SPACE-28. "Moon stones" coming from the Earth

"Moon plays": The Moon Was the Earth - Truth and Lie In the Atmosphere

28. "Moon stones" coming from the Earth -
"lunar probes" were not necessary

Why the "Soviet Union" confirmed the "authenticity" of the secret, "American" moonstones - moon theories and money making of the NASA with artificial "moon dust"

Artificial moon dust 01: "Lunar Soil Simulant".
With this you can make money!

by Michael Palomino (2006)

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.

"Moonstone" 01: The stones shall be worth more than gold, without indication of kind of stone.	"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.	"Moonstone" 03: "Moonstone" of Apollo 16, 1972	"Moonstone" 04: "Moonstone" no. 12055, a basalt of Apollo 12, year 1969
"Moonstone" 05a: Anorthosit.	"Moonstone" 05b: Anorthosit	"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." (orig.: "Auf den höher gelegenen Regionen des Mondes ist die Gesteinsart Anorthosit weit verbreitet. Anorthosit entsteht, wenn geschmolzenes Gestein langsam kristallisiert. Es ist reich an Aluminium und enthält wenig Eisen. Das hohe Anorthosit-Vorkommen spricht dafür, dass die äussere Kruste des Mondes einmal fast vollständig geschmolzen war. Die einzig bekannte Möglichkeit, um die dafür erforderliche Hitze zu erzeugen, ist die schnelle Bildung des Mondes aus einer Akkretionsscheibe. Eine solche Materiescheibe kann sich dann um die Erde gebildet haben, wenn sie seitlich von einem anderen Planeten getroffen wurde. Neueren Simulationsrechnungen zufolge soll dieser Theia getaufte Planet etwa die Grösse des Mars gehabt haben.") (http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/MCanli6235/Astronews.htm)
"Moonstone" 06: very similar to basalt	"Moonstone" 07: Crater "Aristarchus" with alleged stone containing oxygen on the moon	"Moonstone" 08: There is a "C" 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.	"Moonstone" 10: Regolith of the "moon probe" "Luna 24"	"Moonstone" 11: Parts of regolith of the "moon probe" "Luna 16"
	-- 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.> (orig.: (http://www.geokhi.ru/exhibition/expo2000/10g.htm)
"Moonstone" 12: Basalt fragmentary rocks, allegedly a little moon meteorite	(orig.: 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).

[This procedure brings up again new questions:

-- when the comparison of "moonstones" has as result that the stones are the same ones, so Luna 16 had been landed precisely where Apollo 11 had landed, but until now even not the precise coordinates of the Apollo landings are known

-- or the moon would consist only of one single stone which seems impossible].


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 "moon stones" 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.

[But it's not indicated which stone on Earth].

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

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). (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

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"

Examples for "moon dust"
Moon dust 01: The moon dust on the moon shall be 7 cm deep.	Moon dust 02: Exhibition of moon dust in GB 1969.	Moon dust 03: Colour "moon dust" for face painting.

1991-1993

:::::::

Artificial moon dust 01:  "Lunar Soil Simulant"

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 "moon stones"...]

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)




16 March 2005
Wall Street Journal: NASA produces 34 different sorts of "moon dust"

Wall Street Journal 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:

(Wisnewski, p.216)

(orig.: 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 August 2009:

from: bazonline.ch, orig. title  in German: Mondgestein entpuppt sich als altes Holz; 27 August 2009;
http://bazonline.ch/panorama/vermischtes/Mondgestein-entpuppt-sich-als-altes-Holz/story/30830902

For decades Rijks museum of  Amsterdam believed to have a little  rock of moon stone from Apollo 11 mission. But this attraction has turned out absolutely terrestrial.

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 moon stones as a present

Drees died in 1988 and gave the stone to Rijks museum which had no doubt that it would be a moon stone. But in 2006 the management got to know that NASA did not give moon stones 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.