News Ticker

Lunar Lunacy: Disappearing Moon Rocks, Contradictory Mineral Data, Missing Apollo Film and Destroyed Mission Technology


‘No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar.’ –– Abraham Lincoln


In 2013, China set an unmanned rover on the moon. It was equipped with an alpha-particle X-ray spectrometer that was used to analyze moon rocks and soil, and the data was transmitted back to Earth. The rover operated for three months and explored an area of about 3 square kilometers, or a maximum range of six miles from the landing site.

The data was comprised of chemical composition analysis of rock material elements. Most curiously, this data differed dramatically from the samples collected during the Apollo missions. The location on the moon of the Apollo landings are shown as numbers in the photo below, and Chinese rover’s site is marked with an arrow.

Although Apollo sites span a wide area of the Moon, the alleged chemical results were relatively similar. However, the Chinese samples are VASTLY different- Correlated compositional and mineralogical investigations at the Chang′e-3 landing site. The report states,”These compositional features suggest that the CE-3 soils differ significantly from other known lunar basaltic materials.”

Jarrah White calculates these elements as described in the video below starting at 21:36.

Are we even talking about the same Moon?

Are such extreme outlier results likely to be found on the Moon? The Department of Planetary and Earth Sciences at Washington University, St. Louis, says no:

The late Dave McGowan added some pertinent color on the topic of the moon rocks gathered during the Apollo missions. For starters, the transmission data NASA used to base its reports is “missing.”

As Reuters reported (per McGowan) on Aug. 15, 2006:

The U.S. government has misplaced the original recording of the first moon landing, including astronaut Neil Armstrong’s famous “one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind” …

Armstrong’s famous moonwalk, seen by millions of viewers on July 20, 1969, is among transmissions that NASA has failed to turn up in a year of searching, spokesman Grey Hautaluoma said.

“We haven’t seen them for quite a while. We’ve been looking for over a year, and they haven’t turned up,” Hautaluoma said …

In all, some 700 boxes of transmissions from the Apollo lunar missions are missing.

The fact that the tapes are missing (and according to NASA, now have been for over four decades), amazingly enough, was not even the most compelling information that the Reuters article provided. There was also an explanation of how the alleged Moonwalk tapes that we all know and love were created:

“Because NASA’s equipment was not compatible with TV technology of the day, the original transmissions had to be displayed on a monitor and re-shot by a TV camera for broadcast.”

So what we saw then, and what we have seen in all the footage ever released by NASA since then, were not in fact live transmissions. To the contrary, it was footage shot off a television monitor, and a tiny black-and-white monitor at that. That monitor may have been running live footage, I suppose, but it seems far more likely that it was running taped footage.

NASA, of course, has never explained why — even if it were true — that the original broadcasts had to be “re-shot” given that they never subsequently released any of the actual “live” footage.

It isn’t just the video footage that’s missing. Also allegedly beamed back from the Moon was voice data, biomedical monitoring data and telemetry data to monitor the location and mechanical functioning of the spaceship. All of that data — the entire alleged record of the Moon landings — was on the 13,000+ reels that are said to be “missing.”

Update: On Jan 1, 2016 shortly after McGowan’s death and 45 years after the “landings”, voila- NASA claimed to have turned up and published telemetry data from Apollo 15.

Therefore, there is no way for the modern scientific community to determine whether all of that fancy 1960s technology was even close to being functional or whether it was all for show. Nor is there any way to review the physical record, so to speak, of the alleged flights.

Incredibly, another Reuters tall tale dated July 21, 2009 asks us to believe that a batch of 200,000 tapes were degaussed (magnetically erased) and re-used to save money.

For example, the radiation exposure data the Apollo mission recorded in the Van Allen belt was put into a NASA document in 1973. However, the monitoring data utilized to write the report is missing. This is astonishing and no minor footnote.

But it’s not just the reels that are missing. Most of the moon rocks collected during the Apollo missions have vanished as well.

The Associated Press reported on Sept. 13, 2009:

Nearly 270 rocks scooped up by U.S. astronauts were given to foreign countries by the Nixon administration …

Of 135 rocks from the Apollo 17 mission given away to nations or their leaders, only about 25 have been located by CollectSpace.com, a Web site for space history buffs that has long attempted to compile a list.

The outlook for tracking the estimated 134 Apollo 11 rocks is even bleaker. The locations of fewer than a dozen are known. It appears then that having a “control rock” wouldn’t really be of much help after all, since nearly 90% of the alleged Moon rocks that we would want to test don’t seem to be around any more.

Petrified forest rock passed off to the Dutch as ‘Moon rock’

And then there’s the case of the Moon rock that the Dutch national museum carefully safeguarded for many years before discovering, in August 2009, that they were actually in possession of the most over-insured piece of petrified wood on the planet.

The “Moon rock” had been a gift to the Dutch from the U.S. State Department, and its authenticity had reportedly been verified through a phone call to NASA. I’m guessing that NASA was probably running low on meteorite fragments and figured the Dutch wouldn’t know the difference anyway. Or maybe Washington was a little peeved over the fact that Dutch newspapers reportedly called NASA’s bluff at the time of the first alleged Moon landing.

McGowan theorizes that what little Moon rock was actually put forth was of terrestrial origin, meaning it arrived on Earth of its own accord. Yep, as it turns out there are authentic Moon rocks available right here on Earth in the form of lunar meteorites. The Moon lacks a protective atmosphere, you see, so it gets smacked around quite a bit, which is why it’s heavily cratered. And when things smash into it to form those craters, lots of bits and pieces of the Moon fly off into space. Some of them end up right here on Earth.

By far the best place to find Moon rocks is Antarctica, where they are most plentiful and, due to the terrain, relatively easy to find and well preserved. And that is why it’s curious that Antarctica just happens to be where a team of Apollo scientists led by Wernher von Braun ventured off to in the summer of 1967, two years before Apollo 11 blasted off.

Perhaps this explains why U.S. Moon material data and Chinese Moon material data are dramatically different. Perhaps the U.S. tried to pass off Moon rocks from Antarctica as Moon rocks collected by Apollo. Such rocks would be from a different time and would have separated from lunar surface geological processes.

Red flags are not only unfurling around lost rocks and lost data reels. NASA astronaut Don Pettit said he would “go to the Moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don’t have the technology to do that anymore. We used to, but we destroyed that technology.”

Damn it, Janet, happened again- we kept telling the night janitors to leave those cabinets alone!

Finally, there’s the visual comparison of the alleged flyover of the lunar landing site. As I don’t wish to snip the image and lose some quality, you need to go to a repository of the enhanced LRO images of Apollo 11 landing site available online from Arizona State.

Take a look at the excuse for a module. The lunar photo of the module is an indistinguishable white blob, a nothing burger. Look at and compare this with the boulders strewn at 4:00 in the photo. In fact, when you click to enlarge the photo, you can actually make out detail and shapes and certainly determine that these are boulders.


Notice: We are looking for someone to collaborate on making talented You Tube videos, which are beyond our technical skills. We will stay away from the so-called “bannable” content and enter the conspiracy truth space more through the back door. This Moon Landing script might be a good starter. There are plenty of workable scripts on Winter Watch. The idea will be to monetize 15 minute work and split the proceeds.

Other qualifications are a regular reader and a dedication to the Winter Watch message. Contact me at admin@winterwatch.net  Link to examples of your work. A good narrative voice might be a plus, although I could use mine. 

15 Comments on Lunar Lunacy: Disappearing Moon Rocks, Contradictory Mineral Data, Missing Apollo Film and Destroyed Mission Technology

  1. A little scopolamine, a lot of trauma-based mind control under the guise of “conditioning” and an embarrassment of “shhhh, national security” and those astronauts could have been convinced they went to the moon when in fact they had a holiday in Area 51. I know i’m preaching to the choir here.

    • I knew Buzz Aldrin, slightly, when he lived in Hidden Hills. This was back in the early ’70’s. He knew, absolutely, that he had never been to the moon and hated himself for participating in the fraud.

      I did not realize this at the time. We knew that there was something dreadfully wrong with Buzz, that he couldn’t stand to be alone with himself and especially couldn’t bear to be sober, even for an hour. Everyone thought “Well, Buzz is so competitive- it’s the SECOND man on the moon thing.” That’s what I thought at the time, and for the next 45 years as well, until I started hearing people say the moon landings were faked. It took me two full years before I would look at the evidence, but then- well, wudda you know.

  2. Doubting the moon landings is pure science, contrary to the ‘Patriot Science’ junk we are regurgitated to day in, day out. Pure Science drops all preconceptions and just asks how with no regard to established truths or motives. Though probably wrong, the flat earth society practice this too.

  3. Had this exchange at Reddit. Sometimes we forget just how regressed people are on their assumptions. But just in case readers are confused about this? What follows is an elementary concept.

    from huebert11 via /r/conspiracy

    I think the tone of your post highlights a bigger problem. Do you believe the lie has been passed down through of generations workers and there are people fabricating Apollo data to this day?

    If NASA suddenly announced “we recovered and digitized telemetry tapes” (like last year), would you trust that data?

    clovize[S]

    At minimum these lost tape stories are criminal negligence and at worst a monumental lie and hoax. By their very actions they have laid themselves open to the later accusation.

    >generations (of) workers

    Here your assumption is that most of NASA is involved. That is the fundamental flaw in anti-conspiracy theory memes in general. Doesn’t work that way- is very compartmentalized and on a need to know basis. Few participants knew the full details of the Manhattan Project, etc ,etc. Most large military operations are kept under wraps- Barbarossa 1941, D-Day 1944, Battle of the Bulge 1944, etc, etc, etc.

    NASA had a simulation unit. That’s who runs the fraud. So yes fabrication of tapes (or otherwise) could easily be accomplished by one small group. There is no mainstream media watching the hen house either.

  4. I doubt the Chinese even landed. Mainly because the ability to come out of orbit and land is a complication in itself.

  5. So the moon isn’t made of green cheese- it’s actually made of titanium? Amazing.

    For those who still believe the ‘moon landing’ story, go to youtube and watch Buzz Aldrin admit to a little girl named Zoe that “…we didn’t go there…” when she asks why nobody has been back to the moon in 46 years.

  6. Another issue regards photography. Have heard presentations raising two impossibilities: one, for the photography of those times to function, atmosphere is necessary. Two, the cameras would not have functioned well – if at all – with the radiation. Yet most shots have a stupendous depth of field in focus. How many photographers have ever had such results? https://www.google.com/search?q=images+apollo&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=firefox-b-d&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiDudOcuL7hAhUGCnwKHaMUBfMQsAR6BAgIEAE&biw=865&bih=474

  7. Can’t resist posting McGowan’s blitz of the lunar module: http://memoryholeblog.org/2015/05/26/dave-mcgowan-battling-aggressive-cancer/

    “There was much about the Apollo flights that was truly miraculous, but arguably the greatest technological achievement was the design of the lunar modules. Has anyone, by the way, ever really taken a good look at one of those contraptions? I mean a detailed, up-close look? I’m guessing that the vast majority of people have not, but luckily we can quickly remedy that situation because I happen to have some really good, high-resolution images that come directly from the good people at NASA.

    While what is depicted in the images may initially appear, to the untrained eye, to be some kind of mock-up that someone cobbled together in their backyard to make fun of NASA, I can assure you that it is actually an extremely high-tech manned spacecraft capable of landing on the surface of the Moon. And incredibly enough, it was also capable of blasting off from the Moon and flying 69 miles back up into lunar orbit! Though not immediately apparent, it is actually a two-stage craft, the lower half (the part that looks like a tubular aluminum framework covered with Mylar and old Christmas wrapping paper) being the descent stage, and the upper half (the part that looks as though it was cobbled together from old air conditioning ductwork and is primarily held together, as can be seen in the close-up, with zippers and gold tape) being the ascent stage.

    The upper half, of course, is the more sophisticated portion, being capable of lifting off and flying with enough power to break free of the Moon’s gravity and reach lunar orbit. It also, of course, possessed sophisticated enough navigational capabilities for it to locate, literally out in the middle of fucking nowhere, the command module that it had to dock with in order to get the astronauts safely back to Earth. It also had to catch that command module, which was orbiting the Moon at a leisurely 4,000 miles per hour.

    But we’ll get to all that a little later. I think we can all agree for now that such a sleek, stylish, well-designed craft would have no problem flying with that kind of power, precision and stability.”

Post a Comment

%d bloggers like this:
Secured By miniOrange