1
-1

[–] SaveTheChildren [S] 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Seriously, anyone with half a brain can see that all of those photos have in the least been edited to shit.

Where are the raw images?

None of those look convincing at all except for the regular satellite imagery of the ground.

You think this shot isn't edited in any way? http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/30/14/2FADE7B800000578-0-image-a-32_1451485652414.jpg

And then you need to explain to me why the stars are so visible in these shots, but the ISS live feed shows no stars. The inconsistency makes no sense.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

1
-1

[–] SaveTheChildren [S] 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Are you defending those pictures?

Explain the inconsistency. How come those pictures have stars, but the ISS feed doesn't?

Hurling insults isn't an argument, btw, in case you didn't know that.

I'm claiming that yes, those photos are edited. I think it's really obvious they are edited. Do you think they are un-edited? That first one has the earth with a spot light on it as if the sun is a flashlight 1/2 a foot off the screen. That's not how the sun's light works.

1
-1

[–] SaveTheChildren [S] 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Wtf is that spotlight on the earth in that first image?

You believe that those are all raw images?

0
0

[–] clamhurt_legbeard ago 

Let's read the caption:

That first one has the earth with a spot light on it as if the sun is a flashlight 1/2 a foot off the screen. That's not how the sun's light works.

2
-2

[–] SaveTheChildren [S] 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

I'm still calling photoshop BS. It looks like a spotlight.

And again, if we can see stars in this image, why don't we see stars on the ISS feed?