Who Parked The Moon?

[BenDhyan]

When I read this "As a result the images that were obtained had a much higher resolution and dynamic range than had been seen to date. Indeed, in many cases, these images often rival or exceed images taken by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter..", it says LO sometimes matched or exceeded the quality of LRO. Remember, the wide angle camera of LO was of higher resolution than LRO by design, not because of it was better. The 19 inch resolution of the narrow angle camera of LRO was not possible in the days of LO.

So here are the wide angle images of LRO and LO side by side for the same target..


LROC image M1108432631R (left, incidence angle = 68.8 degrees) and Lunar Orbiter 3 image LO3-154-H2 (right, incidence angle = 67.2 degrees) of Surveyor Crater, the eventual landing site of both Surveyor 3 and Apollo 12. Both images were taken at similar illumination geometries and the NAC image has been stretched to match the saturation seen in the LO-3 image.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

If only there was independent 3rd party evidence, eh?

Anything else is like asking Stephen Glass to present evidence of authenticity for his published non-fiction articles.


'3rd party evidence' may be coming in the next ~5 yrs*, however, courtesy of Bezos (if one subscribes to the notion that Bezos/Amazon isn't already compromised, a la Facebook, with Intel agency 'investment', that is).


*subject to scheduling delays and/or CGI magic.

Bezos Reveals Blue Origin's Lunar Lander, Targets Humans On The Moon In 2024

On Thursday, Jeff Bezos' space exploration company, Blue Origin, revealed "Blue Moon", the company's lunar lander designed for towing cargo, payloads, and even humans, back to the moon. At an event late last week in Washington D.C., Bezos - pulling a page out of the Elon Musk taxpayer subsidy playbook - gave a grim outlook for energy consumption on Earth and began to ponder another plan - moving to smaller, man made planets, according to Popular Mechanics.

Greg Johnson, head of the New Shepard program and retired NASA astronaut said: "Jeff laid out a rational reason to do this. That's what's been lacking. Everyone's been putting the pieces together, step by step this is what we have to do. My hope is that it makes everyone enthusiastic for a private/public partnership that gets us back to the moon."

Bezos also has aspirations to mine the moon for resources, like water, according to The Atlantic. Bezos warned at the event that the Earth's resources are finite and will eventually and inevitably wind up depleted.

“Space is the only way to go,” Bezos said about humankind looking for additional resources.

More at link.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/ ... ar-lander/

NASA, Bezos, and Popular Mechanics. All in
the family.

[stickdog99]

Prime real estate

[JackRiddler]

.

So the little salesman who could (swallow the world) is really about the vision thing?

Here's the money quote (since it's about money).

My hope is that it makes everyone enthusiastic for a private/public partnership that gets us back to the moon.

Out of private and public, I wonder which side is supposed to get the profits, and which one will bear the costs and risks? Also, who will hold the patents afterward?

Come on now, I thought this was about the wonders of capitalism, not public subsidies. (Oh yeah, sorry: that's how it has always worked.)

.

[Harvey]

I wrote a part of this Socratic dialogue in specific response to something elsewhere, but it sort of fits well with the above. Hope it's not too boring.

S: Do capitalists employ workers?
G: Yes.

S: And are these workers educated?
G: It stands to reason that an educated workforce is of more value to capital, yes.

S: And these workers are educated to the degree that they can become capitalists themselves?
To a degree. If they wish to acquire specialised skills and knowledge they can do so.

S: And are these workers educated by the capitalists?
G: No. They are educated by the state to a certain level or pay for it themselves. For more specialised skills and knowledge, as I have stated, they must in general pay for it themselves.

S: So it would appear that in general, the state educates people to the degree that they are useful to capital.
G: Yes, it could be stated truthfully in this way.

S: Do capitalists pay the state for the use of this education?
G: No. They pay no taxes beyond a modest level to reward their entrepreneurial risk taking.

S: So if I risk my life in jumping from a high building I should not be rewarded for it?
G: Of course not, you haven’t made or built anything or employed anyone by doing so.

S: And the capitalists make and build things?
G: Yes.

S: And these things made by capitalists are then distributed freely among the people
G: No, of course not. People must buy them with their own money.

S: I see. So these things are novel and interesting and desired by others to such a degree that people are willing to spend their own money on them, but which are made with their labour and built in part with education which they themselves have paid for?
G: Yes, but the people are compensated for their labour.

S: Around $500 billion is spent each year on Public Relations, among other things to encourage people to buy these things. Is this a measure of the value of the things these capitalists make?
G: Yes, I suppose it is.

S: And how is this Public Relations information conveyed to the people?
G: In many ways. These days mostly through advertising on devices owned by the people.

S: And these advertisements are sought by the people, to inform them of the choice of products available?
G: Yes of course.

S: So the people can choose not be persuaded by these advertisements?
G: Yes of course.

S: I have noticed that if I want to access any information on these devices, I must encounter thousands of advertisements each day, mostly for things I do not wish to buy.
G: It is of course your choice whether you wish to seek information.

S: But is not information the basis of all choice?
G: Yes, that is true

S: But I can not choose to find information without also encountering advertisements?
G: You could go to a library instead. It is your choice.

S: Unfortunately my local library in Athens has been closed. As you say, I may choose to walk further and find an existing library but I cannot however choose not to see billboards along the route, the advertisements on screens visible from the public footpath and the road and on the sides of buses, taxi's and so on.
G: Yes, I suppose that is true.

S: And these advertisements while they may not lie, do appear to create false impressions of these things which capitalists make and sell.
G: This is a subjective judgement as to what is or is not attractive and desirable or what is or is not false.

S: Indeed this may be true, although it is certainly the case that I have no wish to see them.
G: We have established this, yes.

S: Let us move on. Do these capitalists move things around?
G: What kinds of things?

S: I wish to note that we may discuss any number of things, material, workers and even the capitalists themselves, but let us confine ourselves for the sake of convenience to the products our capitalists make.
G: Yes.

S: How do they do this?
G: On roads. By train. By plane. By ship.

S: And do these roads build themselves?
G: No, of course not, they’re built mostly by the state.

S: Do these vehicles of land sea and air operate by magical means?
G: Of course not, they are powered by fuels, such as petroleum or diesel or electricity generated by burning coal and so on.

S: And the capitalists secure these fuels by their own effort?
G: Of course.

S: So these fuels are not subsidised upwards of $2 trillion dollars globally, in public money each year, according to the IMF?
G: Well yes, perhaps they are.

S: And these capitalist entrepreneurs, these risk takers do they communicate?
G: Yes of course, they depend upon communication as we have established already.

S: And how do they do this?
G: By phone, by internet, by post, that sort of thing.

S: And did these capitalists pay for all these means of communication?
G: Yes, of course, everyone does.

S: But don’t most of these things require considerable infrastructure?
G: Yes.

S: And isn’t this infrastructure mostly built with public money? The internet is such an example is it not?
G: Yes but the capitalists pay for them like everyone else.

S: But it is true that the power of capital is such that they may pass laws to gain privileged access to these things, is it not?
G: Yes, but only because everything else depends upon their goods and services.

S: But they don’t have to start from scratch, they rely on the same infrastructure as everyone else, do they not?
G: That is true.

S: And this infrastructure is built with public money is it not?
G: We have established this, yes.

S: Then shouldn’t they pay taxes like everyone else?
G: That might be true except the communications infrastructure is also owned by businesses themselves, for example.

S: But they didn’t have to construct it with their own money.
G: No, that is true. But they did purchase it from the state.

S: At a loss to the state?
G: Yes, that is true.

S: And they have grants from the state and preferential agreements with the state to develop and implement new infrastructure from which they draw majority benefit?
G: I suppose that is true.

S: And yet the capitalists don’t need to contribute to the state?
G: Why no, they employ people, give them jobs.

S: Give them jobs? You mean they have need of work and people agree to work for them at a given rate?
G: Yes.

S: And choosing to work for capitalists they have freedom of choice in a market place of jobs and with equal power, such that they may choose their level of wage or conditions of work?
G: No of course not. They have taken no risks nor built anything.

S: And yet we have agreed that the actual work is performed by the workers. It may be said that they have built everything, from the roads to the schools to the things they buy, is this not so?
G: I suppose when you put it like that, yes.

S: But having received all these benefits, the capitalists are the one’s taking risks and so should not have to pay taxes proportional to the benefits they receive?
G: That is true.

S: Do capitalists benefit from state funded investment in science and technology, in research and development?
G: Why yes they do. In every field, from pharmaceuticals to materials science and much else.

S: But they don’t share the benefits of these great and good discoveries and inventions by making them available to everyone?
G: No of course they don’t. They copyright and trademark and defend their intellectual property, as well they should being the fearless risk takers they are. They charge the highest price they can according to the laws of each state as is only right, they have taken the boldest risks after all.

S: And do all of these entrepreneurial activities have other costs, to water supplies, to the natural world, to ecology and to the ability of life itself to flourish and maintain itself?
G: Yes, this is true.

S: And do they pay either to minimise or to correct their damage?
G: It might be said that they do.

S: Is the power of capital such that they are able to pass laws precisely so that they do not have to pay for the damage their products cause?
G: I suppose that may be true.

S: And while they may pass laws to exempt themselves they may also ‘go out of business’ before such costs are due, or convince others that they themselves are to blame.
G: Yes that may also be true.

S: And if they are as grand and important as you say, should they be allowed to go out of business?
G: Not if they are vitally important to everything else, no. The public should pay for them to recoup their losses, being as important to everything as they are.

S: The state should underwrite their losses? They shouldn’t be out of pocket?
G: Not if it stops them from continuing to be entrepreneurs and taking risks.

S: Given all this, why don't the people rise up against the capitalists?
G: Because we have police and armies to maintain order, to keep the peace and to ensure that such things do not happen.

S: And the police, the armies, they are paid for by the capitalists, through taxes?
G: Not so much. Although capital has begun to discover the need to employ private police and armies with equivalent powers to those of the state.

S: And these private police are accountable to the state as should be the case in a democracy?
G: Not so much, no.

S: But we have established that most of what they do, what they make, what they make it with, how they move it and how it is secured is through public works and that when their risks fail at some stage, being too important to pay the costs, everyone else must do so. Is this correct?
G: Yes, that is true.

S: So we may ask who is actually taking the risks?

[stickdog99]

Don't forget who has to pay to clean up after all the capitalists' packaging waste, lung cancer, liver failure, ground water contamination, air pollution, heavy metal waste, asbestos removal, radon removal, lead removal, and Superfund sites.

[Harvey]

Don't forget who has to pay to clean up after all the capitalists' packaging waste, lung cancer, liver failure, ground water contamination, air pollution, heavy metal waste, asbestos removal, radon removal, lead removal, and Superfund sites.

By all means re-write it and add them in!

[Belligerent Savant]

.


We'd be remiss without including some of the added context to Bezos' vision for space exploration: shipping off the undesirables to man-made space 'colonies', leaving the precious Earth for him and those of his ilk (and their offspring).

The photos are quite Interstellar-esque (perhaps the movie's purpose was to 'introduce' these concepts to the plebes... or is that too HMW-ian to suggest such a thing?)

Looks inviting, doesn't it?

Bezos:
"...someone named Gerry O’Neill, a physics professor, looked at this question very carefully and he asked a very precise question that nobody had ever asked before, and it was, ‘Is a planetary surface the best place for humans to expand into the solar system?’ And he and his students set to work on answering that question, and they came to a very surprising — for them — counterintuitive answer: No.”

Bezos went on to describe how the limited surface areas, distance, and gravitational forces of the other planets in our solar system make settling on those planets impractical and cost-prohibitive, while constructing giant space cylinders closer to Earth which can hold a million people is far more practical. These cylinders would spin to replicate Earth’s gravitational pull with centrifugal force.

“These are really pleasant places to live,” Bezos said. “Some of these O’Neill colonies might choose to replicate Earth cities. They might pick historical cities and mimic them in some way. There’d be whole new types of architecture. These are ideal climates. These are short-sleeve environments. This is Maui on its best day, no rain, no storms, no earthquakes.”

No rain? No weather? Just big, spinning cylinders floating monotonously in space? A trillion divided by a million is one million, which means that the best idea the richest man in the world can come up with for the future of our species is to fill our solar system with a million of these floating homogenized space malls.

“If we build this vision, these O’Neill colonies, where does it take us? What does it mean for Earth?” Bezos asked. “Earth ends up zoned, residential, and light industry. It’ll be a beautiful place to live, it’ll be a beautiful place to visit, it’ll be a beautiful place to go to college, and to do some light industry. But heavy industry, polluting industry, all the things that are damaging our planet, those will be done off Earth. We get to have both. We get to keep this unique gem of a planet, which is completely irreplaceable — there is no Plan B. We have to save this planet. And we shouldn’t give up a future of our grandchildren’s grandchildren of dynamism and growth. We can have both.”

Now, if you look at the behavior of Jeff Bezos, who exploits his employees and destroys his competitors, and who some experts say is trying to take over the underlying infrastructure of our entire economy, you can feel reasonably confident that this man has no intention of leaving “this unique gem of a planet”, nor of having the heirs to his empire leave either. When you see this Pentagon advisory board member and CIA contractor planning to ship humans off the Earth’s surface so the planet can thrive, you may be certain that he’s talking about other humans. The unworthy ones. The ones who weren’t sociopathic enough to climb the capitalist ladder by stepping on the backs of everyone else.

And make no mistake, when Bezos talks about saving the planet for “our grandchildren’s grandchildren”, he’s not just talking about his heirs, he’s talking about himself. Bezos has invested large amounts of wealth in biotech aimed at reversing the aging process and cracking the secret of immortality.

This is the sort of guiding wisdom that is controlling the fate of our species, everyone. The world’s most ambitious plutocrat envisions a world in which, rather than evolving beyond our destructive tendencies and learning to live in collaboration with each other and our environment, we are simply shipped off into space so that he can stretch out and enjoy our beautiful planet. That’s his best idea.

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/bezo ... b9d117b819

[coffin_dodger]

Bezos's and big tech's wet dreams have little to do with freeing up Earth for habitation and light industry, far more to do with escaping Earth by uploading a human mind into a circuit board, memory chips and a power source. It's the only way they'll get any substantial amount of disembodied 'humans' beyond our atmosphere. These wonderful CGI floating prisons are window dressing for a future that is so far distant (and elusive) as to be worthless. Keeps the Star Trek fans happy, though.

[stickdog99]

.


We'd be remiss without including some of the added context to Bezos' vision for space exploration: shipping off the undesirables to man-made space 'colonies', leaving the precious Earth for him and those of his ilk (and their offspring).

The photos are quite Interstellar-esque (perhaps the movie's purpose was to 'introduce' these concepts to the plebes... or is that too HMW-ian to suggest such a thing?)

Looks inviting, doesn't it?

Bezos:
"...someone named Gerry O’Neill, a physics professor, looked at this question very carefully and he asked a very precise question that nobody had ever asked before, and it was, ‘Is a planetary surface the best place for humans to expand into the solar system?’ And he and his students set to work on answering that question, and they came to a very surprising — for them — counterintuitive answer: No.”

Bezos went on to describe how the limited surface areas, distance, and gravitational forces of the other planets in our solar system make settling on those planets impractical and cost-prohibitive, while constructing giant space cylinders closer to Earth which can hold a million people is far more practical. These cylinders would spin to replicate Earth’s gravitational pull with centrifugal force.

“These are really pleasant places to live,” Bezos said. “Some of these O’Neill colonies might choose to replicate Earth cities. They might pick historical cities and mimic them in some way. There’d be whole new types of architecture. These are ideal climates. These are short-sleeve environments. This is Maui on its best day, no rain, no storms, no earthquakes.”

No rain? No weather? Just big, spinning cylinders floating monotonously in space? A trillion divided by a million is one million, which means that the best idea the richest man in the world can come up with for the future of our species is to fill our solar system with a million of these floating homogenized space malls.

“If we build this vision, these O’Neill colonies, where does it take us? What does it mean for Earth?” Bezos asked. “Earth ends up zoned, residential, and light industry. It’ll be a beautiful place to live, it’ll be a beautiful place to visit, it’ll be a beautiful place to go to college, and to do some light industry. But heavy industry, polluting industry, all the things that are damaging our planet, those will be done off Earth. We get to have both. We get to keep this unique gem of a planet, which is completely irreplaceable — there is no Plan B. We have to save this planet. And we shouldn’t give up a future of our grandchildren’s grandchildren of dynamism and growth. We can have both.”

Now, if you look at the behavior of Jeff Bezos, who exploits his employees and destroys his competitors, and who some experts say is trying to take over the underlying infrastructure of our entire economy, you can feel reasonably confident that this man has no intention of leaving “this unique gem of a planet”, nor of having the heirs to his empire leave either. When you see this Pentagon advisory board member and CIA contractor planning to ship humans off the Earth’s surface so the planet can thrive, you may be certain that he’s talking about other humans. The unworthy ones. The ones who weren’t sociopathic enough to climb the capitalist ladder by stepping on the backs of everyone else.

And make no mistake, when Bezos talks about saving the planet for “our grandchildren’s grandchildren”, he’s not just talking about his heirs, he’s talking about himself. Bezos has invested large amounts of wealth in biotech aimed at reversing the aging process and cracking the secret of immortality.

This is the sort of guiding wisdom that is controlling the fate of our species, everyone. The world’s most ambitious plutocrat envisions a world in which, rather than evolving beyond our destructive tendencies and learning to live in collaboration with each other and our environment, we are simply shipped off into space so that he can stretch out and enjoy our beautiful planet. That’s his best idea.

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/bezo ... b9d117b819

OK, but can Prime Members save an extra 10% and still get to watch Bosch for free?

[stickdog99]

Bezos's and big tech's wet dreams have little to do with freeing up Earth for habitation and light industry, far more to do with escaping Earth by uploading a human mind into a circuit board, memory chips and a power source. It's the only way they'll get any substantial amount of disembodied 'humans' beyond our atmosphere. These wonderful CGI floating prisons are window dressing for a future that is so far distant (and elusive) as to be worthless. Keeps the Star Trek fans happy, though.

Considering that Bezos has made his fortune paying people nothing to ship crap to far-flunged places, we can well imagine his opinion of and future utopian plans for his pod people. I wonder how many of these pods he envisions selling to the US just to house all his used styrofoam.

[BenDhyan]

LRO is on the job again...

NASA photographed the crash site of Israel's failed moon lander, and it's not pretty

Dave Mosher May 16, 2019,

On April 11, the Israeli nonprofit SpaceIL tried to put its lunar lander, Beresheet, on the surface of the moon. Had it succeeded, it would have marked the first private moon landing.

But the robot failed at the last minute because of a software issue and slammed into the moon’s surface.

More than a month later, NASA moon researchers announced they’d found and photographed Beresheet’s crash site with the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

The new pictures show that Beresheet left a roughly 300-foot-long stain on the moon’s surface when it crashed at about 2,200 mph.



Below are two images of the impact site. The photo on the left is unaltered, while the image on the right is enhanced to boost the contrast and highlight patterns of soil thrown across the lunar surface.



An enhanced picture shows the crash site of Beresheet, a 1,300-pound lunar lander created by the Israeli nonprofit SpaceIL.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/nasa-pictures-israel-beresheet-moon-lander-crash-site-2019-5?r=US&IR=T

[Karmamatterz]

Was sitting on a airplane waiting to takeoff last week. Next to me was my girlfriend. She asked what I was reading and I shared about 30 seconds worth of explanation of the moon landing conspiracy and that all the original footage was lost.

Her reply: "Well at least we still have the footage of Michael Jackson doing the moonwalk."

[Belligerent Savant]

^^^^^^^^
Thankfully Jackson's moonwalk footage has been recorded, archived and stored by many sources, both professional and amateur, so we needn't worry about such a landmark achievement getting lost. Having multiple 'custodians' to manage datasets offers far better redundancy, of course. NASA couldn't have anyone else 'manage' the storage/maintenance of original/raw Apollo content, however. Wonder why?

LRO is on the job again...

Ah yes, the wonders of Photoshop -- particularly the special 'black ops' version offered exclusively to govt agencies!

I kid of course. No way to know for certain, though, right?

Since we're back on the topic of the Moon, I happened across the below offering, which begs the question: why would NASA strongly suggest (though not directly indicate) that there's no lunar soil samples readily available for analysis? Is this another example of NASA trolling the "conspiracy theorists", or is this part of a slow, pronounced back-tracking campaign?

Perhaps I'm missing a key criteria here. Welcome any clarification.

https://secretsun.blogspot.com/2018/01/ ... ollos.html

Let's take a look at this Space.com article on the Super Wonderful Bloody Blue Murder Moon.



Interesting headline, right? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the secrets of the lunar surface were unlocked 49 years ago, when the Eagle landed and all the rest of it. Weird.

let's take a look at the article here...

The upcoming Super Blue Blood Moon eclipse will not only be a treat for skywatchers; the rare celestial event will also give scientists a chance to discover some unknown characteristics about moon dust, like how porous and "fluffy" it is across the lunar surface.

Wait--what?

What "unknown characteristics about moon dust?" Isn't that kinda like coming back from the beach and not grasping the whole concept of "sand?"



And if other "scientists" want to discover how "porous and fluffy" moon dust is why don't they just ask NASA for a sample?





It's not as if collecting the stuff wasn't one of Apollo's primary missions, right?



After all, the astronauts made "precise observations" of the lunar surface.

If scientists are curious, they should be able to find out anything they need in less than a second.

Hell, you and I should too.



I mean. the Apollo missions collected a whopping 842 pounds of samples.

OK, OK you say; that's "scientists," which could mean anybody. Certainly NASA knows the score, right? Continuing:

Lunar rocks regularly warm up and cool down as the surface moves between times of darkness and times of light. Scientists have studied this process before, and according to NASA, this information reveals a lot about the "bulk" of the regolith, or the dusty lunar rock soil.

Sudden cooling changes from a lunar eclipse could reveal characteristics about the fine material at the top of the regolith, as well, NASA officials said.

If they have hundreds of pounds of the stuff, what exactly is there to reveal?

Many folks across the United States witnessed the Great American Solar Eclipse of 2017, and during the fascinating moments before, during and after the moon blocked the sun's light, the ground got cold. On Jan. 31, the moon will experience a similar effect, as Earth blocks and bends sunlight that otherwise would fully illuminate and heat the moon, NASA officials said in a statement.

The lunar surface will get chillier, and if NASA researchers notice that the moon's rocky surface cools down differently than it does in a normal moon day, the findings could clue scientists in on what those moon rocks are made of.

Why does anyone need a "clue" as to what moon-rocks are made of?

I mean, they got huge piles of the stuff all over the place. They took samples all across the Moon's surface.



They have so much Moon crap they've even gifted some of it to foreign dignitaries.

Oh. Wait.

A few added breadcrumbs --

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.

...the Moon is not the only source of Moon rocks. As it turns out, authentic Moon rocks are available right here on Earth, in the form of lunar meteorites. Because the Moon lacks a protective atmosphere, you see, it gets smacked around quite a bit, which is why it is 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 them is in Antarctica, where they are most plentiful and, due to the terrain, relatively easy to find and well preserved. And that is why it is 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. You would think that, what with the demanding task of perfecting the hugely complex Saturn V rockets, von Braun and his cronies at NASA would have had their hands full, but apparently there was something even more important for them to do down in Antarctica. NASA has never offered much of an explanation for the curiously timed expedition.

http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-2/

Exploring Antarctica (1967)



Intrigued by exploration in space and on Earth, Dr. Von Braun participated in an expedition to Antarctica. This photo was made on or about January 7, 1967.

https://history.msfc.nasa.gov/vonbraun/ ... e-60s.html

[BenDhyan]

Great resource here, just click on the relevant US Apollo Mission and Russian Luna Mission regolith, basalt, rock, etc., samples of interest..

https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/lsc/index.cfm

And btw, if you want to borrow a sample for research, here you go....

NASA provides lunar rock, soil, and regolith-core samples for both destructive and non-destructive analysis in pursuit of new scientific knowledge. Requests are considered for both basic studies in planetary science and applied studies in lunar materials beneficiation and resource utilization.

https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/sampreq/requests.cfm