>>2678
Multicell I don't have any concrete proof of, but single cell is pretty much a fact. Even though NASA has never acknowledged it, and done everything they possibly could to hide it. Yet, a lot of the facts that prove it exists are in their own documents, in bits and pieces. The little bits and pieces don't mean much by themselves, but when you put them all together, it spells L,I,F,E.
I'm going to ramble for awhile, maybe a long while, about the bits and pieces. I'll try to keep speculation out of it, and stay just on verifiable facts.
NASA bullshit line #214:
>Nothing can survive on the moon, the moon is a place you would send something to sterilize it.
That's not true, and NASA knows it for a fact.
In 1967 NASA sent the 7 Lunar Surveyor missions to the moon. They were robotic landers equipped with a TV camera, a robotically operated scoop shovel and a penetrometer. For the first phase, the Lunar Surveyors stayed in orbit and sent back photos of the surface for a few weeks. Then they soft landed and surveyed the surface conditions at proposed Apollo landing sites. They took video of the area, poked and prodded the soil to try to determine composition, load bearing capacity, things of that nature. Principally what they wanted to know was whether the ground would hold up an Apollo lander without it sinking or sliding around in the soil, whatever.
A Live Bacteria Is Brought Back From The Moon
Apollo 12 landed about 500 feet away from Lunar Surveyor III. During the EVA the astronauts walked over to it, photographed it, and examined it. In addition they removed several parts from it for return to earth so they could be studied. Scientists wanted to know things like how did the paint hold up, did the plastic degrade, things like that. Back on earth, they took the camera apart and looked inside at the internal parts. Inside was a foam washer. They put the foam washer, along with other parts in broth and tried to culture any microorganisms that might be present. On the foam ring, they did get a successful culture. It was Streptococcus mitis, a common bacteria found in the human respiratory tract. Somebody probably coughed into the camera during assembly and deposited it there. It survived about 2 years on the moon and came back to earth still alive. Yes, it was heavily shielded inside that camera, but it did live there through the heat and cold, in a vacuum, for 2 years. So, can life survive on the moon? The answer is yes, for a fact.
An Exciting Discovery Buried
The Lunar Surveyor program made an absolutely mind blowing discovery on the moon during operations. The geologists watching the video streaming back noticed that on the surface was a very thin, cohesive crust. Similar to what you might find in a plowed clay field after it rains and the soil dries. If you grew up on a farm you'll know what I'm talking about. That was a huge earth shattering discovery. Soil crusts are formed in one of 3 ways:
>1) Impact by rain drops. We know it doesn't rain on the moon.
>2) Chemical. Salts cement the soil together, when the top layer dries it forms a crust layer. The lunar surveyors found the soil to be dry, with no traces of water present. No water was expected to be there either.
>3) Biological. Organisms like Cyanobacteria and algae on the top of the soil bind it together to form a crust.
With options one and two ruled out, there was only one other possibility left, Biological. They kept that very quiet, almost an internal secret that was virtually never discussed outside of the small group of Lunar Surveyor/Apollo geologists working on the programs.
There was an article in the Feb 1969 edition of National Geographic. It was a story about the lunar geologists. The author asked Eugene Shoemaker, often called, "the father of Astrogeology," whether he thought they might find life on the moon. Shoemaker told a joke, that lead him to believe the answer was no. But Shoemaker never actually said no. Shoemaker knew the answer was, yes there is a great chance we'll find life on the moon, but he couldn't tell anybody that. He knew the crust was there, and he knew exactly what it meant. NASA knew there was life on the moon 2 years before the Apollo astronauts arrived there.
In the picrel is the famous Buzz Aldrin bootprint photo. Chances are you've seen it at least once. I've marked the place where the soil crust fractured, shifted a bit, but remained largely intact. They continued to keep that a secret outside of the geologists. They certainly never told the press about it.
Allergic Reactions
There was a biological organism in the soil. One that highly likely no human had ever come into contact with before. During the EVA, both Armstrong and Aldrin got the soil, and the microorganisms in it, all over their boots and their space suits. They brought it back into the Eagle lander with them when the EVA was over. When they repressurized the lander and tool their helmets off, Armstrong had an allergic reaction to the soil and dust, now floating in the air around them. Not really the soil itself. We don't get allergic reactions to inorganic chips of rock. We get them from biological material in the soil. Like bacteria, mold, pollen, spores, etc. If you listen to the radio traffic after the EVA, Armstrong sounds like the has a clothes pin on his nose. It's all stuffed up. Aldrin didn't appear to have a reaction, but that's not out of the ordinary. Some people suffer from Hay Fever, some don't. Aldrin was breathing the same dirty air, but it just didn't affect him. Later on during Apollo 17, both Gene Cernan and Jack Schmidt had allergic reactions to the soil in the same way. Schmidt much worse than Cernan. In that instance, they actually talked about it with the controllers in Houston over the radio. In one exchange Schmidt said that the should have been allowed to go to the sample room and sniff the samples brought back from previous missions to test for it. The controller's reply was something like, God knows we tried. They knew it was there. For Apollo 17, they conducted 3 EVAs. Schmidt said his symptoms got less severe with each exposure. He was getting acclimatized to it over time. Not all Apollo astronauts were allergic to what was in the soil on the moon, but some were. If no biological material had been present, none of them would have had a reaction to it.
The Scum Layer on Lunar Surveyor III
I read the preliminary report that was written after the early examinations were made of the Lunar Surveyor III parts were looked at. When the camera and other parts from Lunar Surveyor III were brought back to earth, researchers quickly noticed that everything was discolored. The once sparking white paint on the camera had turned brown. They found that it was a thin layer that could be scraped off. Initially they thought that maybe the sun had burnt the paint brown. That was until they found that the same brown scum layer was also on the glass lens of the camera, which theoretically couldn't be burnt or chemically altered. They also removed and examined grains of soil that were adhering to the camera. Some of them were freakish. They looked like soil particles under the microscope, but they had hair like filaments growing out of them. The researchers didn't know what they were, and they didn't know what the brown scum layer was. They said in the report they would keep working on it. I was never able to get my hands on later reports, if any exist, or are available to the public. I suspect if they do exist, but nobody will ever see them. I've included another picrel of a cliff stained with desert varnish. Deposited likely by Cyanobacteria, a single celled photosynthetic bacteria from earth. It is known to cause both desert varnish and soil crusting in even the driest deserts on earth. My guess is what's on the moon is something very similar to that. Cyanobacteria is probably among the most ancient living creatures on the earth. It can live in the harshest climates, virtually anywhere on earth.
The Plant And Animal Tests
There is a misconception regarding the Plant and Animal tests that were conducted with lunar soul after the samples were returned to earth. NASA often says they used the tests to search for life, but never found any. That's not true. The tests were not intended or designed to search for life. Their only purpose, was to determine whether lunar soil or anything in it was harmful to plant or animal life. Did it have the capacity kill or sicken plants or animals? That was all they wanted to know. It could have had live organisms in it, but if the weren't harmful, NASA didn't care. In some of the plant tests, they found that ancient plant species like ferns and lichens actually germinated faster, and put on early stage growth faster in moon soil than in earth soil, and a simulated moon soil made from components found on earth. Cyanobacteria and similar photosynthetic bacteria are known for excreting plant growth hormones into the soil around them. Other plants can absorb these growth hormones, helping them to germinate and grow, in a symbiotic relationship sort of thing. That's a known effect on earth. This very same thing appeared to happen with the lunar soil. The moon soil probably had gibberellic acid in it, a plant growth hormone that promotes germination and early stage growth. Excreted by whatever microorganism is living in the soil. NASA I'm sure did much further testing. Way more than just those early tests, but that was all done in secret. They never told us the results of those ones. Or the microscopic scans and chemical tests that revealed the bug culprit behind it. The microorganisms on the top of the soil were not harmful, other than a few astronauts had allergic reactions to it. But there was something deeper down in the soil that was very toxic.
The Apollo 11 Core Sample.
Very late in the EVA Buzz Aldrin hammered a core sampling tube into the lunar surface. It only went down about 8 inches down before hitting something hard, and wouldn't go any further. Aldrin pulled the tube out and turned it over and looked into to to see if it had soil in it. It did. Aldrin remarked over the radio that, "it almost looks wet." It probably was wet. It has been speculated by some reputable astronomers over the years that about a foot down in the soil on the moon, there might be water, probably frozen. Val Firsoff was one of them. The soul from the core sample tube was tested on plant species similar to all the other samples from off the top. All 40 of the plant species brought into contact with it, were killed, dead. The experiment was repeated again 6 months later. After 6 months of storage, whatever killed the plants was gone. They all lived. The toxin either chemically broke down, died, or in some other way was neutralized. The toxin never was identified. It probably was identified, they just never told us what it was. It was not radiation. Nothing brought back from the moon was very radioactive. And inorganic chips of rock do not kill plants.
There is not one thing that tells you that the microorganism is there. It is the sum of a whole bunch of tiny pieces of evidence that all point in the same direction. I'm sure there is a secret room at the Manned Spaceflight Center in Houston, filed with filing cabinets, full of reports on all this and much more. All the secret work that was done. But nobody is ever allowed to see them. I'm sure the, "lost," pristine copy of the Apollo 11 video is in there too. It's not lost, it's in a secret collection that nobody is allowed to see.