More evidence...

...for the conspiracy.  I wonder how many other moon rocks would come up negative.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,549764,00.html?test=latestnews

  Where in that article does it imply that any of the "lost" moon rocks are suspected to be fake?  And how is the recipient losing track of their moon rocks NASA's fault?

Because its awful convenient to lose almost 90% of the supposed rocks that are out NASA's hands.

Because its awful convenient to lose almost 90% of the supposed rocks that are out NASA's hands.

Almost suspiciously convenient...

Because its awful convenient to lose almost 90% of the supposed rocks that are out NASA's hands.

  What's so convenient about it?

I fail to see any evidence or proof there.

Actually, considering the value of the rocks, I'm pretty sure everyone is finding it terribly inconvenient.

Furthermore, this article actually has nothing to do with any conspiracy. It is an article about how a Dutch museum mistakenly displayed a piece of petrified wood thinking it was a moon rock.

The article goes on to further explore the current state of bonafide moon rocks, and finds out that NASA never kept track of the rocks they handed out. I'm not sure where Wardogg got the figure 90% from (as it doesn't feature in the article), but regardless it is misleading as the vast majority of moon rocks (295 kg) were kept by NASA and loaned to scientists or museums periodically. It mentions the high value of black market moon rocks and states that, given the nature of the black market, the authenticity of such moon rocks should be called into question.

and not to put too finer point on it, but if I was in charge of a conspiracy to fool the world into thinking that we've been to the moon when we haven't, the last thing I would do is hand out hundreds of samples of fake moon rocks to other countries and not keep track of them.