Flat Earthers in Shambles Over India Moon Landing
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 лип 2024
- Once again, the flat earthers are in shambles, but this time from the recent moon landing from India's space program.
Support me on Patreon: www.patreon.com/user?u=3308388
Follow me on Twitter: / stickprofessor
Become a Member: / @professorstick
Check out my merch: teespring.com/stores/professo...
Original Video: • India Becomes 4th Coun...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAIR USE NOTICE:
This video may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
I mean, the first clip of the landing is actually CGI. It's a model for the purpose of visualization. Because if it was real footage, they'd have to land, set up the camera, take off, and then land again to get it on camera (or have a second lander). But the landing was real and so was the footage with the solar panel
Well said!
and how do you know that the landing was real?
because someone told you it was?
how could you prove it?
@@axeman2638 and how do you know that the landing was fake?
because someone told you it was?
how could you prove it?
@@axeman2638 People who claim the landing didn't happen are making a claim that needs evidence as well. In fact, they are making an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence. They are claiming that thousands of people are involved in a conspiracy of some kind.
In general, being a social species, we base our relationships on trust, giving people the benefit of the doubt, until we have good reason to believe they have betrayed that trust. This is normal, healthy, human behavior.
I have seen no evidence to give me reason to believe NASA and other space agencies are engaged in massive conspiracies. Until I have I will give them the benefit of the doubt and expect that they are telling the truth.
It is cooperation and trust that enabled our species to survive and thrive as social animals.
@@axeman2638 what you are saying is stupid lol
02:07 that footage on screen is absolutely CGI, but no one is claiming otherwise... It's just a digital representation showing what's happening to the module, as there wasn't a camera on the module that could show the entire craft during the descent.
Yep, it is a weird hill to die on. Both, to claim this would not be CGI but also to claim that this would be supposed to look realistic.
And there isn’t another camera on the moon to record the landing. These idiots expect countries to send up another rocket just to take videos of each other in order to appease flat earth idiots.
Of course it is CGI, how could it NOT be, unless they somehow fly another lander with a camera to fill the primary lander so they can have the nice shots. No, they don't do that, if they did have those images that would be a big red flag! But flat earthers see CGI image and thus claim everything must be fake, they are the ultimate idiots, you can't fight such stubborn stupidity with facts.
I thought Mr. Stick was saying it was real, 'cause I'm like that definitely a digital animation of where it's supposed to be. If we wanted to fake that we would be using Avatar level graphics, and still India would have landed on the moon, CGI doesn't inherently disprove any moon landing.
The animations are based on the telemetry from the craft They are very clear about what is animation and what is real. The only ones who are confused are flatearth idiots who have convinced themselves that everything is fake
That guy: ''The government has an incentive to fake this footage!''
Also that guy: *Refuses to say what exactly that alleged incentive is.*
You may have missed the memo. Potential is the only evidentiary requirement for ALL anti-science claims -- and the fact that no evidence can be found is evidence of the highest order that a conspiracy is hiding the evidence, thereby irrefutably proving their claim.
It's a plan so cunning only a mother could love it.
I think the flerf community in general claims that the incentive would be to "hide the (so-called) true shape of the earth" 🙂
There are a few problems with that though: Why would "they" need to hide that the earth was flat? And, given the amount of people that would have to be involved in a cover-up of that magnitude, why don't we see whistleblowers everywhere?
Not to mention that governments across the globe that can't agree on anything else would all have to agree on that particular issue.
You expect … facts that can be checked by Flatbrainers?
Also fails to mention his own financial incentive for lying. A curious omission to be sure.
These are the same governments that, for the last 2,500 years, have often rather violently not gotten on with each other yet for still utterly inexplicable reasons have all collaborated, along with the hundreds of thousands of geologists, astronomers, pilots, sailors and many others, to hide that the earth is flat. Only an abject moron, or a flat earther, could believe such a thing.
Flat Earth "logic":
Footage is grainy and imperfect=fake
Footage is clear and near perfect=fake
Unless it appears to match flat earth, then it counts as real.
Flat earth logic is fake.
You missed one:
Flat-Earther on craft landed on the moon (or in space)= was hypnotized and brainwashed
Or 'wasn't taken with a P900'. The only camera that flerfers think is real.
ANY footage is proof that it's fake for some «reason» according to flerfdom.
Well on the first argument, that video that the flerf is referring to is really just a visualizer meant to give an idea on how the spacecraft is doing in its descent. It is created with actual data from the spacecraft. It's not an actual video of the spacecraft landing, but then again, no one is claiming that it is.
EDIT: Thanks for the corrections! The base idea is still there tho
It's not animation. It's a simulation on how spacecraft is landing by receiving data from the craft. When craft sends data, it then processed into simulation on how it is descending.
To show how accurate it is, when Chandrayan 2 was crashed, the simulation exactly showed how it was crashed. Which was later proven by NASA too. So that simulation is very accurate.
@@immortalwarrior2695 yes simulation* I had forgotten that word. I'll correct it in my comment
It kinda sounded like Professor Stick thought it was real and not a CGI simulation? "It's because it's so grainy and low quality that we know it's real." Lol wut?!
@@SirMildredPierce I mean just because it's low quality doesn't mean it's real. We did this in 70 million dollars
@@kiltio123 Sorry about this, but the right word is _visualization_.
I feel like "Flat Earthers in Shambles" describes them the majority of the time
Too many syllables, it's not fair to them.
No, it's not the ''majority of the time'' actually it's all the time!
I feel like "Shambolic Flat-Earther" could be an enemy type, like the Infected Clowns with squeaky shoes that attract swarms of other zombies to follow them, the Infected CEDA Agents who can walk through fire because of their suits and the Infected Riot Cops who are completely bulletproof from forward arc. The ShamFlErf, for short, would charge head-first into walls and trees, yelling things like "Black Swan!" and "Container!" and "Perspective!"
Not the majority of the time. That's their normal, or base, state.
@@Sableagle I'll take the final bullet in the revolver thank you ;)
The third person view of the landing is obviously computer generated. It isn't like there was a second craft following beside the lander to capture the footage. That doesn't mean they didn't land on the moon.
Yeah, it looked like an animation to visualize the data they were getting. I assume they had no visuals while landing and looking at elevation and other numbers on a screen isn't as exciting for cameras.
Yeah, I was pretty surprised to hear PS defend it like it was a real live image of the craft landing. They had a very similar graphic for the previous craft that crashed.
@@Fade2GrayOGpretty massive fail on the part of the creator here.
Yes, that is an animation based on the telemetry data from the spacecraft. It isn't supposed to look real... It is to quickly show what the spacecraft is doing (or at least a thinks it is doing).
Personally, I prefer more abstracted animations and plots of the key data, but I'm a weirdo.
@@travcollier Agreed. That telemetry visualization is pretty common these days. I mean, the fact that you can see stars in the background is a dead giveaways. Flerfs always ask "Where are the stars?" Obviously we can't see them in the REAL footage.
Yeah, I can't believe "Doctor Stick" there seems to think it's real footage. If he genuinely meant that, he's stupider than the FE's.
I am from India and this just makes me laugh.
We have cameras on craft to see if it's landed or not. We literally put cameras. How the fuck is this fake?
It's fakeable.. but without forensic evidence of it I'm going to believe the math that I can do myself. They didn't pass 11th grade physics, but they know more than everyone else 🤔
Hey, people literally saw rocket flying. And spacecraft already started doing research
Again, how is this fake?
because the camera is in the wrong direction
what is the right direction?
none
@@naruarthurseriously are you stupid?
That camera angle is in the position where you can see landing. There are 4 cameras on craft. How in the world you didn't get that?
Second that graphics video. That is real time simulation on how craft is landing using data sent from the craft. It's quite accurate. When Chandrayan 2 was crashed, you can see the simulation showcasing how it went out of control. Indians know how to do stuff.
This mission was also supported by USA and Japan so there is no way it can be fake. Like how much evidence you want?
@@immortalwarrior2695 I'm wearing a nasa sweater right now. I'm pro science.
Saying "the space agency isn't proving that space is real" is like saying: "construction workers aren't proving concrete is hard." No, they're not proving anything. They're just using it over and over with predictable results.
The camera aiming at the solar panel can be explained easily by two possible reasons: A. It could be folded in a landing position that later can be moved, or B. It could be used to check the status of the solar panel after landing looking for lunar dust accumulation for example. Others probes/rovers had this type of diagnosis cameras on them. Also it could be used for both things
both are wrong. if you notice every other lander camera postion similar to that is to visual check the craft orientation VS the actual craft orientation data
if the 2 are matching then every thing ok, if not then you are in serious trouble the craft will crash
@@jetli740 But would they need a big part of the image being filled with the solar panel for than? After all there is a limited bandwidth, so not broadcasting that part would be the smarter option in that case.
@@jetli740 being used for landing orientation doesn't mean that it can't be used for others purposes, so it could also be used for the other reasons I suggested.
However, if the main/only purpose was navigation, I would expect it to aim directly downward with minimal obstructions, so it would be easier to track the landing location via on-board image recognition (as other probes did) and not only its orientation.
@@EstebanGrasso it not for navigation, it just extra reference point they can use to verify the lander orientation, navigation there would be at least half or a dozen highres camera + other sensor for that purpose. even a simple drone drone like marvic 3 have multiple camera for senor only
Flat earthers have this strange idea that things should be arranged to suit their demands, the morons think they are important instead of being the bunch of nonentities they really are.
Stick, as many others have pointed out, you are wrong regarding his first issue with the landing video. That is clearly _not_ actual footage of the lander - it's a visualization. You really missed the ball on that one.
Yup. I think the Flerf believed that the Indian space agency wanted us to believe it was a real video of the probe.
Professor Stick wasn't able to make his brain that small.
Flat earthers have enough circular arguments to make a sphere.
🤣🤣good one🤣🤣
I think we're at the point where flat earthers are just here to be laughed at and mocked. If everything is fake to them then it's pointless to reason with them, only laugh at them. I think the best thing said was by Stick in this video, this video isn't for the flat earthers, we're done with those jokes. Move aside, the adults have work to do, so step aside, play in your little flat playground and let the big boys handle exploring the universe
The first post isro made after successful landing mocked flat earthers.
You're close, I think. It's not for humor though. I think it's for views. And the response videos are for the same reason.
Flat earth isn't a discussion or serious proposition. It's a fund raising activity.
We have to stop giving both sides views.
What number booster are you on?
@@lucycat4305 Why are you pathologically selfish? Do you *hate* everyone younger than you? Do you have children (I feel sorry for them if you do), and if so - do you tell them that you hate them? Because that's what you are doing.
".... it's pointless to reason with them." Well, *of course* it's"pointless to reason with them," for the simple reason that you *can't* reason with people who don't possess the necessary intelligence to reason *with!*
I mean, let's face it...most of today's crop (yes, "crop" *is* the right term for these intellectual vegetables) of Flerfs aren't even intelligent enough to realise just how monumentally, epically stupid they really are, which is a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.🤣
Or as Sir Sic might say, "Flerfs am dumb 'cos they can't real!"🤣
I think a pinned comment clarifying point 1 is in order.
His claim was "this footage is obviously fake!"
The response shouldn't have been "how can you tell?" We can all tell, the response should have been "you don't know enough to know how little you know. That's not footage, it's a simulation based on data from the craft."
Watched this live, with an English translator explaining what was happening. They clearly explain that the image of the lander is a cg representation of the data sent by the lander. This was then linked to the live cam from on board the lander and the live telemetry that was displayed constantly on the main screen for all to see. Usually good research from you Stick. Congrats to India. Peace All
It isn't an actual recording, but not because it's fake but because...what would they record the outside of the lander with? A second lander?
(The 3:20 one *is* real, just to clarify)
Precisely
Of course the irony is if they *did* have a second lander filming it that'd also be proof it was faked
@@JennFaeAge honestly yea, pretty hard to justify two landers landing at the same time in the same location
to be precise, it's a simulation tracking the positioning and alignment of the craft based on live data transmit.. :)
Stick, you are always spot on, but I gotta say, this time you blew it. There’s no way the graphic at the beginning could be real video unless the space agency sent another spacecraft along with it just to take pictures. They didn’t. They also openly clarified that it was just a graphic representation.
Flat Earther the Alternative to people who believe Pro Wrestling is real.
it is technically real
they do actually shoot what's happening irl
It's scripted but the moves they perform are real so are the injuries and the effort and training they have to go through, it's a mix of both real wrestling and theatrical performance so not really a good comparison.
at least we can see the wrestlers, no one sees the flat earth, only stupid people on the internet
@@personalemail9329 I like to think of them as theatrical stunt people.
we know its not fake because if it was a bollywood production there would have been a musical number after the lander made it to the moon
Haha😂 you want us to dance there. Someday we might all of us 😂😂 on our way to another base for humanity. Till then we should expect less.
Shepard’s idea of bringing a golf club and ball to the moon was a good one. It was fun for him, entertaining, and shows a bit of physics and gravity experiments.
I was completely unaware that India had landed a craft on the Moon. HECK YEAH GO INDIA!
Edit: I also want to point out, like you stated before, the purpose of the moon landing wasn't to prove the world is round, or that space is real, or that the moon isn't made of cheese, it was to land on the moon for scientific research....they don't need multiple cameras and crap.
"it was to land on the moon for scientific research" as much as I wish that were the case it was really a matter of one upmanship between the US and USSR. That being said it was a fantastic achievement both technologically and scientifically but it explains why we have not gone back to the moon since the 1970's.
@@tomschmidt381 True we did truly want to beat the USSR and that's ACTUALLY all it was. My point more so was that the point of going to the moon wasn't to prove to flat earthers that they are wrong.
Sputnik 1 was a big shock to the US.
@@ssjtrunks15And to think, Russians STILL can't pull off a moon landing in 2023.
@@tomschmidt381not for the isro it isn't.
Russia was faster on track to moon isro didn't care.
Unfortunately russian lander crashed🥺
"Could they fake this?" The answer is actually no. Like, yeah, they can slap together something that's good enough to fool the average viewer, but nothing that would withstand professional inspection.
Guys, come on! The image in question is obviously computer CGI. They took the telemetry data sent via radio by the aircraft (such as position, altitude and velocity) those numbers are plugged in a software that gernerated the animation you see here. They did this because they obviously don't have cameras on the moon to show the ship landing there.
Noone has in that region not even Chinese or russian or nasa
@@randomlyswatching9481 you can do that with a rasbery pie if you have the knowlege
Wait I'm confused af. How the heck would the landing "footage" have been recorded? I thought it seemed pretty obvious that it was a utility graphic meant to clearly communicate which thrusters were firing.
Just put the camera on a comically long selfie stick 👍
Are you telling me we have telescopes in space that have high res images of a small comet near Jupiter taken over 140 MILLION miles away, but no technology to record a moon launch from beginning to landing? The moon is only (allegedly) about 240,000 miles away. (It's not, it's much closer). Look at the moon zoomed in on a Nikon P10000 camera.
Did you LOOK at the image we're talking about? It's very obviously a part of a user interface meant to clearly show engineers which thrusters are firing, and the physical condition of many individual pieces. There is no motion happening in the background of the image, only thrusters turning on and off.
I have tried to find comment on this, but probably the Indian government thinks this is as obvious as I do and di not feel the need to put out a statement for people who thought this was actual video footage of the landing as it was happening
@@aabrightloveI watched it live and they clearly said it was cgi based on telemetry from the actual craft.
@@randomlyswatching9481 thank you for confirming that this is CGI. I found it very strange that India would try to claim that was actual footage, but everyone was talking about it like there was a camera that landed first lol
Glad to hear that, as I suspected, this wasn't the case.
Yup, STILL waiting for Jake The Coward to take me up on my offer to take Craig's place in a fight...
He challenged Craig to a fight? I would like to slap Jake the asshole around myself along with Dave Weiss, Daniel Pratt, and the 2 Nathans
He is a creep and a coward.
That first part is definitely computer generated.
They don't have a camera recording the lander from a 3rd person view just positioned nearby. All space agencies do this. It wasn't meant to be real though, it was meant to display where it's at during that point in time. That doesn't disprove anything though, as the next shot is 100% actual footage from the lander.
I don't think anyone is claiming the image of the craft dropping onto the moon is real. It's a graphic designed to show the public what it happening.
3:40 If they had a perfectly mounted camera that showed ZERO of panels or equipment, what he's asking for, they would immediately claim FAKE BECAUSE WE CANT SEE THAT ITS MOUNTED ON THE LANDER! And then they would ask for a camera view with part of the spaceship in the view, just like we have. FLERFs are NEVER happy.
I have literally heard that exact argument, where structural elements were not in view therefore it's fake... It's so inconsistent. Good thing Flerfs are absolutely inconsequential to the world moving on with reality.
I was thinking the same exact thing. Nothing is ever good enough for flerfs.
First clip is an Animation generated from data transmitted from the lander, when and how the thrusters fired, the attitude of the craft, velocity etc. There's no second craft to film it from. Same thing the TV companies did during the Apollo missions.
Him: “If they have the incentive and ability to lie, they will.”
NASA: Doesn’t have the incentive to send people to the moon.
Him: “Why won’t they do it???”
Yes, why hasn't anyone faked putting more men on the moon the last half century if it's so easy and they have the incentive?
The initial "video" is the simulation based on telemetry data and was just a visual representation of what the craft is doing and actually assists in the landing. Basically, it's showing you what the "black box" is relaying back to Earth.
Well yeah the animation of the spacecraft was "fake" because it's just meant to represent where the spacecraft is
So technically speaking it's correct to say the animation thingy is not real, but it means nothing when it comes to the actual spacescraft.
it's like claiming your car is fake because the GPS doesn't show a picture of your car
It's just wrong lol.
I’m a ham radio operator, and occasionally when we send single sideband audio on high frequency bands like 14.200 MHz (otherwise known as the 20 meter band) it will take the long path around the globe and come back and hit the same location you’re transmitting from with a 120 millisecond delay. It’s called long path echo, and it’s proof the globe is round, since the signal is refracted by the ionosphere all the way around the globe and back to the source.
I have never seen a flat earther who’s a ham radio operator. Otherwise they’d know about things like these as well as moon bounce-the ability to bounce radio signals off the surface of the moon and back to earth to reach locations on the other hemisphere, which always reach the destination with a 2 second delay-proving all at once that the moon is approximately 200k miles away, that space is real and that the earth is curved.
I'm not a ham operator, but I do like making my own(very weak) short wave transmitters. I didn't know it was possible to reflect SW waves from the moon, that's pretty neat.
@@timetraveler7 It isn't hard, but you need a fairly high power transmitter, sensitive receiver and a 1 or 2 meter dish antenna. Green cheese is well known for reflecting radio waves!
Just to correct one thing. The lander third person view is actually computer generated. ISRO has developed a patform that can take the real time data and generate that particular animation. But the photographs and the feed of the moon during landing is real. The photos after the rover went out is also real.
Listening to Jake's voice makes my ears feel like they've been rubbed with a cheese grater
the first video IS computer generated though. Im no flat earther. I agree with you on everything else
Stick must be doing AI scripts or is getting beyond lazy.
No way he can see the actual footage, then go back to the animation in the beginning and only reply with "umm no it's totally real".
Quite a challenge to Jake, though: _Prove_ it's CGI. Flerfs're willing to dismiss huge amounts of evidence and deny things normal people consider obvious, so flerfs ought to be required to back up their claims, including the ones they think are obvious, with huge amounts of evidence.
It's CGI in a sense but it's being fed real data so the audience can get a feel for what's happening.
@@timetraveler7 exactly.
Oh your god. I'm suddenly imagining an astroturf golf course on the moon for billionaires. Can you imagine the green fees?
It would probably be about 25 million including transport there and back, let's just hope it's built by a company a little more reliable than the one that made the Titan submarine.
@@Rosivok Or.. not? Hmm? lol
What greens? The whole thing is just one big sand trap!
@@chrisantoniou4366 As I said, astroturf.
I missed that... ☹
The 3rd person footage is clearly CGI, it's just visual representation of sensor and telemetry data. Nobody claims it's real footage. Who do you expect to take the shot? Space camera man? Second lander? Come on Stick, you are better than this.
I think that debunking flat earthers for all those years isn't good for you if you are now starting to defend a visual representation of telemetry data and say it's absolutely real and filmed on the spot... you are not looking good there.
We all know what they would have said if the solarpanel wasn't in the video: "How do we know that camera is on the lander?"
Besides, it's not like they have a lot of space on the lander to stick cameras. That lander would be choc-full of much more important instruments.
for thousands of years people thought the moon was made of cheese. then 50 odd years ago we went there and found out it wasn't and have put almost zero effort into going back since.
How did you confuse yourself that much on the first argument though?
cos he's an idiot with a massive dunning-kruger effect case
It seems like NASA controls every space agency in the world at the same time as they are in control of the laser-armed cyborg penguins that guard the ice wall -that's in NASA's budget.
It's not the cyborg penguins you need to worry about, it's the elephant seals armed with gauss guns.
they already believe every countries are in on it so no surprise if they also think every space agency belong to NASA as a shell company too.
@Professor Stick, I completely agree with him that the first part is CGI, because it is a representation of which thrusters are firing at what point of time, as well as how close it is to the surface, It would make absolutely no sense to go through the painful process of getting a camera out to the distance it has to be away from the craft to be able to accurately show that, when you can just send the data back to earth and have a mock-up representation to show it.
Everyone who cares knows that it is there, and the CGI representation that is using the live data is plenty good for that purpose
Marsha, Marsha, Marsha! Oh, I mean, NASA, NASA, NASA!!!
The lander video was a simulation based on the data coming from it. ISRO didn't claim that video was taken by the cameraman sitting on the moon surface.
So the russians also fake Luna 25 and its crash? For what? To give India some drama and advantage? Sure, Jake, almost a decade in youtube and always the same stupid argument, brilliant!
I don' t know how could people even think that the earth is flat.
Just waiting for 'Where are the stars?'
Two points. I believe the original graphic is just that a computer generated reprisentation which is all you could have because there is no one on the surface to film the landing. Secondly "manless craft", the correct term would be unmanned.
asking why engineering cameras have hardware in view is just priceless lol
But serious question, why is it pointed towards the panel? What is the purpose of that?
@@PrometheusMMIV probably seeing how much dust settles on it during the landing. Or to confirm it's free of damage after launch. There are probably several more cameras looking at other hardware.
About the thing with the obstructed camera:
the cameras on a spacecraft are not there for the general public to see some pretty photos. They're engineering cameras used to visually confirm things like structural integrity of vital components, such as solar panels and fuel tanks. So when the flat earther says it's convenient that the cameras on spacecraft are always obstructed, it's because the cameras aren't there to image the celestial body, they're there to image the spacecraft.
YES!!!
Finally someone getting on this topic
Of course the lander visual was CGI and not real XD
It looks completely fake because it was. The visual was just that - a visual representation to represent the lander's progress as it approached the moon. Everyone was intended to understand that the visual was just a stand-in.
You can't get real footage of any clarity without already having a camera on the moon, so it's not like you could actually film the lander's approach. Instead, they created a bare-bones visual that would allow them to communicate how close the lander was to the surface quickly and effectively during the voice over from the control room where all the more accurate instrumentation was present.
The reasons it feels "fake" are because: (1) The moon texture is entirely flat. They didn't bother to use even a slightly dimensional image of the moon surface, instead using something like a flattened Google Earth moon projection. (2) There is not rotation as a result of the thrusters firing. It moves perfectly straight, and has static thruster images that have no impact on the lander's angle, facing, or velocity. Obviously the actual lander, if filmed, would be pitching and yawing as it came in, as controlled by the thrusters, and the thrusters would appear as jets rather than static images super-imposed.
Trying to defend the obviously CGI visualization as actual film as a hyper-reaction to flat-earth idiocy is quite funny.
Obviously none of this applies to the footage taken _from_ the lander, which is really interesting, even if low res. I particularly love the reflections of the surface in the solar panels.
Anyway, congrats India on this wonderful achievement! I can't wait to see how this helps the international community, and also to see the next manned mission succeed!
I wish all the flat earth debunkers would just cite the curious droid video when addressing the “lost the technology” argument. I feel that is the most comprehensible be video out there right now on that subject and I wonder how many people know about that one.
On Wednesday August 23, 2023 when India became the fourth country ever to safely land a spacecraft on the moon, proud Indians were quick to note the achievement, estimated to have cost about $70 million, was far cheaper than making the Hollywood sci-fi epic “Interstellar. 🌕
Stick WTF are you talking about, the first 2 minutes of the video shows a visualisation. In 1:07 you even see that it landed and yet the output from thrusters is not interacting with the ground and the module is shaking because of tiny distortions in telemetrics data. The camera from the lunar module is real footage.
2:18 Yes this is CGI.... this CGI model is fed actual data (a representation if you will) so that the audience can get an idea of what is going on. Anyone who has 2 brain cells to rub together knows this. which explains a lot about flat earthers.
3:08 I see we are on the same wavelength prof stick tho you seam to be giving flat earthers more credit.
6:30 I strongly advise song called "We're going back" by Duane Elms
Get 'em Stick!!!
flat earthers have moved the goal posts so much they are now on the moon
I don't understand why Moon landing deniers complain that an Astronaut hit 2 golf balls on the Moon. It was only 1 Astronaut who did that
and he only hit 2 golf balls. He wasn't playing golf. He had the opportunity to do what many golfers wish they could find out. He wanted to see how far he could hit a golf ball on the Moon. That's all.
He even practiced here on Earth with a Professional Golfer helping him to learn how to swing a golf club one handed, and he probably practiced wearing a Spacesuit.
Small correction: I just rewatched him hitting the golf balls. He hit 3 balls.
It probably makes them even more angry to have those small glimpses of humanity between all the efficient engineering.
How did NASA convince India to join the conspiracy?
shillbucks, duh. Hidden inside of the NASA budget is a secret line of shillbucks to be used as discretionary spending to promote the "earth is a globe" lie. The larger the net, the more people they can hook. 😆
not just india but the entire world even many space agency not co-operate with nasa.
Gift cards xD
@@RTheren I'd do almost anything for gift cards😉😉
I don't listen to people who say "so, therefore" . They seldom know what they are talking about. They start off using synonyms. So why should I believe they know what other words mean?
The sensation of Flerfs in tears is what drew me here… Nourishment Time!
Well, well! The discount Jamiroquai has an opinion! 🧐
Ah Jake, his intellect is as sharp as his hats are stylish and classy. He lives up to his self styled nickname, which I notice you avoided using. Quite right, this is a quality channel. Maybe one day a flerf will tell us why the shape of the planet is important enough to lie about (according to them), and on that day pigs will ascend on bacon wings, navigating the skies using the map that they have finally supplied.
RFC1925 2.3: (April 1996)
_With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead._
See, pigs can fly. You can even stitch bacon wings to them before takeoff.
@@advorak8529 A great RFC 😁👍 I like RFC 1149 IP over Avian Carriers and the related RFC 2549 IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service. Sadly no IP over bovine carriers, or we might just get 'over the moon'.
@@TheOwlman You can write it yourself and submit it …
Seriously! Well done India!
You could strap a flat earther to the side of a rocket and send them in to orbit and they would still say it was C.G.I.
do these flatards even realize that there are over a billion people in Bharat who watched this live and over 8 million who watched it on youtube setting a record ? If even one of these flatards sure about their claims they should post a video aimed at us! They know better than to mess around with us I hope ! jai hind bharat Mata ki jai 🕉
calm down, these flat earth complain to everyone not just india, they cannot accept the earth is round
Flerfs can't count to 3 dimensions, your numbers are WAY beyond them!
watched what though?
how does it prove anything?
@@axeman2638 the demise of flatards when they venture into their worst nightmare! हर हर महादेव जय श्री राम वंदे मातरम जय हिंद जान भी है जहां भी है क्यूंकि मेरा भारत महान है नमो नमो 🔱🕉️🥚🙏🏻💪🇮🇳💪🇮🇳💪
Nothing you said is evidence it was real. The number of people watching a live tv production doesn’t make it real.
Once a Jake, always a Jake. Oy vey!
OMG no way. YOU THINK THE TELEMETRY ANIMATION IN THE FIRST TWO MINUTES OF THIS VIDEO IS ACTUAL FOOTAGE OF THE LANDING? WHAT? WHAT SHOT THE VIDEO? Damn, Professor Stick, how did you not realize that this was just a telemetry animation representing the lander?
1:20 This footage is a simulation based on the telemetry from the craft. They take the data received from the lander and simulate visuals based on that. So it's actually both fake and real at the same time.
Wow, I think this is a first for this channel. An actual blunder by the Prof. Well, guess he's human after all and not a divine stick figure.
.We all commit the occasional f*** up, this was his. And we get to see if he will issue a correction
What 😦 blunder ❓
@@kevinmitchell6856 The first video was actually a CGI visualization animated using data sent back from the actual lander
Chandrayaan-II has already taken photos of the lander.
Ask for photographs, get photographs. Done
Whenever new stuff like this happens the Creepypasta's that gets created a few days later are fantastic 😂🎉
Back when I was a motorist I was told to always have a little bit of my car showing in the wing mirror for reference. I assume the camera is mounted like that for the same reason.
Many times an agency builds up a 'fake' graphic to visualize things. Heck, all the way back to Mercury, NASA put up on the wall a projection that showed the path of the spacecraft over the ground. Nobody for a moment thought, "Gee, I don't know, that looks kind of fake. And how did we get a camera up there?" It's done because a visual graphic is much easier to comprehend than some digital readout showing latitude/ longitude/ velocity, engine thrust status, etc...
At no point has anyone claimed that visual graphic is a video of the lander. its a graphical representation for the control room. It would be impossible to film this.
depending on how long these flat earthers go on for it would be so funny to debunk them live from the moon
I'm sure the very last thing on their minds when they were cheering was anything involving flat earthers
He is a one government believer so it doesn’t matter which space agency it is. To him they’re all one.
Latest conspiracy theory: it was all staged by Bollywood.
The camera aiming at the solar panel isn’t really there for recording the landing. That’s a secondary function. It’s main function is being an engineering camera so the engineers on the ground can diagnose problems.
2:58 "...this is for people with at least three brain cells..."
Bonus points for saying that at the three minute mark.
When I saw this on TV I knew that flat earther would say this exact thing about it
Collective bright minds Vs. A dude in the internet that says "nah uh"
I love how the other benefit is “to make fun of flat earthers at the same time”
The camera is obviously there to look at the panel to see if theres any damage. Its not there to give us a show
NO it to give them the visual of the craft orientation, so they can compare with actual craft orientation data
@@jetli740 that too i guess😅
Congratulations India.👍
It's CGI based on telemetry sent by the craft
It still amazes me that certain people willing choose this hill to die on. WTF
He's gonna move the goal post to the moon and back
I thought that the representation of the craft during the descent was computer graphics, but computer graphics taken from the telemetry from the probe which gave a graphical representation of what the craft was doing at that point in time.
The shots of the solar panel off the side of the craft, I thought was real as its showing the craft from the craft as it would seem if you were in the craft looking out the window...although if any of us was on a craft descending to moon our faces would be pressed so hard against the window with squealing of "we're almost on the moon...THIS IS AWESOME".
You are correct, The camera was designed to check the solar panels, The hiRes cameras are on the rover.
@@dogwalker666 why check the solar panel? why? solar panel is not important, if they land on the moon.
give you a clue: craft orientaion and actual craft orientation data.
@@jetli740 And check solar panel orientation and status, Solar panels are for mission power.
I'm your subscriber from India since 4 years. I'm happy you covered this news. 😃
Next week we're launching a solar mission named Aditya-L1. Guess what the flerfs are gonna cry then.
I thought that was Sips in the thumbnail.
Wow! I didn't know thar Nick Offerman was a flerfer!
Umm. I'm pretty sure that the image of the lander around 2:35 IS a graphic. It's an animation to show what's happening with the real lander on the moon.
I can’t wait for 4k GoPro footage of astronauts do flips on the moon.
Bravo for India….The more space activity goes on, the more it incrementally advances us as a species.👍 Flat Earth logic…we are pushed downward, so if the Earth was a globe and you went underneath…you would fall off😂
The shot at 3.48 is interesting - stuffs up some FEs as it shows a curved moon (no disc) and the straight edge of their moon lander (no lens effect...). I wonder if the camera angle is deliberate here?