world against us, accusing us of things we didn't do!"

    - Ian Douglas Smith

#33    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,344 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 29 August 2009 - 09:15 AM

View PostKacen, on 28 August 2009 - 10:22 PM, said:

Fact of the matter is they have moon rocks on display that are, well, clearly moon rocks when put under any scientific scrutiny. This incident wouldn't make sense as a catalyst of "proof of the moon landing being hoaxed".

They could have easily given the Dutch something scientists agree were a moon rock.

Essentially what I'm saying is if this were a result of a deception on NASA's part to assist with the "faking of the moon landing" then it wouldn't have so obviously have been a piece of petrified wood; even to a casual observer one would look and not think "moon rock". Fact is, they really -have- moon rocks, in fact moon rocks were acquired from other sources not just the Apollo Missions. NASA and Soviet Space probes before the apollo missions brought back moon rocks (not in the vast quantities of the Apollo Missions however), and in the 1970's I believe they recovered a few from a meteor impact in Antarctica.

Point is, even if the Apollo Landings were faked they could have still supplied real moon rocks. So the way I see it, it's just a big mix up.

Nonsense. This was no mix-up. The museum even called NASA to confirm it was a Moon rock. NASA essentially confirmed it was authentic, by indicating that ~100 genuine Moon rocks had been given to various countries around the world at the time.

The US Ambassador gave them a fake Moon rock. A deliberate con job. The truth only came out when the Dutch finally decided to examine it on their own, decades later. A good thing too, otherwise it would still be considered a "genuine" Apollo Moon rock.

If there's one fake, then it's quite possible others are fakes. I'd wager this isn't the only phony out there.  

Why would the US Ambassador give them a fake?

To help convince the world Apollo was genuine, obviously.

NASA probably told the US Ambassador it was a real Moon rock. I mean, how would a politician/diplomat ever know if it was a fake or not?


#34    Peter B

Peter B

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,342 posts
  • Joined:29 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Yes We Can-berra!

Posted 29 August 2009 - 02:54 PM

Turbonium said:

Quote

This was no mix-up. The museum even called NASA to confirm it was a Moon rock. NASA essentially confirmed it was authentic, by indicating that ~100 genuine Moon rocks had been given to various countries around the world at the time.
No they didn’t say that. They said they’d given out those rocks in the early 1970s, adding “…those were from later missions…” In other words, it implies the exact opposite of what you’re suggesting – a rock given in 1969 wouldn’t have been one of theirs. Note that the rock was presented in October 1969: before Apollo 12 flew, so the only possible source of the rock would have been Apollo 11, and a rock that size (as seen in the photo) would have been far too valuable to hand over even to a Prime Minister.

Quote

The US Ambassador gave them a fake Moon rock. A deliberate con job. The truth only came out when the Dutch finally decided to examine it on their own, decades later. A good thing too, otherwise it would still be considered a "genuine" Apollo Moon rock.
The only suggestion I can see for a con is the actions of the ambassador. I’d like to see your evidence NASA was involved. There’s certainly no suggestion in the story that they were involved in the activity.

Quote

If there's one fake, then it's quite possible others are fakes. I'd wager this isn't the only phony out there.
Quite possibly. But the key is finding the source of the fakes. If NASA’s not involved, then there’s no way you can use such fakes as evidence Apollo was faked.

Quote

Why would the US Ambassador give them a fake?

To help convince the world Apollo was genuine, obviously.
What? How could NASA possibly hope to convince people a faked Apollo was genuine by handing out rocks that came from Earth, and could be so proved in a couple of minutes by any scientist? Handing out Earth rocks and claiming them to be from the Moon is exactly the path to follow if you want to convince people Apollo was faked.

If I was going to fake Apollo and convince the world it was real, I’d hand out rocks collected from the Moon by my unmanned sample retriever mission (which, if you recall discussions on the Moon Hoax thread, is a method of Moon rock retrieval you agree is a possibility).

Quote

NASA probably told the US Ambassador it was a real Moon rock.
What’s your evidence NASA gave the rock to the ambassador? Did you miss the bit in the story where the ambassador said he got the rock from the State Department? Or is he lying too?

Quote

I mean, how would a politician/diplomat ever know if it was a fake or not?
Well, I’ll agree with you there. I bet the person at the State Department who gave the rock to the ambassador didn’t have a clue either.


#35    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,892 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 29 August 2009 - 05:11 PM

View Postbadeskov, on 28 August 2009 - 08:03 PM, said:

Hi Swanie,

Pardon my ignorance, but have they ever been handing out moon samples as souvenirs (and I am not considering a sample at the Smithsonian a souvenir)? Admittedly, I have not even googled it so my ignorance is not exactly excusable, but I was just curious and without the time to actually do the proper research at the present time.

Cheers,
Badeskov
From the Wiki moon rock page:

Quote

Approximately two hundred small samples were mounted and presented to national governments and U.S. governors.

Here's another link about the goodwill samples:
http://www.timesonli...offset=0&page=1

As you can see, these samples and their accompanying plaques were all very different from the Dutch "fake".  Specifically, the fake is much bigger and its plaque does not claim that the rock came from the moon.

Quote

Just a quarter of a kilogram was spared storage and commandeered for diplomatic purposes. This fragment was split into 1.1g pea-sized grains, each encased in a transparent Lucite ball the size of a marble. The granite-grey “goodwill moon rocks”, as they were termed, were given as gifts to 135 nations by President Nixon and, after his impeachment, by President Ford. Accompanying each ball was that country’s flag, flown on the historic mission, and a plaque bearing the stirring inscription: “This Flag of Your Nation was Carried to the Moon and Back by Apollo 11 and This Fragment of the Moon’s Surface was Brought to Earth by the Crew of That First Manned Lunar Landing.”

Edit to add: I've found this link with a picture of one of the goodwill rocks.  From the information here it appears that the samples given to the US governors were from Apollo 17, not Apollo 11.
http://www.nevadamag...will_moon_rock/

Also found a picture of one of the foreign rocks, also from Apollo 17.  It looks as if the Times piece is incorrect to say the rocks were from Apollo 11.
http://nature.ca/mus..._moonrock_e.cfm

Edited by flyingswan, 29 August 2009 - 05:39 PM.

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#36    starchy

starchy

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 750 posts
  • Joined:04 Dec 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 29 August 2009 - 05:46 PM

View Postflyingswan, on 29 August 2009 - 05:11 PM, said:

From the Wiki moon rock page:


Here's another link about the goodwill samples:
http://www.timesonli...offset=0&page=1

As you can see, these samples and their accompanying plaques were all very different from the Dutch "fake".  Specifically, the fake is much bigger and its plaque does not claim that the rock came from the moon.



Edit to add: I've found this link with a picture of one of the goodwill rocks.  From the information here it appears that the samples given to the US governors were from Apollo 17, not Apollo 11.
http://www.nevadamag...will_moon_rock/

Also found a picture of one of the foreign rocks, also from Apollo 17.  It looks as if the Times piece is incorrect to say the rocks were from Apollo 11.
http://nature.ca/mus..._moonrock_e.cfm

That clears it up. Apollo 17 was a genuine Moon Landing. Apollo 11 was a massive con, not a moon landing in any way. Lying bunch of frauds and liars.



]


#37    BertL

BertL

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 434 posts
  • Joined:07 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the Netherlands

Posted 29 August 2009 - 06:26 PM

View Poststarchy, on 29 August 2009 - 05:46 PM, said:

That clears it up. Apollo 17 was a genuine Moon Landing. Apollo 11 was a massive con, not a moon landing in any way. Lying bunch of frauds and liars.
Hahaha, that's quite a leap you're making there (again).

Hello there.

#38    merril

merril

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts
  • Joined:16 Feb 2008

Posted 29 August 2009 - 06:36 PM

View Poststarchy, on 29 August 2009 - 05:46 PM, said:

Lying bunch of frauds and liars.

In reference to the OP, can it be conjectured that the R.A.I. Convention Center, where this publicity event took place, had possibly agreed that a prop "Moon rock" be used during a press photo session, since a real one involved certain restrictions?

Regarding the 1969 opening of The Amstelhal, the R.A.I. website's history tab says-

Exhibition and Conference Centre-

Soon after the opening of the new premises in 1961 the RAI had to embark on expansion yet again. The Westhal was added in 1963 and the Congress Centre in 1965. The combination of exhibition halls and conference facilities, including restaurants, proved to be a great success. From that time onwards the development of the RAI gained momentum.

The Amstelhal was added in 1969 and Prince Claus opened the Holland complex in 1982. At the same time, six new conference and meeting rooms were added to the Congress Centre. Since the last major expansion -- the addition of the Parkhal in 1993 -- the present RAI Exhibition and Congress Centre consists of 11 exhibition halls with a total covered exhibition area of some 87,000 sq.m. plus 22 conference rooms, seven restaurants and an underground car park for over 3,000 cars.


Sounds like just a publicity shoot, for all involved.


#39    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,380 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 29 August 2009 - 07:27 PM

View Postflyingswan, on 29 August 2009 - 05:11 PM, said:

From the Wiki moon rock page:


Here's another link about the goodwill samples:
http://www.timesonli...offset=0&page=1

As you can see, these samples and their accompanying plaques were all very different from the Dutch "fake".  Specifically, the fake is much bigger and its plaque does not claim that the rock came from the moon.



Edit to add: I've found this link with a picture of one of the goodwill rocks.  From the information here it appears that the samples given to the US governors were from Apollo 17, not Apollo 11.
http://www.nevadamag...will_moon_rock/

Also found a picture of one of the foreign rocks, also from Apollo 17.  It looks as if the Times piece is incorrect to say the rocks were from Apollo 11.
http://nature.ca/mus..._moonrock_e.cfm

Swannie,

Thanks for taking the time and sorry for leeching like that. That was very informative and was it not for a deadline I am busy with I would have searched myself, but given your knowledge in the field I took the opportunity to exploit that :blush: I hope you don't mind.

Again, thanks!

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#40    postbaguk

postbaguk

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 995 posts
  • Joined:17 Aug 2006

Posted 29 August 2009 - 07:58 PM

This is interesting.

Apparently, the same museum displayed the rock back in 2006. It looked different back then...

http://www.rijksmuse...he-moon?lang=en

Compare the rock in that image to this:-

Posted Image

So what they have now doesn't seem to be what was given to them. Looks as if the 'switcheroo' took place in the last 3 years.


#41    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,892 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 29 August 2009 - 10:26 PM

View Postpostbaguk, on 29 August 2009 - 07:58 PM, said:

So what they have now doesn't seem to be what was given to them. Looks as if the 'switcheroo' took place in the last 3 years.
Dunno, could be the same rock seen from a different angle.  The colours, reddish with lighter and darker parts, look the same.

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#42    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 29 August 2009 - 10:58 PM

View PostSamael, on 28 August 2009 - 03:43 PM, said:

Sorry, but I don't see that you have to be a fully-trained rock geek to know that wood is not moon rock :/


That would be true, Samael.  It is obviously not a Moon rock, and the premise here is pretty ludicrous.

I wouldn't be surprized if some U.S. Ambassador got hold of this thing and presented it as a Moon rock.  Political types do all sorts of goofy stuff, but the fact of the matter is that Moon rocks were not given out in 1969, especially not full rocks.   Later on,small pieces (slices) were mounted and presented to various countries.

From the article...

Quote

The museum acquired the rock after the death of former Prime Minister Willem Drees in 1988. Drees received it as a private gift on Oct. 9, 1969 from then-U.S. ambassador J. William Middendorf during a visit by the three Apollo 11 astronauts, part of their "Giant Leap" goodwill tour after the first moon landing. Middendorf, who lives in Rhode Island, told Dutch broadcaster NOS news that he had gotten it from the U.S. State Department, but couldn't recall the exact details.

The State Department had nothing to do with, nor had any access to Moon rocks...

Quote

...one important unanswered question is why Drees was given the stone. He was 83 years old in 1969 and had been out of office for 11 years.

Curious.


Sounds like a cute little gesture, but certainly nothing NASA had any part in, since they weren't giving Moon rocks to anyone in 1969.

It looks pretty amusing and kinda dumb in hindsight...for the people involved, but that wasn't NASA.


#43    Gravitorbox

Gravitorbox

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,558 posts
  • Joined:22 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States

Posted 29 August 2009 - 11:05 PM

View Postturbonium, on 29 August 2009 - 09:15 AM, said:

Nonsense. This was no mix-up. The museum even called NASA to confirm it was a Moon rock. NASA essentially confirmed it was authentic, by indicating that ~100 genuine Moon rocks had been given to various countries around the world at the time.

The US Ambassador gave them a fake Moon rock. A deliberate con job. The truth only came out when the Dutch finally decided to examine it on their own, decades later. A good thing too, otherwise it would still be considered a "genuine" Apollo Moon rock.

If there's one fake, then it's quite possible others are fakes. I'd wager this isn't the only phony out there.  

Why would the US Ambassador give them a fake?

To help convince the world Apollo was genuine, obviously.

NASA probably told the US Ambassador it was a real Moon rock. I mean, how would a politician/diplomat ever know if it was a fake or not?
Why didn't they give them a real moon rock? They have real moon rocks, they had them before Apollo and could have supplied a real moon rock even if the Apollo missions were hoaxed. That thing was so obviously not a moon rock that it must have been a mix up. This incident is essentially independent of moon hoax accusations. It's not here nor there. I could tell that isn't a moon rock by freaken` looking at it.

If NASA intended to fake they could have done a more convincing job by actually supplying a real moon rock. It just doesn't make sense whether you believe the Apollo missions happened or not. Such is why I rule it as a mix up.

Edited by Kacen, 29 August 2009 - 11:13 PM.

"Everything we did was criticized. For about thirty years we lived with the world against us, accusing us of things we didn't do!"

    - Ian Douglas Smith

#44    Gravitorbox

Gravitorbox

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,558 posts
  • Joined:22 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States

Posted 29 August 2009 - 11:10 PM

View Postpostbaguk, on 29 August 2009 - 07:58 PM, said:

This is interesting.

Apparently, the same museum displayed the rock back in 2006. It looked different back then...

http://www.rijksmuse...he-moon?lang=en

Compare the rock in that image to this:-

Posted Image

So what they have now doesn't seem to be what was given to them. Looks as if the 'switcheroo' took place in the last 3 years.
Somehow I have a theory floating around in my head now that some thief stole the moon rock some years back for money and replaced it with a piece of petrified wood.

"Everything we did was criticized. For about thirty years we lived with the world against us, accusing us of things we didn't do!"

    - Ian Douglas Smith

#45    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,846 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 30 August 2009 - 03:48 AM

This is straight outta a Monty Python .
If a Rock floats and a Peice of wood floats She`s a witch!

This is a Work in Progress!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users