what evidence do you have that it is a composite image, other than its existence destroys your argument? The shadows look right to me, and why bother photoshopping something that occurs all of the time, (a bright moonlit night) As I asked before, is there an image you will accept? quit throwing out red herring distractions about having an extensive citation on a photo and just admit that we have all seen bright moonlit nights and that arguing against that is so trollish, its ridiculous. If I was trying to prove the existence of a horse by showing a picture, would your demands be so outlandish? I guess they would have to be if you were arguing that horses did not exist. I also love how the picture of the tops is being totally ignored. Nice job there.
http://www.spaceweather.com/archive.php?view=1&day=13&month=01&year=2009Once again, Ice skaters, in motion, are they holding that pose for overexposure? If this one isn't good enough for you, with its source, nothing will be. Calling "fake" isn't an argument, it's a cop out. Like I said before, it isn't good enough for you when we call FE fake, why do you expect it to be for me?