Slashdot Mirror


NASA Missing Hundreds of Moon Rocks

New submitter Minion of Eris writes "It seems NASA can't keep track of its goodies. A recent audit discovered that moon rocks have been missing for 30 years, loaned displays have gone unreturned, and book-keeping has been generally poor. From the article: 'In a report issued by the agency's inspector general on Thursday, NASA concedes that more than 500 pieces of moon rocks, meteorites, comet chunks and other space material were stolen or have been missing since 1970. That includes 218 moon samples that were stolen and later returned and about two dozen moon rocks and chunks of lunar soil that were reported lost last year. NASA, which has lent more than 26,000 samples, needs to keep better track of what is sent to researchers and museums, the report said. The lack of sufficient controls "increases the risk that these unique resources may be lost," the report concluded.'"

132 comments

  1. Very Rare Regolith Missing? by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yeah so these things are worth millions of dollars (to collectors and researchers alike) and you call them "missing"? Perhaps 'stolen' would be a better word considering the worth of these rocks. Also, I can't believe that the story of the Texan intern who stole and sold lunar samples from NASA and then had sex on top of them with his girlfriend so that they were the first people to have sex on the moon was left out of this article.

    I'm guessing they're not missing but rather have long been stolen and sold on the black market.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah so these things are worth millions of dollars (to collectors and researchers alike) and you call them "missing"? Perhaps 'stolen' would be a better word considering the worth of these rocks.

      I'm guessing

      Yes, yes you are. They don't know what's happened to the rocks, so "missing" is quite clearly the best word.

    2. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

      Maybe,

      the "people" they stole them from, took them back home.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    3. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bring out the well-developed Democratic sense of caring and empathy and lack of any hatred at all!

    4. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by Gideon+Wells · · Score: 2

      Not all were stolen. http://news.yahoo.com/former-resident-sues-claim-alaska-moon-rocks-071955850.html

      If this is a real moon rock someone just threw it away at one point. One person's valuable rock worth millions is another thing you can just pick up outside.

      --
      by Anonymous Coward: I, for one, welcome the shift from car analogies to pizza analogies. um.. overlords?
    5. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by LifesABeach · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Gee, lets look around for the missing moon rocks. Hay NASA, there's a big ball of them above our collective heads. Go there and get some more.

    6. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why don't they just get ILM to make them some new ones?

    7. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't trust much from someone trying to sell a book. The article I read said it was three and half ounces of rock.

    8. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Not all were stolen. http://news.yahoo.com/former-resident-sues-claim-alaska-moon-rocks-071955850.html

      If this is a real moon rock someone just threw it away at one point. One person's valuable rock worth millions is another thing you can just pick up outside.

      It's all probably very Gary Larson-esque - the fat kid with the crew cut and circular glasses, who cleans up at night, swept them up and put them all in the bin. Nobody likes an untidy lab.

      The only Moon rocks I've seen were already cut in very fine slices and placed in plastic holders. So moon "rocks" may be imprecise, Moon Samples is probably better.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    9. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Why don't they just get ILM to make them some new ones?

      Pfft. ILM can't do a decent rock to save their lives. Not only does the first one come out with a lot of unknown minerals, except one old salt who hasn't done nowt in years, but the others are spread out over years and years and then there's a big break while the ones they've already made get a bit spiffed up unecessarily, but then the pre-rocks come out and nobody even likes them, including the green one, which everyone says reflects poorly on a certain bit of strata.

      Don't even get me started on Dreamworks rocks, they all have to have some stupid blue-white lightning all over them.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    10. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      They would probably just replace the rocks with potatoes.

      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080684/trivia

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    11. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Want to solve the problem?

      Do just one mission to go to the moon and bring back a few tons of the stuff, then scatter them around the planet.

      Sell grains of moon dust for $1 each.

      Stop pretending they're magical and reduce them to the dirt they are.

    12. Re:Very Rare Regolith Missing? by dave87656 · · Score: 1

      I can't believe that the story of the Texan intern who stole and sold lunar samples from NASA and then had sex on top of them with his girlfriend

      That's one space age way to get your rocks off.

  2. I know where they keep the stuff. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a huge source of moon-rocks around here somewhere.

    1. Re:I know where they keep the stuff. by SecurityGuy · · Score: 2

      Funny, I was thinking the same thing. We *can* get more.

    2. Re:I know where they keep the stuff. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Question is whether or not you can still afford to get more. Will probably be cheaper to buy them from China in 10 years or so.

    3. Re:I know where they keep the stuff. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but they'll be counterfeit.

    4. Re:I know where they keep the stuff. by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      NASA is taking a leaf out of De Beers book, keeping Moon Rocks artificially scarce, stockpiling them in orbit, just to keep the value of them high.

  3. Lack of sufficient controls.... by sound+vision · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's more of the lack of a sufficient space program that'll lose us "unique resources."

  4. Sex On The Moon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 2002, three NASA interns found and stole moon rocks that were stored in a safe at the Johnson Space Center lab in Houston.
    They later tried to sell them online after sprinkling them on their bed and having sex on it.

    1. Re:Sex On The Moon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Revenge of the Nerds - Moonwalk scene.

    2. Re:Sex On The Moon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In 2002, three NASA interns found and stole moon rocks that were stored in a safe at the Johnson Space Center lab in Houston.
      They later tried to sell them online after sprinkling them on their bed and having sex on it.

      You convince your girlfriend to go along with your kinky fantasy, and *thats* where you went with it? Talk about opportunity wasted.

    3. Re:Sex On The Moon by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      "Three"? Wow, didn't know NASA interns were that kinky...

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
  5. Moonstone for Elven and Glass Armor by Tekfactory · · Score: 1

    I know where they are, the Elves took them.

  6. Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Go get more. The reason nobody was paying much attention in the 1960's is that they never expected the supply of moon rocks would dwindle. We need to maintain permanent residence whatever we go. We went to the moon, we need to establish a base there. If we go to mars, we need to establish a permanent base there too. If we don't force ourselves down this path, we're never going to get off this rock.

    1. Re:Simple solution by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      If we don't force ourselves down this path, we're never going to get off this rock.

      There will probably never be large numbers of people living anywhere but here on Earth. The notion that mankind has a "destiny in space" is a false hope at best and a potentially dangerous distraction if we permit it to interfere with needed steps to preserve our planet for future generations. For those interested in the details, may I suggest the following two articles from Do the Math: Galactic-Scale Energy and Why Not Space?

  7. Bissell Vacumm lady by turtleAJ · · Score: 1

    Anybody has cared to check the vacuum's bags?

  8. Recovery plan by mholve · · Score: 0

    1) Release press statement that those samples were all fake
    2) Watch eBay for auctions of said "fakes"
    3) Profit!

  9. Less than 2%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Correct me if I am wrong, but 500 out of over 26k samples is a very very small portion of the samples they have. While I am sure the value, both financially and as to how they could contribute to science, could vary greatly between each individual sample, this doesn't appear to be some terrible blundering of recordkeeping.

  10. Unique? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are 73 trillion tons of moon rock that /haven't/ been stolen. I'd hardly call it unique :p

  11. Unique? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hardly unique, there's a wacking great big planet that you can see every night with lots more rocks. Just go pick a few!

  12. 500 or so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They loaned out over 26,000 of these, and that's all that's gone missing? That's not bad at all. Maybe they should go into the mortgage business.

    The story that really irked me is the scientist who just had it sitting on his desk for years and years, and never bothered to do any research.

    1. Re:500 or so? by sexconker · · Score: 1

      They loaned out over 26,000 of these, and that's all that's gone missing? That's not bad at all. Maybe they should go into the mortgage business.

      The story that really irked me is the scientist who just had it sitting on his desk for years and years, and never bothered to do any research.

      How much more research could you possibly do beyond "Yup, it's a rock."?

    2. Re:500 or so? by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 1

      How much more research could you possibly do beyond "Yup, it's a rock."?

      Surface structure, chemical composition, searching for embedded items (micrometeorites?), trying to make some sort of concrete out of it to build a moon base from, helping to determine age / history of that moon area, etc, etc, etc.

      For some research a surrogate might do, but then you'd still have to compare with the real thing once in a while. Since we have so little actual moon material, of course that is worth its weight in gold (well no, much more actually since only way to obtain more is to go back to the moon - pretty expensive undertaking).

    3. Re:500 or so? by AaronLS · · Score: 1

      Exactly what I thought. So they lost like 2% of their stock over 30 year period. That's like a 20th of one percent per year. Surely there's room for improvement given the cost involved in recovering material from the moon, but it's not like they've done a horrible job.

    4. Re:500 or so? by sexconker · · Score: 2

      How much more research could you possibly do beyond "Yup, it's a rock."?

      Surface structure, chemical composition, searching for embedded items (micrometeorites?), trying to make some sort of concrete out of it to build a moon base from, helping to determine age / history of that moon area, etc, etc, etc.

      For some research a surrogate might do, but then you'd still have to compare with the real thing once in a while. Since we have so little actual moon material, of course that is worth its weight in gold (well no, much more actually since only way to obtain more is to go back to the moon - pretty expensive undertaking).

      Everything you've listed either has been done with other samples, wouldn't be useful, or would result in the destruction of the sample.
      So if some scientist had one sitting on his desk for ages and did nothing with it, I'd say he made the right choice. It's most valuable uses are as a paperweight or as a conversation starter with dumb chicks you want to bang.

    5. Re:500 or so? by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      And of course there's no possibility of technology changing in an unexpected way for people to suddenly say "hey, I wonder if moon rocks can do ..."

    6. Re:500 or so? by treeves · · Score: 1
      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    7. Re:500 or so? by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      I don't know. Surely at this point, given our robotic technology and the distance to the moon, we really should be arranging for more sample return missions (seeing as how there's also huge interest in doing the same thing from Mars and other bodies around the sol system).

  13. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess we need to go get some more, then!

  14. Whats so unique? by h2okies · · Score: 1

    "increases the risk that these unique resources may be lost," the report concluded.'" There are a few million lbs where we got these...lets just go back and get some.....

    --
    Beware the Lollipop of Mediocrity, Lick it once and you suck forever.
    1. Re:Whats so unique? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Upvote this.

    2. Re:Whats so unique? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly they'd probably opt for the cheaper less exciting of sending a rover with a spade on the front.

    3. Re:Whats so unique? by DamienNightbane · · Score: 0

      Not if we can convince them of the economy of scale that three dudes with shovels and burlap sacks can provide.

  15. it's not as if they can't go fetch some more... by Tastecicles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    is it?

    Back in the 1960's they had to start with a clean board and design the technology in less than a DECADE to fulfill the promise made by a dead president.

    Now we have the knowhow, we have the technology, what's the single insurmountable obstacle to returning to our nearest solar neighbour?

    Politics.

    It's not even as if the technology has been locked away and forgotten, either. NASA's new launch vehicles will have first stage boosters based on the J2 engines. The manned capsules will be based on the Gemini and Apollo capsules. The Mercury-Atlas and Gemini booster stages are still in use for heavy lifting high-risk and military payloads. It just seems a sad waste to me, that such high adventure was shitcanned so fast after all those "firsts" - landing on the Moon, walking on the Moon, driving on the Moon, playing golf on the Moon. Was all that really done just to piss off the Russians? I have a difficult time putting it down to merely that. Our destiny is in space. We shouldn't let petty disagreements over distribution of finite resources stand in the way of that, or we as a species will die in our crib.

    --
    Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    1. Re:it's not as if they can't go fetch some more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what else we had back then? Nazis.

    2. Re:it's not as if they can't go fetch some more... by khallow · · Score: 2

      NASA's new launch vehicles will have first stage boosters based on the J2 engines.

      The J-2X is intended for upper stage stuff.You're thinking of the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) which is a different beast.

    3. Re:it's not as if they can't go fetch some more... by M0j0_j0j0 · · Score: 1

      Amen!

    4. Re:it's not as if they can't go fetch some more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The rocket scientists weren't nazis first and foremost. They were guys who wanted to be rocket scientists so badly they were willing to sell out to nazis.

      Not that it makes them good people. Just sayin'. So perhaps the punchline should be, "find somebody who cares so much about their craft that they'll damn morality all to hell so they can practice it".

    5. Re:it's not as if they can't go fetch some more... by steelfood · · Score: 1

      what's the single insurmountable obstacle to returning to our nearest solar neighbour?

      Patrick Dempsey.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    6. Re:it's not as if they can't go fetch some more... by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Actually, you have it backwards.

      The only way we could afford to do that then was politics.

      We were willing to spend anything to perform a circus stunt to one-up the rooskies.

      The cost of it was astronomical, and the psychological effect was that we believed we really could do anything we wanted. Then we tried to leverage it with 30 years of the shuttle program, but that just became another vast money sink that robbed us of the opportunity to do anything else, and the only thing we could think to do with it after a while was built a permanent nest of tin cans in orbit for it to visit.

      Now you can't convince the public to spend a few bucks to get us to Mars, even though it's just the Moon shot with bigger air tanks, more fuel, and astronauts who are tough enough to live in a VW beetle for 8 months. Which is probably the proper political perspective, because what the fuck would we need to put boots on Mars for, other than to say we'd done it? And is that worth the lives we could save here with the money we don't spend by not doing it?

    7. Re:it's not as if they can't go fetch some more... by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Our destiny is in space.

      Incorrect. Our destiny, whatever it may be, will be played out here on Earth. If you doubt that then the following two articles from Do the Math, Galactic-Scale Energy and Why Not Space?, should make it clear that any promises of a "destiny in space" are false at best and may even be dangerous if they distract us from solving our pressing problems here on Earth.

    8. Re:it's not as if they can't go fetch some more... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Back in the 1960's they had to start with a clean board and design the technology in less than a DECADE to fulfill the promise made by a dead president.

      That's the urban legend. In reality, development of the F-1 engine (that ended up in the first stage of the Saturn V) got underway in 1956. Development of the Saturn family got underway in 1957. Development of the Apollo CSM got underway in early 1960. The first serious stabs at designing a LM got underway in early 1961.
       
      That's why Kennedy chose the moon landing as a national goal - because an enormous amount of development that could be built on was already in progress.
       

      Now we have the knowhow, we have the technology, what's the single insurmountable obstacle to returning to our nearest solar neighbour?

      Budget. We just aren't willing to spend the significant fraction of the budget required to go back because we aren't racing the Reds anymore.
       

      Was all that really done just to piss off the Russians? I have a difficult time putting it down to merely that.

      Regardless of whether you have a difficulty with it or not, it's a fact.

  16. honestly? by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

    just as long as the government has a slightly better handle on where all the plutonium is (contemporaneous cold war artifact)

    i'm not too concered about escape dusty basalt

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  17. math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "missing for 30 years"... "missing since 1970"... [current year: 2011] ...doesn't that mean that they've been missing for over 40 years?

    1. Re:math by BenSchuarmer · · Score: 1

      Maybe the 30 years weren't consecutive. For example, they could gone missing in 1970, been found in 1985, and lost again in 1995.

  18. Not surprised by whatkey · · Score: 4, Funny

    A government agency and insufficient internal controls? I'm actually surprised that the audit didn't turn up missing spacecrafts.

  19. Well, thats it. by BigSes · · Score: 1

    God knows, we won't be getting anymore at anytime soon, if ever. Better keep better track of whatever we have left.

  20. huh? by TheCarp · · Score: 3, Informative

    Um... why would they report the number as "500" and include 218 samples that were "returned". Wouldn't those, by definition, no longer be "lost"?

    Thats nearly half.... so only 282 missing,

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    1. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which means they have lost ~1.2% of those they loaned out. Granted moon rocks are a rather special type of item, but I would like to see that percentage compared to library books, museum items in general, munitions, or even cash in financial institutions.

    2. Re:huh? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Now you're understanding why they couldn't keep count before.

    3. Re:huh? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      Touche, even worst, seems every one they did get back seems to weigh just a little less than half of what their records show in lbs.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    4. Re:huh? by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Um... why would they report the number as "500" and include 218 samples that were "returned". Wouldn't those, by definition, no longer be "lost"?

      Thats nearly half.... so only 282 missing,

      Seems the ability to keep track of things is rather infectious. Just reporting about it makes you get lost in a sea of "missing", "stolen", "borrowed", and "returned".

  21. Cave Johnson by MachineShedFred · · Score: 3, Funny

    Nah, we learned that moon regolith is the perfect material for shooting a portal gun at. Quoth Cave Johnson:

    Welcome to the enrichment center. Since making test participation mandatory for all employees, the quality of our test subjects has risen dramatically. Employee retention, however, has not. As a result, you may have heard we're gonna phase out human testing. There's still a few things left to wrap up though - first up, conversion gel. Now, the beancounters told me we literally could not afford to buy $7 worth of moon rocks, much less 70 million. Bought 'em anyway. Ground them up, mixed them into a gel, and guess what: ground-up moon rocks are pure poison.

    Clearly that's where it all went.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    1. Re:Cave Johnson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw the title and KNEW that Cave Johnson would be metioned in the comments. (posting anonymously to keep the mod on parent)

    2. Re:Cave Johnson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as soon as I saw the title I did a ctrl+f to find where they started talking about cave johnson

  22. Possibly Intentional by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've worked for companies that, for book keeping reasons, would not let you as an employee take a single thing for personal possession. However, if an item was old and no longer usable, management would "turn a blind eye" if you walked out the door with it. Honestly, if it was large enough, they would help you usher it out the door.

    I know moon rocks aren't the same but I wonder how many items were "lost" to the hands of astronauts and key mission controllers because they frickin' changed the world in being part of the process and NASA felt they deserved a small chunk of history.

    I'm not saying it's right, but I also wouldn't want to prosecution Neil Armstrong if he left his office on his last day with a palm sized moon rock from the Apollo 11 mission, tucked away in a coffee mug.

    1. Re:Possibly Intentional by squidflakes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Short answer: of course.

      There was a bar near the Johnson Space Center in Houston called The Outpost. It was torn down this year, but when the place was jumping you had a reasonable chance of finding some old guy who would be happy to show you his collection of space artifacts, including lunar samples.

  23. Sorry, this is no good, could you repeat that? by Grindalf · · Score: 0

    Sssshay that again son? You were playing hookie with what? Phone the FBI please, at your earliest convenience if not sooner. (It's a case of “It's your badge son ”)

    --
    The purpose of existence is to make money.
  24. Is this a valid reason to go back to the Moon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need more Moon rocks?

    I wonder how much money they could raise if they pre-auctioned off Moon rocks to the public from a future space flight?

    1. Re:Is this a valid reason to go back to the Moon? by phil_aychio · · Score: 1

      Why not just take some of the bigger moon rocks that they have and break them up to replenish those that are missing?

      --
      obvious redundancy is obvious
  25. Even worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Washington University in St. Louis has some. Because they are so special, the entire fifth floor is under lock and key. In fact, the university tried to give the rocks back several times to NASA. However, NASA doesn't "remember" that they gave them to the University and won't take them back. Imagine the universities position!

  26. Obligatory by scuzzlebutt · · Score: 0

    That's no moon. Rock.

    --
    In C++, your friends can see your privates.
  27. I can only wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What other pieces of the movie set are missing?

  28. Oh Waa, NASA Doesn't Have Any More Moon Rocks! :( by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    My child at the ripe old age of 4, figured this one out. Hay NASA! Get up, off you lazy excuse ridden ass, and go get some more! Time Out! One Minute, if front of all your preschool friends! And stop wasting your parents time.

  29. Easy to find.... by david.a.judge · · Score: 1

    .... Check eBay.

    1. Re:Easy to find.... by phil_aychio · · Score: 0

      a search on craigslist for "moon rock" bring back 282 results

      --
      obvious redundancy is obvious
  30. And we all know NASA will never get more by NReitzel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, out of eight hundred kilos of moon rocks, some beancounter at NASA is having apoplexy about a half-kilo of rocks not having proper paperwork to document where they have gone?

    He's right. These samples are unique. As long as the bureaucrats rule, NASA doesn't have a chance in Hell of going back and collecting another 800 kilos of rocks. This guy knows that these samples are irreplacible becasue he knows that NASA will never be able to do what they did back when engineers called most of the shots.

    Let him rant. Just like rare earth metals, in a few years we will be able to buy all the moon rocks we want, from the Chinese.

    --

    Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.

    1. Re:And we all know NASA will never get more by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Yes the samples are unique, but so is any other rock. I had a million unique snowflakes melt on the top of my house yesterday!
      The real issue is what is this moon rock witch hunt costing the taxpayers, and to what end.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
  31. Missing Moonrocks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check with GlaDOS and Wheatley... That was the last place I heard of them ;-)
    And get into the holiday spirit at http://aperturescience.com/

  32. Plenty more... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2

    ...where they came from

  33. I wouldn't worry too much about it by warrax_666 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm sure there are billions and billions of moon rocks out there.

    --
    HAND.
  34. Use them to wipe out the deficit by strangeattraction · · Score: 1

    Why don't we sell or lease them and wipe out the deficit. Win Win for American public and capitalism.

  35. Little Critters by Identita · · Score: 1

    Oh my God, look what happened to Apollo 18!!! Now my grandmother is going get attacked since I left that rock on her desk! Quick call the NSA

    1. Re:Little Critters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only one Apollo 18 post... I am saddened by this, it was a decent horror movie.....

  36. "Missing" Moon Rocks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    From what I understand NASA was handing Moon Rocks out like party favors back during the Apollo missions because they though that space/moon travel was going to become commonplace. Unfortunately things changed and now these rocks are a precious commodity. Because they were handed out in such a cavalier manor I find this whole "they're government property" claim to be rather dubious. Its like some rich guy handing out hundred dollar bills while he's swimming in money, and when hard times hit he claims all of that money was temporary loans because he verbally joked with some people that they owed him the money back.

  37. Old NASA was well run? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    People talk about NASA in the time of the Apollo program as a well oiled machine that could do no wrong. Well, here's evidence that it was a bureaucratic disaster. It's easy to look back with rose colored glasses and say the shuttle era was a mess, but in reality maybe it was always that way?

    1. Re:Old NASA was well run? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Interesting

      People talk about NASA in the time of the Apollo program as a well oiled machine that could do no wrong. Well, here's evidence that it was a bureaucratic disaster. It's easy to look back with rose colored glasses and say the shuttle era was a mess, but in reality maybe it was always that way?

      Bureaucracies are always a mess. Strip the facade behind any complicated human activity and you will find confusion, graft, incompetence and sloth. NASA has 'lost' lots of things - Apollo tapes, pieces parts, data. They've made grevious engineering errors (ie, Apollo 1).

      Archival processes are very expensive and when you are more focused about doing things than preserving what you did, it isn't surprising that you can't account for everything.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  38. Aperture Science by Joe+Jay+Bee · · Score: 1

    They had to make that conversion gel somehow.

  39. Can someone say cover up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just part of the vast cover up that is the faked moon landings. Of course the rocks are missing we never got them!

  40. A Sad, sad state of affairs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I have never understood why the United States does not have a Museum of the Moon - just for the moon and NOTHING ELSE. For God's sake, it's the only other planet people have walked on.
    All of the stuff we brought back from that other planet and all of the stuff we used to get there and back should be showcased for everyone in the world to see. The moon rocks should be right up there with the Constitution or Old Ironsides. Heck, those things should be enshrined like pieces of the True Cross. THIS IS THE BIGGEST THING THAT MAN HAS EVER DONE. The artifacts of that accomplishment should not be treated like a rock collection.

  41. Mice took it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And ate it. They thought it was cheese.

  42. Having been into the lunar sample vault... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I did an internship with a space industry contractor in the summer of 2005 and worked alongside their DBAs, mostly working on the database that was being used for inventory management. Partway through the summer, the lab in charge of the lunar material contacted the group I was working with regarding an update to their database. They wanted to migrate everything they had from the, I believe, late '70s DEC machines that they were still running with a hierarchal database system I had never heard of (I recall seeing some output that looked vaguely COBOL-like) to MS SQL Server 2000. There had been a failed attempt to migrate to FoxPro sometime in the early '90s, from what I heard, but they had scrapped it and just stayed with what they had in the end. At the time they were calling us, they were worried that something might fail and that they'd lose it all.

    In order to better understand their organizational system, we got to don bunny suits and head into the vault where all of the samples are kept at Johnson Space Center. It was pretty fun getting a chance to go around, peek into cabinets, and just see how it was all stored in perfect condition. Since the samples they loan out to scientists need to have their origins tracked and new samples are created by breaking old ones, the samples are labeled with an increasingly long identifier as they are broken down. To give a quick (and slightly oversimplified) example, an initial sample brought back from the moon may have been labeled A. After it was broken in two, the two samples were A-1 and A-2. When the first one was broken in three, it became A-1-a, A-1-b, and A-1-c. Each of those is referred to as a sample, even though they may have originated from a single sample, and since samples can be created outside of the immediate vicinity of NASA's personnel, it's not really surprising that some samples have gone missing. Hell, NASA requires that every speck of dust be returned as a sample as well.

    At the time, I think they had said that roughly 90 or 95% of the samples brought back are still in pristine, untouched condition, and are being preserved in a nitrogen-rich atmosphere to prevent oxidation. So even with all of these samples lost, the vast majority of it still exists and has yet to be studied by anyone.

    Also, I didn't realize it, but NASA has all of the samples that the Soviets brought back from the moon with their unmanned lunar missions. Those are kept in one part of the vault, separate from the ones retrived by the American missions. Neat little fact that I didn't know at the time that I went into the vault.

    1. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Also, I didn't realize it, but NASA has all of the samples that the Soviets brought back from the moon with their unmanned lunar missions. Those are kept in one part of the vault, separate from the ones retrived by the American missions. Neat little fact that I didn't know at the time that I went into the vault.

      Wonder how that happened ...

      "Hey, anyone speak Russian? I've got a "Boris" on the phone here. I think he's saying something about trading rocks for a green card and a bottle of vodka ..."

    2. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      It was probably FORTRAN. They do everything in FORTRAN. They like to pretend they don't anymore, but they still do.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    3. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      I can confidently say that it wasn't FORTRAN. One of my earlier internships in the space industry had me learn FORTRAN for a weather modeling and meteorological app I was helping to support (I don't think they use FORTRAN much these days), which, strangely enough, has come up as being useful a number of other times (e.g. I later was the TA for the FORTRAN course the last semester it was offered at Texas A&M University). Plus, as I said, this was some output from a database, so it wasn't a programming language at all. I was merely describing it as COBOL-like, which is how another DBA I was working with described it at the time when she saw it. I don't know COBOL, so I had nothing else to compare it against, since it looked alien to me.

    4. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      To give a quick (and slightly oversimplified) example, an initial sample brought back from the moon may have been labeled A. After it was broken in two, the two samples were A-1 and A-2. When the first one was broken in three, it became A-1-a, A-1-b, and A-1-c.

      Ah, the migrations may have failed in the past, but we have the technology to do the sample management efficiently now! Simply replace the existing sample management system with Bitcoin technology. It works the exact same way! Plus, it wouldn't affect the actual worth of Bitcoin in any way. Everything would stay just as speculative!

    5. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was Datatrieve. "COBOL-like output:" :)

    6. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      I ran into the JPL's CSPICE library at work a while back. Turns out they just ran their SPICE library through a code converter, to convert the original FORTRAN into C. I don't get the feeling it was all that long ago (Mebbie a decade heh heh heh.) Looking at the public NGA GPS satellte ephemeris files, it kind of looks like they were barfed out by a FORTRAN program too, and are intended to be read the same way. It seems you can't go very far in that industry without running into something someone wrote in FORTRAN.

      I vaguely recall taking a class on WATFIV, which is essentially FORTRAN, back in the 80s in a college summer program. The course on assembly was really much more interesting though. I still have the book for that one.

      Of course the name of the game back in the day was fixed length records, potentially with a indicator to indicate which record type you were reading. I was thinking, as I looked over aforementioned ephemeris files, that I could read that a damnsight faster than the XML it's bound to be replaced with in 10-15 years. The data is more machine readable, which is not terribly surprising. It's also more human-readable, which may be. XML was supposed to be self-documenting, but it adds so much crap in the way of actual data that I find it impossible to read it on its own.

      There's nothing inherently wrong with FORTRAN or fixed length records, if they get the job done. I think somewhere they must still program like that.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    7. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by tqft · · Score: 1

      ADABAS ?

      --
      The Singularity is closer than you think
      Quant
    8. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Unlikely. As I said, I don't remember much, but I believe they were DEC machines, which Wikipedia doesn't mention as being supported by ADABAS, and we were also going to have to write our own custom migration scripts since we couldn't just output some SQL files, which ADABAS can apparently do. I do recall that it was a hierarchal database, since that struck me at the time as unusual, given that I had only dealt with relational databases up to then.

    9. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, I didn't realize it, but NASA has all of the samples that the Soviets brought back from the moon with their unmanned lunar missions. Those are kept in one part of the vault, separate from the ones retrived by the American missions. Neat little fact that I didn't know at the time that I went into the vault.

      Wonder how that happened ...

      Actually, Reagan and Gorbachev had a side bet on the Cold War.

    10. Re:Having been into the lunar sample vault... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Spot-on! Now that I've heard the name, I recognize it, since I mistakenly heard it as "Datatree" back when it was first mentioned on the job. I recall being embarrassed when I later found out it was "trieve" not "tree".

      Thanks!

  43. I need them for my by geekoid · · Score: 1

    googlephonics system.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  44. Lost? Yeah right by zmooc · · Score: 1

    That's what I'd say if I'd led the world to believe I brought back lots of rocks from the moon while they were in fact little moonturtles that simply escaped from my lab.

    --
    0x or or snor perron?!
  45. Re:Oh Waa, NASA Doesn't Have Any More Moon Rocks! by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it's NASA's fault~

    Please explain to your son congress controls that, and tell him it's important to vote for people who understand how critical space exploration is.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  46. Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a secret space program that shits on NASA. Your tax dollars fund it, but you aren't allowed to know about it.

    This is why I laugh at the most pitiful stupid shit like this.

  47. Old NASA was well run. by dtmos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, back in the day it was exactly the opposite. Everyone was totally focused on one goal -- getting to the Moon by 31 December 1969. Since neither the task at hand nor the time to complete it were changing, plenty of people were hired and plenty of money was spent, to be sure, but that situation also meant that any bureaucratic baloney was ignored, sidestepped, or waived. People's reputations were on the line, and nobody wanted to be part of the group/division/company/organization that kept the country from reaching the moon first. Whoever was deemed responsible for that could look forward to a lifetime of testimony before congressional investigative committees, not to mention the nation on a never-ending series of Walter Cronkite prime time Special Reports.

    Not to mention not being able to get another job in your profession for the rest of your life. Being Steve Bartman would be a step up.

    After 1973, however, NASA was a different entity. When a pie is growing, as NASA was in the 1960s, nobody bothers to erect any bureaucratic fences, since there's plenty of work for everyone. When the pie shrinks, however, people start trying to stake out their remaining territory, and the end is near.

  48. The problem is: No Nazis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, this is going to be a xkcd reference:

    http://xkcd.com/984/

    Without Nazis who do it for them, they cannot do it. D'uh. Good luck reaching Mars!

    1. Re:The problem is: No Nazis by k6mfw · · Score: 1
      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
  49. moon rock? Prove it by buback · · Score: 1

    "Wanna see my moon rock? take a look at that!"
    "What do you mean it looks like a piece of gravel from the driveway?"
    "Where did i get it? off ebay, why?"

    end scene:
    So the whole point of having a moon rock is showing it off, like a diamond. The act of proving it's a moon rock (e.g. sending it to a lab for testing) would probably end with it being confiscated from you. If you can't prove it's a moon rock, it might as well be any old piece of gravel, of which we have trillions right hear on earth.

  50. So, ask the Russians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they'll build another Luna 16.

  51. Re:I use to keep better track... by Caerdwyn · · Score: 1

    Keep your hands to yourself, sneak-thief.

    --
    Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
  52. Punishment by pesho · · Score: 2

    I suggest NASA be immediately punished by being made to go back on the moon and get enough rocks to replace the ones they lost.

  53. Well are they using them for anything? by Nationless · · Score: 1

    Well are they using them for anything or are they just sitting in warehouses gathering dust? Because I wouldn't feel too bad stealing a moon rock which isn't currently doing any good or garnering any attention in some box Raiders-of-the-lost-ark-style. If I knew they were actively being used for Science(tm) then I would be a whole lot more apprehensive about it.

    From the article:
    In two cases, one researcher still had nine lunar samples he borrowed 35 years ago and another had 10 chunks of meteorites he kept for 14 years. Neither had ever worked on them. Another researcher had 36 moon samples and kept them for 16 years after he had finished his research.

    It doesn't exactly sound like they're in very high demand for research either... They're just novelties at this point. Just focus on getting us some Mars rocks that we can catalogue and promptly forgotten about.

  54. I know where start... by chinton · · Score: 1

    Is NASA sure Edgar Mitchell doesn't have them, too?

  55. Re:Oh Waa, NASA Doesn't Have Any More Moon Rocks! by DamienNightbane · · Score: 0

    How about we just ignore Congress and go anyway? If Congress doesn't have to use real money, why should NASA?

  56. Cat litter by sourcerror · · Score: 2

    I'm just hoping they won't end in a litterbox.

  57. Re:Oh Waa, NASA Doesn't Have Any More Moon Rocks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pfft, at that point, you might as well explain that his vote will be meaningless, unless he has the mountains of money needed to convince the proles to do something other than what the TV tells them to do.

  58. Unique? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to question just how unique of resource they are. The moon is huge, 1/4 the size of the Earth !

  59. So I'm not the only one who's getting old by suspiciously_calm · · Score: 1

    Since 1970. That's 40, not 30, years.

  60. Apollo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe the rocks were actually spiders that crawled away when no one was looking (Apollo anyone??). Tee hee

  61. Steve Martin wasn't kidding! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He really DID get a stereo (wow, TWO speakers!) with a moon-nock..rock needle. Aw, shit!

  62. Go back to the fucking moon and get more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sheesh

    Sell the damn things on ebay to pay for it.

  63. No problem. Get more. by edibobb · · Score: 1

    There are lots more where those came from -- we should go get a few loads.

  64. Misread ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... rocks at rockets (quite early here ;)) and was totally like "holy crap, who can steal 500 rockets and get away with it ... and why does nasa even have so many?" :D

  65. Re:Oh Waa, NASA Doesn't Have Any More Moon Rocks! by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    Congress combined couldn't identify a space probe from the contents in a box of suppositories.

    I have to believe it is NASA's fault, they're smarter than we are, ask'em. For starters, ISS could be used as a space platform to assemble space vehicles, it's not. The moon has more Helium3 than common sense allows for; laying on the ground. One would think that after 50 years, there would more human presence on the moon than a foot print. Post Space Shuttle development? Looks like someone went to the basement at KSC and photo shopped the blue prints from the Apollo hardware. Does anyone at NASA know that Burt Rutan's initial designs for low earth orbit launching literally blows the doors off of anything NASA has done since then. As for telescopes, not many city lights are on the moon. As for physical issues of living on the moon, we don't know because NASA won't go.

  66. Buy Replacements? by bradorsomething · · Score: 1

    Maybe the Chinese can go get us some? (It saddens me that I can say this and it's not a troll.)