Luna - your condescending accusations to those who don't see what you see are a hypocritical statement. Since you self admittedly state you are not a
learned man then you need to understand how to structure an argument if you want people to agree or respectfully disagree with you. You cannot make
broad statements that people choose to be blind because you are formulating a very poor and subjective argument in your thread.
You are presenting an argument in this thread. Your argument is you feel you have found photographic evidence there are non naturally formed
structures on the Moon that NASA is intentionally hiding. In an argument you traditionally present premises. In order for the conclusion of your
argument to be true then all of your supporting premises must also be true. For example if you were to present 4 premises but 1 of those premises
were proven to be untrue then the entire argument is rendered untrue. In order for your conclusion to be true i.e. "NASA is hiding (through
photographic manipulation) structures on the Moon" then all of your supporting premises must also be true.
You have not even presented one premise. State what your premises are. Here are the ones I see you need to present and how you should provide
1. Premise: NASA manipulates Moon photos.
- Show a Moon photo such as you have where you show the Moon's surface is intentionally over exposed.
2. Premise: Once a Moon photo is "corrected" additional features become visible.
- Show how in the "corrected" version of the same Moon photo how we can see more surface features compared to the original over exposed photo.
3. Premise: There are surface anomalies on the on the Moon that appear to be something other than naturally formed.
- Show pictures with clearly labeled examples of the areas you feel are not naturally formed.
4. Premise: The surface anomalies appear to be similar to certain man made structures we can find on Earth.
- Show pictures of the corresponding Moon photo with the clearly labeled surface anomaly and state what you think it is. Provide an additional Earth
bound photo supporting your claim. Example: In photo 1 in the NW area of the surface of the Moon there appears to be a mining crane. Then show a
picture of an Earth mining crane so we can make a visual comparison.
These are just some examples. Where you are going to run into an inability to PROVE some of your premises are true is where the photographic evidence
you present is not clear and concise. That means that without question we can all positively identify what a specific surface anomaly is. Most of
the pictures you have posted in this thread are 100% subjective. That means it is 100% open to interpretation and is 100% inconclusive. Do not use
any photos of this nature because you will automatically discredit your entire argument. Only choose photos where there is a clear and concise
surface anomaly and we can clearly correlate it to a similar man made structure found on Earth.
And unless you can come up with high definition Moon photos (which you cannot) then at best this argument will only prove to be plausible. At best it
will be plausible. Just follow the basic rules of argument.
Thanks for the thread.
BTW...check out this web page. It is in Danish but you can translate it using Google translate. There are some very compelling pictures here.