The
proof that the "moon landing" was in the moon hall:
sand and dust are the same
It seems strange, but sand and dust in the "training"
have the same graining size as in the "moon landing".
And this is impossible (Wisnewski, p.174)
So this is another proof that the "moon landings" all
were in the halls.
This is NO conspiracy theory, but these are the facts,
you stupid Wikipedia.
Examples of "moonstones": Stones should give an
impression
When you are asking for "moonstone" in the Internet (in
German: "Mondgestein"), then you should have the
searching word "moonstone", "moon stone" or surprisingly
the best searching word is "lunar sample".
Funnily enough the research almost always knows what
kind of stone it is and can compare the stones with
stones from the Earth, or the stones are almost
identical.
And there are mad indications that "moonstones" would be
worth more than gold. So, there exist fantasies that
there are things on the moon more worth than gold...
 "Moonstone"
01: The stones shall be worth more than gold,
without indication of kind of stone [mo01]
|
"Moonstone"
02: A sample "moonstone" of Apollo 16 (1972) as
an eternal item on loan of NASA for the huge
crater museum at Nördlingen, Germany, without
indication of kind of stone [mo02]
|
"Moonstone"
03: "Moonstone" of Apollo 16, 1972 [mo03]
|
"Moonstone"
04: "Moonstone" no. 12055, a basalt of Apollo
12, year 1969 [mo04]
|
"Moonstone" 05a: Anorthosit [mo05a] |
"Moonstone" 05b: Anorthosit [mo05b]
|
"In the higher
regions of the moon Anorthosit is widespread.
Anorthosit comes out when melted stone is
crystallizing slowly. It's rich of aluminium
and contains some iron. The high occurrence of
anorthosit indicates that the outer crust of
the moon had been almost completely melted.
The only known possibility to have the
required heat is a quick building of the moon
from an accretion disc. Such a disc of
material can have formed around the Earth when
Earth was hit by another planet from the side.
Latest simulation calculations say that this
planet Theia should have had about the
amplitude of Mars."
(http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/MCanli6235/Astronews.htm)
|
"Moonstone"
06: very similar to basalt [mo06]
|
"Moonstone"
07: Crater "Aristarchus" with alleged stone
containing oxygen on the moon [mo07]
|
"Moonstone" 08: There is a "C"
[mo08] on the stone on the "moon soil" on a
"moon foto", according to NASA it's a little
hair which slipped on the foto.
(http://www.zdf.de/ZDFde/inhalt/14/0,1872,2320686,00.html
(August 2006).
But in this case there must be other hairs on
other stones, too...
|
"Moonstone" 09 from the Academy of
Sciences at San Francisco behind bulletproof
glass, without indication of kind [mo09]
|
"Moonstone" 10: Regolith of the "moon probe"
"Luna 24" [mo10]
|
"Moonstone"
11: Parts of regolith of the "moon probe"
"Luna 16" [mo11]
|
|
<The
moonstone [regolith] was brought to the
Earth the first time with the Soviet
unmanned stations "Luna 16", Luna 20"
and "Luna 24", from three regions of the
moon - Mare Fecunditatis, a continental
region near the crater Amegino and Mare
Crisum. It was 324g. It was given to the
GEOCHI RAW for researches and
safekeeping. The moon surface is made of
a huge layer of a slack material -
regolith.The research showed that the
regolith consists of 50-70% of a dusty
material (with a particle diameter of
under 70-80 micro meter). The biggest
parts are
--
fragments of local magnet stones (basalts,
gabbro, dolerits, anorthosits, norits)
-- parts which were built during the
change of the moon surface by meteorite
hits (breccia, agglutinated stones, glass
stones, clinker).
The
local sea stones in the landing area of
"Luna 16" are the dark gray
ilmenitbasalts (TIO2 - 4-6% of the
mass), and in the landing area of "Luna
24" the basalt poor of titan (TiO2 -
0,8-1,5% of the mass). If one compares
them with the basalts on Earth the moon
basalts are poor of leaching elements
and contain almost no water. The
continental stones from "Luna 20" are
mostly breccia stones or crystalline
ortosits, norits and troctolits with
over 70% white plagioklas. That's why
the continental parts of the front side
of the moon are shining so bright, and
the moon seas are covert by basalt
streams and look dark.>
(http://www.geokhi.ru/exhibition/expo2000/10g.htm) |
"Moonstone"
12: Basalt fragmentary rocks, allegedly a little
moon meteorite [mo12]
|
<The stone comes from
the Apollo missions or came as a meteorite
to the Earth. By the way one knows 17 such
little fragments from the moon which were
blasted of the moon surface by meteorites
and were catched by Earth's gravitation.
EET96008, with a weight of 53 gr, 4,5 cm
long meteorite, was found in 1996 in the
elephant moraine in the antarctic and was
recognized as a basalt fragmentary rock from
the moon only a short time ago.>
(orig.: <Das Gestein
stammt von den Apollo-Missionen oder
gelangte in Form von Meteoriten zur Erde.
Inzwischen kennt man 17 solcher winzigen
Fragmente vom Mond, die einst Meteoriten aus
seiner Oberfläche herausgesprengt haben und
die irgendwann die irdische Schwerkraft
eingefangen hat. EET96008,
ein 53 Gramm schwerer und 4,5 Zentimeter
langer Meteorit, der 1996
in der Elefanten-Moräne-Region in der
Antarktis gefunden wurde, gab sich erst vor
kurzem als basaltisches Trümmergestein vom
Mond zu erkennen.>)
(http://www.wissenschaft.de/wissportal_static/sofi99/themen/sofi_5.html) |
|
Generally: "Moonstones"
cannot be proved
"Moonstones" have no possibility to be compared on moon
itself, because there is no possibility of a neutral
control on the "moon". So, it's permitted for anybody to
claim this or that stone would come from the "moon".
Also when certain "moon probes" are said having landed
on the moon also this is not controllable. And it's not
possible to control if these "moon probes" have brought
stones or dust from the "moon" to the Earth or not
either. At the end the super powers "USA" and "SU" claim
together to the public that "moonstones" would be "very
similar" to "Earth stones". This "similarity" brings up
some new questions (Wisnewski, p.209).
[All in all all shown "moonstones" could be also from
the Earth. The indications that "moonstones" would
eventually be more worth than "gold" lets rise the
fantasy for the greedy, capitalistic society at the same
time. When the "moonstones" would be from the Earth so
one had lost more than "gold"...]
The stage-managed race for
"moonstones"
According to the access into the falsification practice
with the planet machinery "LOLA" at Langley and
according to the possibilities of radio communication
not over some 100 km all flights of the "moon probes"
are a lie. And because the transport of "moonstones" was
not a neutral, controllable procedure, and because
according to the technical data of the little aberration
of the landings from the landing points and because of
the cosmic radiation (sun storms with many sunspots) the
Apollo flights cannot have been performed, the official
data about "moonstones" do not seem very reliable. By
the "moonstones" one lie supports the other one, in case
of the "moonstones" in cooperation with the "Soviet
Union".
With the secrecy and with the term "conspiracy theory"
against all critics the cock-and-bull story of the
moonstones is defended successfully in the propaganda
and in the media...
13 July 1969
Start of the "SU" "lunar
probe" Luna 15 with the aim of a landing "on the moon"
on 21st July
(Wisnewski, p.210)
16 July 1969
Start of Apollo 11 with the
aim of a landing "on the moon" on 21st July
(Wisnewski, p.210)
But until now the "USA" have not even brought one single
"lunar probe" to the moon and brought back (Wisnewski,
p.210).
21 July 1969
"SU": The "lunar probe" is
said have crashed "on the moon"
The reasons for the crash are "not known"
(Wisnewski, p.210-211).
24 July 1969
Apollo 11 claims they had
brought "moonstones" (soil samples) "from the moon"
all in all 20 kg "moonstones" (Wisnewski,
p.209,210).
since 24 July 1969
The research on the
"moonstones" is only for "elected people"
Research with the "moonstones" is only possible with a
proposal and with a detailed justification of the
project. Then some milligram "moonstone" are released
(Wisnewski, p.211).
14 to 24 November 1969
Apollo 12 claims having
brought back parts of "lunar probe" "Surveyor 3" "from
the moon"
Astronauts from Apollo 12 claim they had brought back
parts of the "lunar probe" Surveyor 3, among others the
little camera. But according to indications of NASA the
camera shall have contained a terrestrial bacterium
which had survived the "stay on the moon".
(In:
David, Leonard: Apollo Moon Rocks: Dirty Little Secrets;
www.space.com; 26.3.2001;
www.space.com/news/spaceagencies/apollo_moon_rocks_010326.html
(August 2006); Wisnewski, S.216)
[Then there is the proof that the "lunar probe" Surveyor
3 had never
been "on the moon", and that is - again - NO conspiracy
theory, but this is logic, you stupid Wikipedia].
12 July 1970
"SU": Start of the "lunar
probe" "Luna 16" with the aim of a landing "on the
moon"
(Wisnewski, p.211)
24 July 1970
"SU": Flight back of the
"lunar probe" "Luna 16" "from the moon" and landing on
Earth with ca. 100 gr "moonstone"
This is the official data (Wisnewski, p.211).
since 1970
The superpowers comparing
their "moonstones"
Now funnily enough the officially hostile superpowers
are comparing their "moonstones" and "accept the
authenticity of the Apollo material" of each other.
(In: www.clavius.org; Wisnewski, p.211).
The "SU" legalizes the
"American" "moon landings" and gets wheat for it
All in all the "Soviet Union" legalizes the "moon
landings" of the "USA" by the declaration that the
"moonstones" are the same. At the same time "SU" suffers
bad harvests and is depends on wheat deliveries from the
West. The "Soviet" regime has no other choice than to do
the favour to the "USA" to recognize the "moonstones"
and with it the "moon landings" (Wisnewski, p.212).
1972
Researchers claim having
found "moon meteorites" in the Antarctic
But the claim for moon meteorites is impossible because
until now (2006) nobody can go on the moon and control
what "moonstones" really are. The claim is another lie
which should support the lie having brought "moonstones"
to the Earth (Wisnewski, p.209).
[And the media, greedy for sensations, report the moon
meteorites as true fact and rise the number of copies
with it...]
since 1972
NASA has stored officially
382 kg "moonstones"
The storing of the 382 kg "moonstones" at the NASA is in
boxes filled with nitrogen (Wisnewski, p.214). Nobody
has an access, and all is kept "secret" (Wisnewski,
p.215).
The "moonstones" are protected from all events, storms
and tornadoes...
(In:
David, Leonard: Apollo Moon Rocks: Dirty Little
Secrets; www.space.com; 26.3.2001;
www.space.com/news/spaceagencies/apollo_moon_rocks_010326.html
(August 2006); Wisnewski, S.216)
[Earth stones
become "moonstones" by special storing...]
The new theory about the
formation of the moon: The collision theory
Up to the "moon landings" there are different theories
for the formation of the moon. Now the "research"
detects that the "moonstones" would be pretty "similar"
to the Earth stones.
Since this claim there is only one single theory about
the formation of the moon: the collision theory. A
little planet is said have hit the Earth and sunk in the
Earth. Then a big part of the Earth shall have split and
shall have formed a moon in space (Wisnewski, p.213).
Add to this there shall be lots of Earth stones on the
moon surface: When asteroids hit the Earth some Earth
stones shall have been shot to the moon always again.
This stones shot to the moon shall be on the moon's
surface in peaces. John Armstrong from the University of
Washington at Seattle claims having calculated that by
this on a square mile of moon surface 5 tons of Earth
stones are lying around .
(In: Britt, Robert Roy: Moon Holds Earth's Ancient
Secrets; www.space.com, 23.7.2002; Wisnewski, p.213)
So: Earth stones were
brought "from the moon"
The "moon astronauts" shall have collected Earth stones
on the moon? When this is true it's not necessary to fly
to the moon to find "moonstones". But this conclusion is
not allowed officially until today (August 2006) in the
media. But the collision theory should explain the
similarity of Earth stones and moonstones. The articles
in the encyclopedias must all be adapted to this NASA
theory...
(In: Heck,
Philipp: Der Mond - unser geheimnisvoller Nachbar.
Entstehung, Missionen, Aufbau [The moon - our mysterious
neighbour. Building, missions, construction];
http://lexikon.astronomie.info/ 7.6.2002;
Wisnewski, S.213)
1978-1982
Indexing of the
"moonstones" - the "moonstones" are living...
| Graham
Ryder, geologist of the Lunar and
Planetary Institute (LPI) of Houston,
portrait, died in 2002 [1] |
 |
During
the indexation the "moonstones" may be touched
only with Teflon gloves to avoid any
contamination. A member of staff of the
indexation of the "moonstones", geologist Graham Ryder
from the Lunar and Planetary Institute
(LPI) at Houston reports how hermetically the
"moonstones" are stored (Wisnewski, p.215) [1]
(Hoversten, Paul: 30 Years Later, Moon Rocks
Retain Their Secrets;
www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/
moon_rock_analysis_000522_MB_.html (August
2006).
|
|
University of
Portsmouth [2]
|
But Andrew
Steele, an astro biologist at the University of
Portsmouth in England, detects with his microscopic
research that there is terrestrial life in the
"moonstones" to be found:
-- brush hairs
-- plastic parts
-- nylon parts
-- Teflon parts
-- terrestrial little animals, some of them "pretty
snotty".
So, there is the question how the ultra cleaned storage
at the NASA looks like. Because the many terrestrial
contaminations can only come from the Earth from a time
after the
building of the moon. The website www.space.com
indicates such events as "dirty little secrets".
The question if the "moonstones" come from the Earth is
not allowed of course...
(In:
-- David,
Leonard: Apollo Moon Rocks: Dirty Little Secrets;
www.space.com; 26.3.2001;
www.space.com/news/spaceagencies/apollo_moon_rocks_010326.html
-- Wisnewski,
p.215-216)
The contradiction:
"moonstones" are not "similar"
"Moonstone" 13: "Moonstone" from Apollo 15, no. 15415:
"A close-up view of Apollo 15 lunar sample no. 15415 in
the Lunar Receiving Laboratory (LRL)"
According to the indications of this article
"moonstones" are not at all similar to the Earth stones:
-- "moonstones" shall be very dry
-- "moonstones" shall contain no water molecules
-- "moonstones" shall have no oxidation
-- "moonstones" shall not contain any iron
-- "moonstones" shall be easy to distinguish from Earth
stones.
Original text:
"Compared with terrestrial samples, all lunar rocks are
oddballs because they are so dry," Ryder said. "They
contain no molecules of water, they're not oxidized and
they contain no ferric iron. They're easy to distinguish
from rocks on Earth."
(Hoversten, Paul: 30 Years Later, Moon Rocks Retain
Their Secrets;
www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/moon_rock_analysis_000522_MB_.html
(August
2006).
Conclusion: All thesis about
"moonstones" are worthless
By this any thesis about "moonstones" is invalid because
the statements are absolutely controversial that no
thesis is reliable any more. But the media reported all
as a sensation to rise their number of copies and to
rise their number of viewers, and the "research" has
opened a new researching field "moonstones" which is
paid by the tax payer again with millions of $ and
Euros... for nothing.
(Conclusion Palomino)
This is NO conspiracy theory, stupid journalist, but
these are facts.
NASA's business with
"artificial moon dust"
:::::::
|
Artificial
moon dust 01: "Lunar Soil Simulant"
|
1991-1993
NASA's "moon dust" program
NASA gives the order to produce 25 tons of artificial
"moon dust" under the name "lunar regolith simulant".
The purpose is secret (Wisnewski, p.217).
[Oh, there is more tax money wasted...]
since 1993
NASA dispatches the
"artificial moon dust"
The artificial "moon dust" is sent to researchers and
universities. "Science" shall confirm the similarity of
Earth and moon, and by this the building history of the
moon is fixed in the encyclopedias, and indirectly the
"moon landings" are fixed in the encyclopedias one more
time (Wisnewski, p.217).
[The tax money is a good investment: A new lie supports
the main lie of the moon landings...]
2003
Comparing research of Earth
stones and "moonstones": The moon is said to consist
of 50% Earth stone
NASA claims that the relation between oxygen isotopes in
the "moonstones" and in the Earth stones is similar
(Wisnewski, p.214).
But then the "research" finds out that also the relation
between the elements niobium ant tantalum would be the
same in the "moonstones" as in the Earth stones. Max
Planck institute for chemistry [probably at Munich as
the headquarters] claim, niobium would solve under high
pressure in the metal core of big planets like the
Earth, but not in the moon because the moon would be too
little. When is coming out that in the "moonstones" are
the same circumstances as in the Earth stones, Max
Planck institute claims simply that the moon would be of
50% Earth stone.
(In: Max-Planck-Institute for chemistry, July 2003; In:
www.sternwarte-singen.de/mond_entstehung1.html;
Wisnewski, p.214).
[So, it's not at all necessary to go "to the moon" to
get some "moonstones"...]
2005 apr.
NASA orders the production of big
quantities of "Mars material"
(Wisnewski, p.217)
[This will be a new invention and costs again millions
of $ or Euros...]
February 2005
"USA": President Bush
announces a new "moon offensive"
(Wisnewski, p.216)
[3]
16 March 2005
Wall Street Journal: NASA
produces 34 different sorts of "moon dust"
Wall Street Journal [diary of New York stock exchange]
reports that NASA produces for new preparations of "moon
missions" 34 different types of "moon dust" to simulate
the different conditions "on the moon". The different
conditions were determined by telescope observation and
meteorite research:
<In preparation of new Apollo missions NASA produced
34 types of artificial moon dust to simulate the
different conditions which can be awaited by telescope
research. Add to this meteorites were searched which are
believed to be similar to moonstones.> (Wisnewski,
p.216)
(orig.: <In Vorbereitung auf die Apollo-Missionen
stellte die NASA 34 Typen künstlichen Mondstaubes her,
um die unterschiedlichen Bedingungen zu simulieren, die
Beobachtungen mit dem Teleskop
erwarten liessen. Darüber hinaus untersuchten sie
auch Meteoriten,
von denen sie glaubten, dass sie Mondgestein ähnlich
sein könnten.> (Wisnewski, S.216)
So: Apollo is not needed -
"lunar probes" are not needed either - the chain of
lies
It seems the "moonstones" and the "lunar probes" are not
relevant any more. This brings up new questions. So, all
other "lunar probes" Surveyor 1 to 5 had never landed on
the moon (Wisnewski, p.216).
Then also the over 85,000 fotos from the Surveyor "lunar
probes" would be fotos from the moon halls (Wisnewski,
p.216), and this would be an easy task with the planet
machine "LOLA" at Langley, and the "moonstones" of the
"lunar probes" would be from the Earth.
[By chance the headquarters of the CIA are at the same
place where the planet machine "LOLA" was: at
Langley...]
Foto composition:
Aldrin is controlled by the police. This event
is missing until now, that police on the moon
could perform neutral controls. Why so?
|
|
|
By this the circle of the lowest
resistance is closed. The chain of lies began
with the planet machine "LOLA" and with the
faked "lunar probes". The Apollo missions were
the culmination point of the lie, and with
Mars and other probes and "robots" on planets
other "culmination points" are following who
nobody can control. Millions of tax money are
wasted for this "research field" which is not
under neutral control. NASA controls the
secrecy.
As long as the police cannot
control what happens on the moon nothing
should be believed what is reported from the
moon. As long as NASA is not put under neutral
control nothing should be believed what NASA
says.
(Conclusion Palomino)
|
Further news about "moon
rockets"
Amsterdam
27.8.2009: <Mondgestein entpuppt sich als
altes Holz>
aus: bazonline.ch; 27.8.2009; |
x
|
Amsterdam
27 August 2009: <Moon rockets turning out
as old wood>
from: bazonline.ch; 27 August 2009; |
http://bazonline.ch/panorama/vermischtes/Mondgestein-entpuppt-sich-als-altes-Holz/story/30830902
|
<Jahrzehntelang
glaubte das Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, einen
kleinen Brocken Mondgestein der
Apollo-11-Mission zu besitzen. Doch die
Attraktion stellt sich jetzt als ganz und gar
irdisch heraus.
Nur versteinertes
Holz: Das Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam nimmt es
gelassen
Bei einer Überprüfung stellte sich das Exponat
schlicht als versteinertes Holz von der Erde
heraus. Das Museum will das Stück dennoch
behalten und als Kuriosität ausstellen. «Wir
können darüber lachen», erklärte
Museumssprecherin Xandra van Gelder.
Kurios ist allemal die Geschichte der Herkunft
des vermeintlichen Mondgesteins. Laut Van Gelder
wurde es im Oktober 1969 vom damaligen
US-Botschafter in den Niederlanden, William
Middendorf, an den seinerzeitigen
Ministerpräsidenten Willem Drees übergeben.
Anlass war eine Rundreise der drei
Apollo-Astronauten drei Monate nach der ersten
Mondlandung. Middendorf erklärte unlängst, er
habe den Stein vom US-Aussenministerium
erhalten, könne sich aber an keine Einzelheiten
mehr erinnern.
Nasa hat kein
Mondgestein verschenkt
Drees starb 1988 und vermachte den
Gesteinsbrocken ans Rijksmuseum, das keinerlei
Zweifel an seiner Echtheit hegte. Erst 2006
erfuhren die Kuratoren, dass die
US-Weltraumbehörde Nasa so kurz nach der ersten
Mondlandung wohl kaum Mondgestein verschenkt
haben dürfte. Die meisten Mondbrocken in
ausländischen Museen stammen von späteren
Apollo-Missionen. Daraufhin wurden Geologen der
Universität Amsterdam eingeschaltet, die die
Wahrheit an den Tag brachten.
Zu sehen war der ominöse Stein allerdings schon
in der Vergangenheit nur bei
Sonderausstellungen. Das Rijksmuseum ist in
erster Linie eine Gemäldegalerie für die Werke
von Rembrandt und anderen niederländischen
Künstlern.
(bru/ap)> |
|
<For decades Rijks
museum of Amsterdam believed to have a
little rock of moonstone from Apollo 11
mission. But this attraction has turned out
absolutely terrestrial.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Only petrified
wood: Rijks museum of Amsterdam takes it easy
At an inspection the exhibit turned out as
simple wood from Earth. Nevertheless the museum
wants to keep the peace and wants to exhibit it
as curiosity. "We can laugh about it", museum
speaker Xandra van Gelder decleared.
But at least the history of origin of the
alleged moon rocket. According to Van Gelder it
was given in October 1969 by the US embassador
in the Netherlands, William Middendorf, to
the president Willem Drees. The three Apollo
astronauts were touring three months after their
first moon flight. Middendorf declared recently,
he got the stone from US State Department but
could not remind details.
Nasa did not give
moonstones as a present
Drees died in 1988 and gave the stone to Rijks
museum which had no doubt that it would be a
moonstone. But in 2006 the management got to
know that NASA did not give moonstones shortly
after the flight. Most of moon rockets in
foreign museums came from later Apollo missions.
That's why there were geologists engaged for
investigations and they turned out the truth.
But one could see the strange stone only on
special exhibitions. Rijks museum for the main
part is an art gallery for works of Rembrandt
and other Dutch artists.
(bru/ap)> |
And another lie:
22 October 2010:
Claims of some silver in the "moon dust" - it's all a
lie
The article claims that in 2009 a lunar probe has hit the
moon provocating a big cloud of dust. This seems strange
because during the "moon landings" there was never any
cloud of dust but the dust was under the lunar module and
there was no dust on the feet of the lunar module. This
contradiction allready eliminates any credibility of the
following news. The claim of silver in the moon dust is
another lie of NASA to sell more lots of land of the moon
and to make money with the claim it would be possible to
fly "to the moon". But read yourself:
aus: n-tv online: Raketeneinschlag bringt es ans Licht:
Silberstaub auf dem Mond; 22.10.2010;
http://www.n-tv.de/wissen/Silberstaub-auf-dem-Mond-article1766161.html
orig. German:
<Die Mondoberfläche ist reichhaltiger als
gedacht. Das zeigt die Analyse des gezielten
Einschlags der NASA-Mondsonde "LCROSS" vom 9.
Oktober 2009. In dem aufgewirbelten Mondstaub
stießen die Forscher nicht nur auf das gesuchte
Wasser, sondern auch auf Kohlenmonoxid,
Kohlendioxid, Ammoniak, Stickstoff - und
überraschenderweise auch auf Silber.
Allerdings
fanden sich von dem Edelmetall nur Spuren -
nicht genug, um hinzufliegen und es abzubauen,
wie Peter Schultz von der Brown University in
Providence in Rhode Island betont. Schultz
stellt zusammen mit mehreren Teams Analysen
des Einschlags im US-Fachjournal "Science"
vor. dpa>
|
|
Translation:
<Moon surface seems to be richer than thought
until today. This shows an analisis of the hit
of NASA lunar probe "LCROSS" of 9 October 2009.
In the cloud of dust scientists did find
water, and also carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide,
ammoniac, nitrogen - and silver as a surprise.
But there was only little silver in the dust -
not enough to fly there and to exploit it, as
Peter Schultz from Brown University in
Providence in Rhode Island said. Schultz is
compiling analisis of the hit in the
professional journal "Science" with several
groups. dpa>
|
The chain of NASA lies is functioning
like this: NASA is inventing an impact on the moon. Then
NASA also has the power in the university institutions,
and also has the power over the journal "Science". The
dust itself seems to be from Chile. It's simple.
========
2014: Moon stones were produced by NASA
artificially?
"Rolf Jaeckel"
<htrj@inbox.com>
Nov. 1, 2014
Rolf Jaeckel reports in an e-mail:
"NASA" [was] producing just officially artificial "moon
stones" for special use allegedly."
(original in German: "Die NASA [hat] ganz offiziell
künstliches "Mondgestein" herstellen lassen, angeblich für
besondere Anwendungen.")
