Sunday, August 30, 2009

Moon Rock in Dutch Museum is FAKE!

There are some people out their that question the initial American landings on the moon.

The fact that NASA lost or destroyed or reused the tapes that recorded the first moon landing certainly seem incredible!

This shall certainly stoke the flames even more.

'Moon Rock' in Dutch Museum Is Just Petrified Wood


The Dutch national museum said Thursday that one of its prized possessions, a rock supposedly brought back from the moon by U.S. astronauts, is just a piece of petrified wood.

Rijksmuseum spokeswoman Xandra van Gelder, who oversaw the investigation that proved the piece was a fake, said the museum will keep it anyway as a curiosity.

''It's a good story, with some questions that are still unanswered,'' she said. ''We can laugh about it.''

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.

8 comments:

  1. Yeah but maybe it's like petrified moon wood, eh. Bet no ones thought about that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. As if, Silv. I'll bet what happened was that a big meteorite struck the earth and blew a bunch of debris (including bits of petrified tree) into space and some of it hit the moon. And then the astronauts arrive and amongst the bazillion tons of moon rock they could have picked up they accidentally got the bit of fossilised tree that had come all the way from earth. No problems.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I believe the moon landing was faked for the following reasons:

    (1) Its success was necessary, cheaper and more sure to fake it than attempt the real thing.

    (2) Control systems to keep the capsule upright as it descended onto the surface of the moon were impossible at the time. See Segway: It needs a 386 to stay balanced.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Something that is odd about the moon landing photographs is that there is no blast crater or disturbance of any sort under the landing module and also that there is no dust on the feet on the module.

    That thing must have wafted down very gently.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I had no idea that there were these kind of issues with the early moon flights?

    I can see the necessity on the part of the US to fabricate the first moon landing in particular if they did, given the times.

    Gotta admit when Russia launched sputnik in 1957 the US was gobsmacked!

    http://history.nasa.gov/sputnik/
    The Sputnik launch also led directly to the creation of National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). In July 1958, Congress passed the National Aeronautics and Space Act (commonly called the "Space Act"), which created NASA as of October 1, 1958 from the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) and other government agencies.

    so who would send the first man to the moon, the race was on.

    ReplyDelete
  6. doug& john: as it happens today I will be listening to an interview
    with Jarrah White, producer of Apollo Zero

    Did NASA moon us all
    should be interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

TROLLS &SPAM WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT HESITATION
KEEP IT RELEVANT. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS