This is a truly mind-boggling thread.
DavidC, if you are intent on dismissing any written and published evidence provided by an expert because "they could be lying" then hasn't it occurred to you that exactly that same argument could be used to dismiss all of these videos etc. that you keep linking to. They also could be lying.
How do you plan to assess the honesty of a geologist who has published a paper on his examination of the moon rocks and assessment that they are actually from the moon?
If you cannot do that then all you have is "they could be lying".
Is it not more appropriate to accord other human beings (particularly peer reviewed scientific experts) the benefits of an assumption of honesty unless you actually have evidence that they are dishonest?
And, even if there is evidence that they are genuinely and seriously dishonest, they could still be telling the truth about the moon rocks - that would be the point of peer review of course. And no one lies 100% of the time.
If you are really claiming that all of the geological papers written about the moon rocks are lies, how has that deception been maintained for all this time in the face of NASA's willingness to allow research on the samples by any expert that requests it.
Let's face it, Hwang Woo-Suk was incapable of maintaining his little hoax for more than a few months.
Here's the story