Neil Armstrong’s shadow is found in thin section of Lunar Sample 10065? His body, lunar vines, animal neuron fossils are all found and identified in http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=li...28676&p=29
Source of above image: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/samples/at...=S69-54910

Wretch Fossil  Wrote:

Neil Armstrong’s shadow is found in thin section of Lunar Sample 10065? His body, lunar vines, animal neuron fossils are all found and identified in http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=li...28676&p=29
Source of above image: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/samples/at...=S69-54910

You have to be kidding me! Those are images of samples taken
ON EARTH of lunar samples that were BROUGHT BACK from the moon.
It was taken OUTSIDE THE LAB for a comparison against earth rocks.

"It was taken OUTSIDE THE LAB for a comparison against earth rocks."

No fear of contamination? Couldn't comparison be made inside the lab? What other images of moon rocks were taken outside the lab?
Thin-section micrograph taken outside the lab? No kidding.

Wretch Fossil  Wrote:

"It was taken OUTSIDE THE LAB for a comparison against earth rocks."

No fear of contamination? Couldn't comparison be made inside the lab? What other images of moon rocks were taken outside the lab?
Thin-section micrograph taken outside the lab? No kidding.

Are you still seriously trying to say that the image was taken ON the
Moon? Or alleged to have been taken on the Moon? Where on that page
of ALL the images in that series does it state that these are samples
located anywhere BUT the lab?

The image is obviously not an image of a thin section. However,
this webpage claims the image is that of a thin section:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/samples/at...mple=10065
No one takes images of a thin section in a desert or outside a room.
No thin section contains images of a human shadow.
If it's not a thin section, then it shows dead vines of about 20 centimeters long (derived from comparison with the length of the thumb in the image). If it's a macro image, then it should not be imaged on Earth in this way, unless one tries to cheat, in view of the reasons stated above (No fear of contamination? Couldn't comparison be made inside the lab? What other images of moon rocks were taken outside the lab?)

I did something that it seems folks like you are too frightened to do.
I emailed the people who run that page. Here's the reply I just got:

----------------------------begin copy email----------------------------------
Unfortunately that image should not have been in the Lunar Sample Atlas.
It is an Earth-based astronaut training photo. The image is mislabeled.
That image number should have been a lunar sample image. We will be
checking the collection for additional mislabeled images and remove
them.

The image appears to be one of the early images taking at one of several
astronaut training sites most likely at Cinder Lakes, Arizona. The
vegetation in the image appears to be native sage brush plant. This
image was NOT taken on the Moon. Since this image was mislabeled at
some time in the last 40+ years, it is difficult to determine who's
shadow is in the image. If I find out more information, I will pass it
on to you.

Mary Ann
_________________
Mary Ann Hager
Library / RPIF
Lunar and Planetary Institute
----------------------------end copy email----------------------------------

Now, I can understand and believe that a library could mislabel and/
or misplace something. I'm sure you will try to read something nefarious
into this. Rather than make assumptions I tested the "data", something
you can't understand but scientists do all the time.

Go on then, call Ms Hager a liar. I know you want to.

the shadow behind him shows someone not wearing a helmet.

http://imgupld.lunaticoutpost.com/graphi...7DBA18.jpg

Wretch Fossil  Wrote:

The image is obviously not an image of a thin section. However,
this webpage claims the image is that of a thin section:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/samples/at...mple=10065
No one takes images of a thin section in a desert or outside a room.
No thin section contains images of a human shadow.
If it's not a thin section, then it shows dead vines of about 20 centimeters long (derived from comparison with the length of the thumb in the image). If it's a macro image, then it should not be imaged on Earth in this way, unless one tries to cheat, in view of the reasons stated above (No fear of contamination? Couldn't comparison be made inside the lab? What other images of moon rocks were taken outside the lab?)

I did something that it seems folks like you are too frightened to do.
I emailed the people who run that page. Here's the reply I just got:

----------------------------begin copy email----------------------------------
Unfortunately that image should not have been in the Lunar Sample Atlas.
It is an Earth-based astronaut training photo. The image is mislabeled.
That image number should have been a lunar sample image. We will be
checking the collection for additional mislabeled images and remove
them.

The image appears to be one of the early images taking at one of several
astronaut training sites most likely at Cinder Lakes, Arizona. The
vegetation in the image appears to be native sage brush plant. This
image was NOT taken on the Moon. Since this image was mislabeled at
some time in the last 40+ years, it is difficult to determine who's
shadow is in the image. If I find out more information, I will pass it
on to you.

Mary Ann
_________________
Mary Ann Hager
Library / RPIF
Lunar and Planetary Institute
----------------------------end copy email----------------------------------

Now, I can understand and believe that a library could mislabel and/
or misplace something. I'm sure you will try to read something nefarious
into this. Rather than make assumptions I tested the "data", something
you can't understand but scientists do all the time.

Go on then, call Ms Hager a liar. I know you want to.