I have no idea what you're talking about or the 'blob' you refer to. WTF are you on about?
inconsistent lighting between photos:
Oh this one again? Hey fuck wit, it's called reflectivity. The moon's surface reflects light onto shadowy areas. The apature of the camera also changes so some photos are different than others. If you know photography you know why. People who don't know (like you) invent conspiracy bull shit facts they know shit about.
micrometeorites decades ago
Baseless conjecture without anyone of any credentials that support you.
As in Flat Earth, you morons invent shit up and claim 'science fact' when none of you know anything, you don't have any degrees in science nor do you have anyone of any accreditation to support you. Come back with someone with more than a grade 12 education and an armchair to support your claims.
You've made no real points here, and launched straight into ad hominem, which is telling.
I'll just address one point:
Because the moon does not have spy satellites orbiting around it.
I'll just quote from the link I provided, since you probably didn't read it:
Since 2009, the LRO’s camera (LROC) has been mapping the lunar surface with resolutions of between 1m/pixel and 0.5m/pixel. In 2011, NASA announced that LRO had briefly descended in altitude and returned pictures of 0.25m/pixel.
For comparison, the cameras aboard the privately owned GeoEye-1 satellite have a resolution of 0.41m/pixel and are perfectly capable of distinctly resolving cars and humans from an altitude of nearly 700km (435.7miles).3
While bearing in mind that the ISRO probe is even more capable than the GeoEye, it is also true to say that having stated that the Apollo lunar landing sites were imaged by the LROC from a distance of 50km (31miles) at 0.5-meter resolution, the NASA images of these locations should be able to show any hardware present at these sites in distinct detail.
Yet the only LROC images that NASA has released since 2009 show a few white or gray pixels. Some are better than others, but generally they leave much open for interpretation.
1 meter per pixel looks exactly what this image looks like. You can see the lander, footprints and other items left behind. What's your problem? Can't understand reality?
Even if we assume those arbitrary low-res lines aren't made by microsoft paint, all that proves is that there is in unmanned robot on the moon. Same as the one Russia put there. Same as the one China put there. It does NOT prove we put men on the moon and got them back safely. Got any more evidence? No ya don't faggot lmao
Yes there is. FFS - you might want to think before you post that what you say is 100% wrong.
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/images/index.html
Because the moon does not have spy satellites orbiting around it. Gee, again, your injection of "things you know nothing about" is telling. They do today https://www.space.com/12030-moon-photos-nasa-lunar-reconnaissance-orbiter.html
I have no idea what you're talking about or the 'blob' you refer to. WTF are you on about?
Oh this one again? Hey fuck wit, it's called reflectivity. The moon's surface reflects light onto shadowy areas. The apature of the camera also changes so some photos are different than others. If you know photography you know why. People who don't know (like you) invent conspiracy bull shit facts they know shit about.
Baseless conjecture without anyone of any credentials that support you.
As in Flat Earth, you morons invent shit up and claim 'science fact' when none of you know anything, you don't have any degrees in science nor do you have anyone of any accreditation to support you. Come back with someone with more than a grade 12 education and an armchair to support your claims.
You've made no real points here, and launched straight into ad hominem, which is telling.
I'll just address one point:
I'll just quote from the link I provided, since you probably didn't read it:
1 meter per pixel looks exactly what this image looks like. You can see the lander, footprints and other items left behind. What's your problem? Can't understand reality?
https://imageio.forbes.com/blogs-images/startswithabang/files/2018/12/584398main_M168353795RE_25cm_AP12_area-1200x900.jpg?format=jpg&width=960
Are you so incompetent that you couldn't replicate that image in MS paint in 30 seconds? Figures.
why would I want to do that?
lmao you're such a simp for the deep state
imagine thinking this image is proof that men landed on the moon and returned safely to earth: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_feature/public/thumbnails/image/vikram_ejecta_1100px_scalebar.png
Well yeah, that's a lame ass photo. But this one is not:
https://imageio.forbes.com/blogs-images/startswithabang/files/2018/12/584398main_M168353795RE_25cm_AP12_area-1200x900.jpg?format=jpg&width=960
Even if we assume those arbitrary low-res lines aren't made by microsoft paint, all that proves is that there is in unmanned robot on the moon. Same as the one Russia put there. Same as the one China put there. It does NOT prove we put men on the moon and got them back safely. Got any more evidence? No ya don't faggot lmao