Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
village_idiot

AS11 Astronauts give fake moon rock to dutch

78 posts in this topic

So I guess we also have

4) an individual (US or Dutch) stole the real rock and swapped it for a fake.

Probably not. NASA say they were not handing out moon rock souvenirs at the time.

There's already a thread in the conspiracy section on this:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=162679

Edited by flyingswan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go, some possible evidence that the 1st Moon landing was faked. According to a dutch museum a moon rock given to them by Armstrong et al, was fake. Turns out it was a petrified piece of wood.

Either

1) They didnt go to the moon, and Nasa has conned the world.

2) The rock is from the moon, and indicates that trees once grew there. We know it has water, but could the moon have once have had an atmosphere,and trees.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8226075.stm

So - let me get this straight - you think that the first moon landing was faked with almost surgical precision but when it came to claiming something was a rock from the moon they went to the trouble of finding a piece of petrified wood rather than a rock that would be much easier to find?

Come on - somebody at the museum just made a mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Threads merged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not. NASA say they were not handing out moon rock souvenirs at the time.

There's already a thread in the conspiracy section on this:

http://www.unexplain...howtopic=162679

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its always something other than the obvious isnt it?

What are you getting at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbonium said:

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.

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.

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.

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).

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?

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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:

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.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article459076.ece?token=null&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.

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.nevadamagazine.com/index.php/issues/read/nevadas_goodwill_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/museum/press/2009/pr09-07-23_moonrock_e.cfm

Edited by flyingswan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Wiki moon rock page:

Here's another link about the goodwill samples:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article459076.ece?token=null&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.nevadamagazine.com/index.php/issues/read/nevadas_goodwill_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/museum/press/2009/pr09-07-23_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.

]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

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...

...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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting.

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

http://www.rijksmuseum.nl/pers/tentoonstellingen/fly-me-the-moon?lang=en

Compare the rock in that image to this:-

capt.b888c76b74f74421ad227dc0057e372d.netherlands_not_moon_rock_ams101.jpg

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is straight outta a Monty Python .

If a Rock floats and a Peice of wood floats She`s a witch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of other points come to mind.

Firstly, the rock is described as being fist-sized, which means it probably weighs several hundred grams. That's a substantial proportion of the weight of rocks brought back by Apollo 11. If NASA was to hand out samples of such size to every Prime Minister and President, and ex-PMs as well, they'd run out of Apollo 11 samples well before they'd covered their allies, and leave nothing for the scientists.

Secondly, the ambassador gave the rock to the ex-PM, who kept it in his desk. That's not the way NASA treats genuine moon rocks. For example, there's a small moon rock at the Tidbinbilla Tracking Station, just outside Canberra, which is a gift from NASA (or permanent loan, I don't remember which). It's stored in a sealed container which is otherwise full of nitrogen gas. In other words, if ever Tid was to give it up, it'd probably still be useful for at least some scientific examination.

The more I think about this story, the more it sounds like a not very scientifically literate ambassador trying to impress an equally scientifically illiterate ex-Prime Minister.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about this story, the more it sounds like a not very scientifically literate ambassador trying to impress an equally scientifically illiterate ex-Prime Minister.

I suspect that is very likely an excellent summation of this matter, Peter!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I see are shoddy excuses .

So, the US Ambassador was just "trying to impress" him!

Right.

Instead of simply giving him a real Moon rock, which they (supposedly) had plenty of collected by Apollo, the Ambassador spent days/months beforehand trying to find a piece of petrified wood that would pass for a Moon rock!

Makes perfect sense. If you live in Apollo-world, at least.

But not in the real world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of simply giving him a real Moon rock, which they (supposedly) had plenty of collected by Apollo, the Ambassador spent days/months beforehand trying to find a piece of petrified wood that would pass for a Moon rock!

Please show exactly where it is said that the Ambassador "spent days/months" looking for a rock.

Please also show exactly where it is said anywhere on the plaque that this rock is from the Moon.

Finally, please show exactly where it is said anywhere that NASA had anything to do with this.

Cz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I see are shoddy excuses .

So, the US Ambassador was just "trying to impress" him!

Right.

Instead of simply giving him a real Moon rock, which they (supposedly) had plenty of collected by Apollo, the Ambassador spent days/months beforehand trying to find a piece of petrified wood that would pass for a Moon rock!

Makes perfect sense. If you live in Apollo-world, at least.

But not in the real world.

What do you have to say about the fact we had moon rocks before the Apollo missions? We got them from space probes, so did the soviets.

We could have given the Dutch a REAL moon rock even if the moon landings were fake.

That entire factor just leads me to believe it was a god damned mixup.

That and even if they didn't get moon rocks before the apollo missions well erm...

76826-004-C65972DA.jpg

They could have given a far more convincing "fake". I mean I assume you believe this is fake, right? Looks nothing like the obvious piece of wood.

Dunno if you believe NASA's space probe missions were fake (and if so, by extant the soviet ones as well?).

Edited by Kacen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.