So just to confirm then.... You are officially abandoning your entire argument for why this photo is fake (the lack of stars) and pivoting to something entirely new?

You said sunlight is dimmer than a streetlight.

It's hard to win a debate with a smart person. But it's impossible to win a debate with an idiot. Good day to you sir.

But there is something in this frame and you still said it's proof it's fake. Which means you obviously know jack shit about cameras and photography, which means you're not qualified to interpret any other photos either.

Besides this, it is possible to see bright lights in the background even though a bright object is in the foreground.

Stars are not "bright lights".... They are so dim you have to sit in total darkness for 20+ mins in order for your pupils to adjust enough to get a good view of them.

Try viewing daylight with dilated pupils... You'll go blind.

Get it? It's not even close to the same level of brightness. They are so far apart your eyes have to physically adjust to protect you from injury.

Let me explain it again...

There is a device called a "light meter".... It can objectively measure the brightness of an object.

Put a white suit in direct sun light.... And point the light meter at the suit.

Then point the same light meter at a street light at night...

The suit will be brighter....

Dynamic range means the camera has to select which area of the image it's focusing on. It can either capture the detail in the dark areas, at the expense of turning the light areas all white. Or it can capture the light areas, at the expense of turning the dark areas all black.

It can not photograph both at the same time because that's not how cameras work.

Goalpost stays, in "space" the stars would be extremely bright and you would be able to see them if you had real photographs

Then you should also be able to see them when focused on a street light, since a street light is dimmer than a white suit being hit by the sun.

Take the picture and prove me wrong.

Moving goalposts... How much would I bet that your grasp on physics is as laughable as your understanding of photography? A lot.

Blah blah blah... You say you know its fake but you don't even know how photos are supposed to work.

A person in white reflecting DIRECT SUNLIGHT is going to be brighter than a street lamp at night.

If the street lamp keeps you from seeing the stars, then you have NO CHANCE of seeing them when the focal point of the photograph is being lit up by the sun.

The fact that the astronaut is not completely bleached out as a massive white blob is the reason you can't see any stars. Because that's what it would take for them to show up in the photo.

Go directly under a street light and take a photo facing straight up. Make sure the camera is focused on the light.

Let us know if you can see any stars in the periphery of image, and share your results here.

There is something called dynamic range on cameras. The camera can only photograph light that falls within that range. anything brighter comes out as pure white, and anything darker comes out as pure black.

You can test this by having a friend stand next to a sunny window in a room with no other light sources and photograph them with your phone.

When you tap the person's face your phone will adjust the dynamic range so you can view their face, but you will notice that doing so will turn view from the window completely white. If you focus on the window your phone will adjust again and you should be able to get a view of what's outside, but then your friends face will be very dark and might not be visible.

In this photo you have an astronaut wearing white illuminated by direct sunlight. The stars in the background are very dim by comparison and are outside of the cameras light range.

Since the beginning of time right of conquest has dictated that land rightfully belongs to whoever has the military force to control it.

I love how calling everything a jewish conspiracy with no evidence or even explanation of the conspiracy is not a "falsehood", but calling it out is.

If it's a falsehood, then explain this conspiracy to me on a timeframe longer than 1 day.

Funny because the first time I got it, I did not know the name covid 19, as it was in late January of 2020 before all of the hysteria started. I got totally knocked on my ass by it for like 2 weeks.

Once I was well enough to go out again, I voluntarily wore a mask for a few days just to try and reduce the chances of giving it to someone else.

This was before the mask hysteria, before the media demanded you wear a mask, before the media demanded you NOT wear a mask, before masks were political, and before I realized I could've made a ton of profit scalping masks.

I never wore a mask before to stop people from catching a cold or the flu. But that was my instinct with this.

At the time I was not under the impression it was a common cold even if I didn't put a name to it.

The next times I got it I had to seek urgent medical attention for being unable to breathe, which again is something that has never happened to me with a common cold.

So I can either believe my own body when it told me the sickness I was experiencing was something totally new and serious that it had never encountered before.

Or I can believe some idiot on the internet who tells me it was just like every other common cold I've had many times before.

Who do you think I'm gonna believe?

Is that why you can't explain their master plan on a timeframe longer than a day? Cause they made you poor?

What is the objective of that control? What behavior do the jews hope to influence you into doing?

Were my illnesses fake?

That makes those pics real?

The tests don't work anyways... 3 out of the 4 times Ive had it, I tested negative despite manifesting severe symptoms.

You're going back to "KoChS PoStULatES" again?

Previously, when I showed you that "postulate" means "assumption" and that authority figure you were citing didn't even stick to his own assumptions you completely dropped that argument, and pivoted to something new.

Yet that was your main argument. The FIRST thing you presented when asked for justification of your beliefs.

A set of random assumptions from some idiot in the 1800s... A naked and overt argument from authority that you would never in a million years accept if it was made against your position.

Any logical person can tell that you're full of shit based on the simple fact that instead of presenting and explaining positive evidence in favor of your position, all you do is attempt to undermine evidence for the other position, as if somehow that makes your position stronger.

It doesn't... It just shows you have no evidence to prop up your position so the only way you think you can make it stand taller is to try and knock down the opposing argument.

But you have proven over and over that you absolutely refuse to do any experiments that could possibly support your argument. As that's where our debates always end.... Me telling you to go out there and prove that you're immune to viral infections in some way, and you refusing to do it.

Your entire position boils down to an argument from personal incredulity, because you can't possibly imagine how an experiment 100 years ago could have failed. And if you can't imagine how it could fail, that means viruses aren't real.

Yet you yourself are not volunteering to replicate the experiment with modern flu or covid patients, despite the fact that would be trivial and easy.

And no doubt you are ignoring a massive wealth of data and experiments from the last 100 years that would discredit your position, but they all don't count for some reason probably because they are part of a jew conspiracy to make you think viruses are real, to keep your country in debt or something.

Strange that you don't expect Spanish flu patients to transmit a contagious poison that will give you Spanish flu.

But yet you do expect to an HIV patient to transmit a contagious poison that will give you HIV.... But definitely not a virus...

Just a contagious poison moving from one person's body to another causing a specific disease.... 🤣

Does a bullet kill you? Herpa durr....

I have no clue what it is contaminated with but something is causing the disease so it could be in the blood also.

Kind of stupid to call a virus fake, acknowledge the disease is real, and then say you have no idea what's causing it. Obviously you know what's causing it, that's why you won't take the blood.

As every other possible contaminate is something that's within your power to control for and eliminate from the experiment, yet you still won't do it.