There are moon rocks on earth, especially in Antarctica (because they are easier to see.) There are also martian rocks on earth.
All of which, as has already been pointed out to you, show clear indications of unprotected passage through the atmosphere at high speed and having sat unprotected in the environment of Earth for an indeterminate number of hours, days or years. Do you wish to claim that a geologist can't tell the difference between a rock that has been subjected to that kind of treatment from one that has been picked up from an airless environment and stored under vacuum until examined on Earth in the lab? Do you also wish to explain the soil and core tube samples from Apollo, which are even less easily brushed under the carpet as meteorites?
Russia has moon rocks they brought back from unmanned missions (which means if the Apollo moon rocks actually came from the moon, it does not prove we put a man on the moon.)
Yes, Russia did bring back some soil and small rocks. Their sample return capacity was orders of magnitude poorer than Apollo. Where is the evidence of the incredible unmanned sample return capability that can include rocks the size of a football and three-metre long core tubes that would be required to explain the Apollo haul if it were not collected by manned missions?
Also, if an unmanned sample return capability did exist, as you are now suggesting, what was so much harder about a manned one?
Scientists also say the moon was knocked off as a chunk of the earth, which means moon rocks are made of the same material as earth rocks.
With differences caused by the very different ways the two bodies developed after that event. An event, by the way, that was hypothesised as a direct result of studying the Apollo lunar rock and soil samples.
So FORGET your moon rock theory.
As you have forgotten to respond to the question about your engineering colleagues from companies that were heavily involved in Apollo and the space program at the time?
As far as the LEM having a rendezvous radar, the radar-guided Patriot missile during the Gulf War missed 9 out of 10 targets. That was 1991.
Prove that the challenge of guiding an unmanned surface to air missile towards an aircraft travelling at high speed and capable of attempting to evade it is even remotely comparable to the challenge of providing radar information to human pilots co-operating in bringing together two nearly co-orbital spacecraft with approach rates measured in the low feet per second range, and you might begin to have a point there.
You are still evidently labouring under your misconception that the LM liftoff and docking was something like a missile shot. Why?
Also, perhaps you could tell us how precisely the patriot missile needed to know its launch co-ordinates in order to find its target. Or did it simply go off in roughly the right direction and use the radar to actively find the target aircraft?
