Just so I understand, are you saying that the different images are not images of the same features, and therefore not of the same places on the moon? In other words, is it a bit like seeing different images of the earth from different angles, and confusing England with Japan?
I didn't understand the bit about Kermit the Frog. Why would we confuse the moon with a frog?
Some of the features are the same; if you draw on a circle and rotate it away, you will still see those features. This isn't like the model of a rotating Earth because it is a singular basically flat face that's visible, and rotating away, hence the change of shape. But yes, in general they're not the same locations, and they don't look it.
Kermit it just brought up because of how the images were overlaid. Whole new features were added to the crescent that were not actually visible because they existed on the full moon laid over it. By that logic you could overlay the image of a full moon on anything, like Kermit, and identify features that way.
What matters is what is actually seen.
You are identifying and connecting features that do not exist on the crescent, and are only visible because you overlaid the two. You could do the same to argue that the moon is Kermit the frog.
Hahaha. JRowe sees two picture of the same object in different conditions and can't detect the similarities. The crescent moon picture was taken with higher resolution than the other and therefore shows more detail, but JRowe believes that the "coarseness at the edge of the underside" means that the moon shows different faces at different times.
To top it off, when a helpful person rotates the image and draws lines to make the matching feature obvious, JRowe calls foul with the typical flat-earth you used CGI on the image. Classic!
JRowe, if you can't understand that the side of the Moon facing Earth is always the same, you're not going to generate credibility for your other viewpoints. Especially when you show us a picture of them looking the same and then claim louder that they are different.
You are more than welcome to look at other images of the crescent moon. Coarseness along the border is universally visible.
I didn't call CGI, I pointed out that
he literally overlaid the full moon onto the crescent moon. He is drawing lines from an image of the full moon to an image of the full moon, why are you attaching significance to the fact that they match? What is it you imagine he did?
Instead of your typical blind REer scorn on anything that dares be different, how about an honest analysis of the situation? I note you ignore the fact that I responded to that image by again posting the original crescent to point out that the features he's drawing a line between objectively do not exist on the image of the crescent, and instead only exist on the image of the full moon that
he overlaid. Yes I'm calling foul because overlaying the image of the full moon is
exactly what he did. If you disagree, please correct me, how do you think he laid one image on top of the other and created whole new features that it is trivial to see did not exist in the original?
I mean for god's sake you can literally see the lines of the full moon's outline. This is hardly rocket science.
He drew lines from an image of a full moon to an image of the same full moon. Why are you acting as though this is evidence?!