Holland Moon-Rock Revealed !

[Kiwi]

If we compare the Apollo 17 sample collection with those from earlier missions is there a noticeable difference in "quality". By that I mean did the presence of a professional geologist on the lunar surface result in improved sample selection? I would have assumed it did but when looking through available post mission analysis reports I haven't seen anything which comments upon this.

You might find more about that subject, and in greater detail, by reading the entire Apollo 17 Lunar Surface Journal. There's plenty of information there about Jack Schmitt's capabilities as both Lunar Module Pilot and geologist, starting at just the third paragraph, Crew Selection. Such as:

Gene continues.

"Anyway, I know that there were people who thought that Jack had a lot to prove. He got the Apollo 17 assignment because he was a geologist and there were some people saying he wasn't an aviator, that he shouldn't fly, that he couldn't handle it. So Jack probably had a little cross to bear in proving to those people that, not only could he handle the geology - which came natural - but also that he could handle the other requirements of being a Lunar Module Pilot."

"Some time ago I told you that Jack was an 'adequate' pilot, and I want to clarify that. Jack in a T-38 was an adequate (airplane) pilot. He wasn't a great pilot, but he didn't have the experience to be a great pilot. And, quite frankly, I don't think he had the aptitude or the desire to be a great pilot. Jack flew airplanes in NASA because he had to fly. That was one of the squares to fill to get on the Moon. And that's not a knock. I flew with Jack in T-38's, and I think Jack was a safe and an adequate pilot. I don't think Jack thought he was the greatest pilot in the world. Most people who want to fly big-time or fly off aircraft carriers, if they're not a little arrogant and don't think they're the best pilot in the world, they should get in some other business. And, since we came back, Jack hasn't flown. To be a great pilot, you've got to think you can do it better than it had ever been done before. You know your limitations, but you have to be a little arrogant. I used to say, 'I dare the guidance system on the Apollo Saturn V to fail, because I can get us into orbit.' And if I didn't think I could get us into orbit, then I shouldn't have been there. And I knew I could land that lunar module closer than anybody else had done to their desired landing point. Whether I'm a few feet long or short, really didn't matter, but I had to go into that mission thinking that. It's the kind of arrogance - not egotism - that you have to have. And Jack didn't have that when it came to flying an airplane. Adequate is the word I used."

[Snip]

"Now, when it came to flying the lunar module, 'adequate' does not describe Jack's ability to fly in the righthand seat of the lunar module. He was outstanding."

[Snip]

"Jack knew the systems. He knew the AGS computer. He knew the PGNS computer. He knew the dynamics. He knew what we were going to be looking at. Now, when I say 'fly', Jack didn't have much of a chance to land it (in the simulators) and Jack didn't have much of a chance to fly the rendezvous, but that wasn't his job. He trained hard. He studied hard; and he worked hard. Jack was not an 'adequate' lunar module pilot; he jumped in with both feet and was an outstanding lunar module pilot. Now, contrast that with Joe Engle. Joe was born with a stick and rudder in his hand. Joe Engle is probably the finest stick and rudder aviator that I've ever flown with in my entire life. He could make an airplane do things that I don't have guts enough to make it do. So Joe was an outstanding aviator. In contrast, Joe was only an adequate lunar module pilot.

IIRC further on, during the EVAs, there are comments from Gene about Jack doing a better job of picking samples than he would have, and there are questions and comments from Eric Jones that are relevant to the subject.

[nweber]

a fake moon rock of unknown origin apparently means all Apollo (and Luna) samples are also fake.

Fido is a dog.

Fido has fleas.

Therefore, all dogs have fleas.

QED

When I see an argument on the internet, on either side of an issue, in which the conclusion actually follows from the premises, I am extremely surprised.  It's an extraordinarily rare event.

The particular fallacy that even many people with years or scientific or engineering training seem to love is that any argument with a true conclusion is valid.  If you demonstrate that the world is round by a fundamentally flawed method, and someone points it out, then they're obviously a flat-earther.

[Jason Thompson]

a fake moon rock of unknown origin apparently means all Apollo (and Luna) samples are also fake.

Fido is a dog.

Fido has fleas.

Therefore, all dogs have fleas.

QED

When I see an argument on the internet, on either side of an issue, in which the conclusion actually follows from the premises, I am extremely surprised.  It's an extraordinarily rare event.

The particular fallacy that even many people with years or scientific or engineering training seem to love is that any argument with a true conclusion is valid.  If you demonstrate that the world is round by a fundamentally flawed method, and someone points it out, then they're obviously a flat-earther.

The Doctor: All elephants are pink. Nelly is an elephant, therefore Nelly is pink. Logical?

Davros: Perfectly.

The Doctor: Hmm. You know what a human would say to that?

Tyssan: Elephants aren't pink...

- Destiny of the Daleks -