Do I have to explain to you that sun does not rise behind the moon? Nor is it behind the moon at night.
Can you explain why every search engine returns composites for the terms "moon sunrise", while the moon is often visible during the day, making this a commonly photographed phenomenon?"
I'm not going to call myself a great artist or anything but here's a simplified diagram of how your perspective relative to the moon changes how much of the reflection you can see. https://imgur.com/a/hkWd2MG
Obviously looking at it from different angles is how you see full, 3/4, 1/2, and 1/4 reflections on a sphere. This should inform your perspective of how you see the moon at different positions in it's revolution around the earth. Not sure why the Earth's rotation or your position relative to the equator would have anything to do with it.
Then clearly you can provide an image that gives us a crescent shaped lighting on a sphere.
https://www.google.com/search?q=shpere+rendering&tbm=isch
Take your time. Any image will do.
Here you go. https://imgur.com/a/4Nx5OId
Amazing. Now put the light source in front of the sphere, and not behind it. While accomplish the same effect.
https://communities.win/c/Conspiracies/p/17sOxE5QtV/not-reflecting/c/4Z8k2php6We
Do I have to explain to you that sun does not rise behind the moon? Nor is it behind the moon at night.
Can you explain why every search engine returns composites for the terms "moon sunrise", while the moon is often visible during the day, making this a commonly photographed phenomenon?"
I'm not going to call myself a great artist or anything but here's a simplified diagram of how your perspective relative to the moon changes how much of the reflection you can see. https://imgur.com/a/hkWd2MG
And if we were 2 dimensional beings, I would have to relent.
So am I to assume, you did not render the earlier image?
Obviously looking at it from different angles is how you see full, 3/4, 1/2, and 1/4 reflections on a sphere. This should inform your perspective of how you see the moon at different positions in it's revolution around the earth. Not sure why the Earth's rotation or your position relative to the equator would have anything to do with it.
Of course. Position is relevant, when you cite it, but not me. The sun is Schrodinger's light source.
And for some reason you are bringing up the equator, when I was not discussing it at at all?
And I am now realizing that you are not u/MindlessRationality.
Which explains why your hollow argument doesn't match up with his.
In fact, neither of you have addressed a single thing I have said.
Why is that?