On top of that this video tells you a few lies of it's own. #1. Is #15 ~ You lot need to stop half a**ing it with your research. This is at the end of the article I bet you got the info from. "However, Planet Nine isn’t the only explanation for the orbital behaviors observed. A recent survey of the outer solar system found over 800 trans-Neptunian objects. A random distribution of this matter could also potentially have the same effect on the tilt on the traits observed in various orbits-but the jury is still out." #2. Is #07 Sound does travel in space and that is why we know what each of the planets in our solar system sounds like. It is not something a person could hear though. This is also why I think the town in New Mexico is resonating with earth and not some mysterious alien base or alien attack on our psychology. FN aliens in everything these days it seems. #3. Is #05 From NASA: Individual atoms of oxygen are common in space, particularly around massive stars. But molecular oxygen, which makes up about 20 percent of the air we breathe, has eluded astronomers until now. You could of found that out by doing what I did. I literally just typed in "oxygen in space". #4. Is #03 I am not claiming I know anything more than just this simple little observation. Moving faster than light is simply a matter of how much force you can exert on an object. If this was not true, the force pulling everything in to a black hole would not swallow light and then would never of been proven to exist. Here is a quick little bonus on black holes. They do eventually die out and when this happens a large burst of gamma radiation is shot out of the center like a guy in bed for the first time. #5. Is #00 You only gave us 21 of 25 in the end. As I like to do when people are being fed the wrong info on a video and I choose to give a crap and type something, I will copy/paste it in a few comments.
have you guys noticed that correlation between those who are asleep and those who are awake when looking at the likes I'm UA-cam comment sections? almost always the most likes are the blind and dumb and the least likes are those who are awake
You need to establish that you are an authority on space, astronomy or physics before you go clearing up the "Big lies". Or cite your sources. Most of the points you make are basically correct, and I (an astronomy professor) have been making them in class for decades. But you are especially wrong about the temperature of space (#12 and #11). Astronomers have myriad ways of defining temperature, some of which are independent of the "average kinetic energy of particles" concept. In a vacuum, you can still define temperature in space in terms of the radiation passing through that region. The best number for the average temperature of space (and the universe) is 2.74 Kelvin (~ -454 F) because that is the temperature of the cosmic background radiation (CBR). If a human body were floating in space, and the radiation from the Sun and nearby planets was blocked, it would freeze solid fairly quickly. The body would radiatively cool until it was in thermal equilibrium with the CBR (well, a little warmer than that b/c of radiation from the Milky Way). We're used to being bathed in IR radiation from the Earth/walls around us, but without that, it would be very cold. A common freezer set at -10 F (~250 K) is much warmer than the CBR. The fact that outer solar system objects (e.g., comets, Pluto) are so cold (
@JCP Explain this! For an observer from Earth, the objects in the sky do trace ellipses, but one should not conclude that a spoon is broken, only because one can see its broken image through a half-emptied glass of tea. Circles look ellipses when viewed at an angle, but there is no such thing as "elliptical orbit". "Orbit" is synonymous to "altitude", distance to the center of gravity. To change that distance, another force must be introduced. Otherwise, it's only horizontal momentum and gravity, and they don't change. Mathematics is unsuitable for describing nature, because of this language's shortcomings. The Universe does not divide by zero or takes the square root of negative number etc. The World is analog, not digital. Through manipulation of Math, all modern pseudo-scientific hoaxes have emerged, be that: black holes, neutron stars, atom bombs, rockets flying in a vacuum and so on. The Math made an impossible possible, but only in Sweet Dreams: tinyurl.com/yy643j53 The most damning evidence of Space Hoax. Read tinyurl.com/y6vwwgv7
@@only2percent762 if as you state there is "no such thing as 'elliptical orbit'"- how then do you explain comets? We can observe their paths, some with periods lasting thousands of years. ...Just don't ask me why they always miss the sun. Perhaps from great distances it's a relatively small target..(?)
@@only2percent762 The force acting on orbits to make them elliptical is gravity. It accelerates the planets on their way towards the sun and then deaccelarates them on their way back. Look up Kepler's second law to understand it better.
I agree with a lot you said but not everything you guys with a PhD or in active work say. Usually you guy have the narrowest minds you guys tend to be the last to accept change and cling by the skin of your fingers to old theories. Maybe because of job role maybe because of pay or department. But believe me most people are not looking to you guys as an authority on the matter because of the industries track record. And we also have access to peer reviewed studies the exact same as you guys. So mate get over yourself and your degree you literally know nothing more than the average joe that’s interested in the subject with google lol
The Moon's albedo is only 12%. So indeed it is dark. It only looks bright in the sky because sunlight is so bright that even only reflecting 12% is still a lot of light.
Yes, there is a difference between a misconception and a lie. A lie is something untrue that is used to get someone to believe in something as a misconception is when someone thinks something is true when in reality it isn't. Basically, Lies are intentionally not true as misconceptions are unintentional and the person saying the misconception doesn't know that what they are saying is not true. *sorry for the lecture btw XD*
I have only heard anyone say “the earth is a perfect sphere” once in my life. People tend to say “the earth is round” or “the earth is spherical,” both of which are true - an oblate spheroid is spherical, just not perfectly so, and it is round.
666dtc - you may very well be the single greatest genius of our time. After all, it is impossible to tell the difference between an oblate spheroid from a perfect sphere at a glance without those nonsense fancy science tools - satanic they are. Brilliance you have. Unbridled brilliance. No has ever thought of this. Just brilliance. Brilliance like the sun orbiting our Earth. I tip many, many hats to your overwhelming and well thought out insight. You should be in charge of all of science. No really, I mean that. Greatness you have.
io Elmeti you sound like one of these people who use the "water not sticking to a basketball" experiment to "disprove" gravity... Damn the internet for giving a platform to bottom 20% of the intellectual base...
possibly alluding to the fact that dwarf-planet still has the word planet in it. meaning pluto is still a planet. otherwise it would be classified as an asteroid, not a dwarf-PLANET!
As usual, every video about space there will be "Flat Earth Trolls" on the comment section, even thought most of them aren't really "flat earth believer" more like *"we're trolling you because our post will make you cringe"*
funny isnt it that the closer you get to the sun the colder it gets. funny how the sun being a fake 93 million miles away shines all the way to flat earth but the higher you go the darket it gets.
@@questioneverything8301 life truly is curious, I personally don't believe in the flat earth theory, but then again I've never been to space to do a 360 around our planet so I can't say for sure. But each to their own. Take it easy.
@@leecullen7651 thats the thing no one as been to space. so do we know all the details no. but then nasa wont let anyone go up above a certain height either. you have to asks permission and then have the funding. also some that have been are told to use a fish eye lens. the red bull jump from space for example. but yeah its good that you dont just dismis it stay cool too.
Monfe earth is shielded by a bubble as it floats silently withjn deep dark ocean of Luke warm water.. Would be the popular belief if someone in the past claimed it true..
jupiter is a micro-star, not a planet either. stfu, a planet is a planet. it's all just groups of matter floating in the space-time plane of the universe. what makes something a planet is how we define a word. refining how we define a word doesn't change what that object was or still is.
No. But it would be a great album name in a situation where the name of the album is not based off of a single song on that album. For the record (pun intended), it would make a terrible band name.
RE Satellites: the GPS module uses satellites. The network and internet sides of it, yes mostly use wireless to the nearest access point which is largely a cabled global network. Your videos may encourage more subscribers if you actually did some research and informed viewers rather than just telling mistruths.
GPS only use the signal coming from satellite. There's no traffic back. May the title changed to "Your mobile phone uses satellite to communicate over".
Technically masses like stars and planets are so massive that they distort space and it is the distortion caused by the sun's mass that the Earth orbits and not the sun itself. But he did fail to explain it very well.
I'll "like" it when you can PROVE that Earth orbits the sun! Until then, ...not so fast! Stop BELIEVING that which you've been indoctrinated to believe is "education," learn to think for yourself, etc.
Earth orbits a point in space that's 1,500,000 km from the Sun. The Sun is at one focus of an ellipse and nothing is at the other focus. This orbit is so perfectly circular that you couldn't draw a circle 4 feet across that perfect with a fine nib ball point pen because that nib is too thick.
To save star wars a bit, you can hear explosions in space but not in the normal way. Instead of sound moving particles in the air, the explosion would cause particles to be shot out in all directions and some of them would probably hit your ear. Also, the simulated atmosphere around the death star and the oxygen from the fighters' life support systems would allow fire in some way in the event of an explosion.
@@MegaRoder Correct...it is true... perhaps these nay-sayers should simply look at the definition of "orbit"...the middle point of being slung out and being drawn in...but it is much easier to act intellectually high and mighty.... leftists fade that philosophy all the time.... I adore calling these self deluding fools out...
nela gordon low orbit IS falling. cause earths gravity IS pulling you down BUT because of the acceleration they don’t actually fall. So can u reconsider?
12. Wrong - Space is cold, you even contradict yourself, cold is the absence of heat/energy, with no partials to excite there is nothing to create any heat. What you are misunderstanding is that for an object to dissipate it's heat it needs to come into contact with particles of a lower energy state which then absorb some of the said energy, because there are significantly less particles in space this process takes a lot longer than say if it were in a cold atmosphere, but given enough time the heat would still dissipate, until the object and space reached an equilibrium, which at the temperature of space is about 2-4 Kelvin out of direct sunlight, which is approx. -270c. So no, space is most definitely very very fucking cold!
Luke Gibson Both are right. What you are forgetting is the audience. The video portrays the extreme simplicity for a mass audience. Pay attention to the vocabulary in the video: “nearly impossible” and “basically”. I’d also like to call into question grammar, spelling, and punctuation if you are a native English speaker. If you are not a native English speaker, allowances might be allowed.
@@sunh1213 Thank you so much for spotting the typos in my writing. I don't have time to fix them myself. If you would be so kind as the correct me with the adjusted version down below so i may learn from your infinite wisdom. I wouldn't want anybody thinking I'm some non native terrorist. The horror I feel to think that my lapse grammatical and spelling perfection was so easily mistaken for the incoherent ramblings of a dirty foreigner. I'm am forever in your debt for saving me from myself. Maybe this is why my cat went missing and my wife left me for that man with the funny accent. I must repent oh exalted one who is the keeper of the typo allowence and has the power to revoke my citizenship given at birth based on UA-cam comments. Please forgive me master!
It isn't really much of a scientific mystery, it's primarily economics. The primary reason is that high bandwidth communications (as in gigabits or terabits per second you need for whole countries) is essentially impossible to do over radio, because you have narrow bandwidth you can use (competing with everything else), whereas with wired (or optical) you have a full spectrum to play with. Then of course there's also weather and interference to deal with with radio. Wired/optical communications has FAR higher capacities and cheaper. As long as you can afford to run a wire to the nearest node on the network, or do a short wireless hop to someplace that is connected to the wired network, that's the way to go. Even cell phones do this. Problem being if you're highly mobile, out of range of wireless, or in the middle of the ocean, you can't get access to the wired network. So you use a satellite phone. Similarly, rural areas even in developed countries, often get their TV or Internet by satellite. Sure cheaper than running miles of copper for one customer. There was a period where satellite was more heavily used in communication, but that's when there were a *lot* fewer trans-oceanic cables, and the cables were just simple copper wire - you can't run the bandwidth really high with that. It wasn't until fiber optics hit its stride that the sheer quantity of data we want to send could be sent at all. Apropos that: In the early 80s, the precursor to the Internet (UUCP/Usenet/email) travelled between Australia and North America by magnetic tape. Satellite was too expensive for what was essentially skunkworks. Once a day regular as clockwork, a tape would be shipped and another one received. Ironically, it was NASA doing it for us free - the NASA/Australian stations had no other way to move the vast quantities of data they produced to and from the USA, so they shipped whole cases of them daily, and let one magtape be used for Usenet/e-mail communications. I knew the NASA engineer at NASA Ames that did "our end". Which led to the line "never underestimate the bandwidth of a delivery truck full of magtapes" ;-). Especially 30Tb LT08 magtapes. Latency sucks tho.
Mass is both a property of a physical body and a measure of its resistance to acceleration when a net force is applied. The object's mass also determines the strength of its gravitational attraction to other bodies. The basic SI unit of mass is the kilogram. 1kg on Earth is = 1kg on the moon ... BUT that same 1kg on the moon would WEIGHT 1 / 6th of what it does on earth. #1. Is #15 ~ You lot need to stop half a**ing it with your research. This is at the end of the article I bet you got the info from. "However, Planet Nine isn’t the only explanation for the orbital behaviors observed. A recent survey of the outer solar system found over 800 trans-Neptunian objects. A random distribution of this matter could also potentially have the same effect on the tilt on the traits observed in various orbits-but the jury is still out." #2. Is #07 Sound does travel in space and that is why we know what each of the planets in our solar system sounds like. It is not something a person could hear though. This is also why I think the town in New Mexico is resonating with earth and not some mysterious alien base or alien attack on our psychology. FN aliens in everything these days it seems. #3. Is #05 From NASA: Individual atoms of oxygen are common in space, particularly around massive stars. But molecular oxygen, which makes up about 20 percent of the air we breathe, has eluded astronomers until now. You could of found that out by doing what I did. I literally just typed in "oxygen in space". #4. Is #03 I am not claiming I know anything more than just this simple little observation. Moving faster than light is simply a matter of how much force you can exert on an object. If this was not true, the force pulling everything in to a black hole would not swallow light and then would never of been proven to exist. Here is a quick little bonus on black holes. They do eventually die out and when this happens a large burst of gamma radiation is shot out of the center like a guy in bed for the first time. #5. Is #00 You only gave us 21 of 25 in the end. As I like to do when people are being fed the wrong info on a video and I choose to give a crap and type something, I will copy/paste it in a few comments.
@@xXHadrielXx you make some good points but in the future you may want to edit out your tendency to write, "would of" rather than, "would have". I know it may seem like a small thing but it's definatly not an error a highly educated person would ever let slip by in their writing. Think of it like one of those little social rules, such as which fork to use for what course at a fancy dinner, that easily inform the ultra rich they have a poser in their midst. Trust me, the right people will take you far more seriously if you clean up your grammar.
The fact that we only see one side of the moon has nothing to do with the rotation of the earth, only the rotation of the moon and the revolution of the moon around the earth
it has nothing to do with any rotation. The moon is in what scientist call a tidal lock, basically the gravity of the earth effects one side of the moon more than the other because one side is closer. It also has to do with the size of the moon relative to the earth, the orbit trajectory, the speed, etc. The point is that one side of the moon faces the earth at all times. When the moon is completely dark, the side facing away is lit up.
Good point, but how many have "deduced" that because what we see in the night sky (the shaped of the moon), it MUST FOLLOW that the Earth must ALSO be a "sphere"? (Which, of course, is stupid logic, being that we can't PROVE that the moon is a sphere, in that we ONLY see one "side" of it!) So, it begs the question: who is lying? Those "selling" that the Earth is flat or those "selling" that the Earth is flat-ish? NO ONE can prove it either way, which relegates one to a BELIEF one way or the other... which is NOT "science," but "faith," which is typically taught in a different building at our universities! :-)
Can someone explain to me why everyone is so distraught about Pluto not being called a planet?! It's still there, it's still really interesting, with its massive moon, its cool ice patterns. We didn't lose it from our Solar System! Is everyone so sad because they have to revise what they were taught at school (that our solar system has 9 planets)? It's shocking to me that everyone has such a hard time and a huge emotional response to a change in classification
Yeah, it's silly. Pluto was just reclassified, it wasn't demoted or busted down to a lower rank or something. Pluto doesn't give a shit what we call it.
#13, I know there are flat~earthers & inner~earthers... But I met a guy today, that believes that the World doesn't spin on it's Axis. I guess the sun moves around us, along with the moon and stars. I think?... I am still trying to grasp or comprehend the entire concept... pretty sure it set Neil DeGrasse head spinning! lol
as for experience when traveling by air for very long 22 plus hours, you fly rather high into the levels of the atmosphere at a point you can see the curve of the planet. I know it is not flat. I can see the night sky it's hourly changes. also, it changes with the seasons. The Sun moves across the sky. I have sat under a tree and been hit by the falling of leaves or fruit. I have sat in a meadow, I heard the birds sing, I have watched the coming, the going of a train, I experienced the Doppler effect. I know from experience the effects of gravity, I do not know everything. I too have discovered much of passed down knowledge is flawed, but to say, one knows nothing is rather presumptive. there was a time I knew absolutely nothing. but once a being has reached beyond the zygote stages, we begin to think. it might not be a full Consciousness but it is thought. I have found the "you know nothing" as a copout. this person I know did not have any real foundation. from what I heard before I butted in... he stated the flat-earthers and inner~earthers are weird, although he said, the whole big blue ball spinning a 100 billion miles an hour, is equally weird, we would all spin off and go flinging out into the void. To me after actually observing with my person. I find it odd. this is a belief, I had not heard for many many human years. I found it amusing when the Flat~earthers reappeared... I do not know everything, that be absurd. although to suggest after so many years alive to know absolutely nothing is equally absurd. Forever a student always learning. never blank. if you know absolutely nothing how can you school others for their lackings? if you are flawless, what do you know of flaws? Intelligence is. it can grow. but it never is nothing.
YOU CAN NOT SEE THE CURVATURE OF THE EARTH FROM AN AIRPLANE. FACT. So why say you can? Just to CON the great unwashed who have never been on an airplane? I've been to Mexico, Spain, Portugal, Holland and Egypt. I always try to sit by a window and guess what? NO CURVE. YOU CAN ONLY FOOL THE FOOLS. What do you get out of it?
I saw, what I saw. I am not telling you what to believe. I traveled the polar route. are you sitting or standing somewhere? do you see anything in front of you? have you ever stood where a rainbow prism light falls? I cannot fully describe those things either but they have been witnessed but. not just one. so those with that common knowledge can know what is meant. I do not know what makes people believe it is flat or a rock that does not spin or that there are advanced inner earthers? I did find the fact we do not spin. as unheard of. so I did "smirk" maybe they know something we do not. honestly, I have been too busy to look it up. I at first thought he was joking... but now? I must look into it... I have never claimed to have knowledge of everything or I would be a lot wealthier I would have ended world hunger, Had I unlimited knowledge I would cure the world's children. Of hunger, disease, homelessness, ignorance. I would not be weeping at our inability to do any of those things...ᵃᶫᵗʰᵒᵘᵍʰ, ᴵ ʰᵃᵛᵉ ᶰᵒᵗ ʸᵉᵗ ᵍᶦᵛᵉᶰ ᵘᵖ ᵗʰᵃᵗ ᶠᶦᵍʰᵗ⋅ ᴺᵒʳ ˢʰᵃᶫᶫ ᴵ ᵉᵛᵉʳ⋅
it is so terribly sad to see, others look into the abyss so long they lose humanity. retain only the ability to abuse, to judge not enlighten. hell, I was told is full knowledge of opportunities missed. having an ability to make something better but walking away, indifferent to life or death. IDK just some little thing passed down... Some knowledge passed down is a blessing, if one can learn to listen? then maybe they will learn to hear as well? maybe only a whore's ass would know. Merry Christmas... ᴴᵉʸ, ˢᵃᶰᵗᵃ ᵖᵃˢˢ ᵐᵉ ᵗʰᵃᵗ ᵇᵒᵗᵗᶫᵉ⋅⋅⋅⋅
Mad honey bee I uh.. Well ya I'm a sorry for being so agressivly me it really just I'm jealous because you a M. H. B.... I amount to the just no higher than say a sac of smashed assholes...I m sorry
Indrid Cold You’ve never heard the sun is yellow? Huh? Kids color the sun yellow with crayons at just 2 years old or so. That’s an incredibly common thing that is said.
@@Sinnbad21 Are you taking advise from young children? The is white. Maybe kids colour it white so it contrasts against the white paper. But they also colour green people, pink horses, and blue dogs. It is a G type star producing visible white light, and ultraviolet light. Yellow light is not produced.
@@indridcold8433 I never said the sun was actually yellow. I just said that it considered and often labeled yellow by almost everyone. It surprised me that you’ve never heard it described as yellow
Damnit I wanted the comment about how there would be an ass hole who would say such a thing.... Then I laughed because it was funny. Now I feel like a schmuck! Good comment (from a flat earther)
Most claims in this vid are indeed true but they were not opposed or contradicted in the first place. So this vid in itself is in fact a bit of a sneaky lie. Btw, FIRE does not always need oxygen to be classified as fire, that's an inner orbit Earthern concept. Heliumfusion is also fire but without oxygen. Like life without oxygen is also life, it's called anaerobic life. Just another concept of functionalism
Not only did NASA not pay to develop the pen; they didn't even pay for the ones they used. Fisher gave them two cases of pens (which NASA cheerfully accepted and used) so they could advertise that the pen is used by NASA in space.
Nope. They didn't use pencils as the chance of breaking a nib and the small piece of graphite floating off (or falling over the horizon) and lodging in a vital component was considered unacceptable.
+STELLAFELLA Pay attention. Stop listening to FE garbage. I remember when that first came out in the 60's. It was immediately walked back by the fisher company because of the cost.
+Jeffrey Schouten. The video says something quite different from that which I said. The video says that the Russians used "Pencils" in space. This was not true because of the risk of a graphite based pencil lead snapping off and getting into a control pencil. Instead of using graphite pencils, as implied by this video, everybody used WAX pencils, also known as "colouring pencils". These are a very different item.
I was just about to write something similar... and then changed my mind. Until I read your comment. This video is so pathetic that even Trump understands it. The narrator makes a point, serves a question... and just moves on... SAD
@IgnoranceIsNot AVirtue , it's no use trying to talk with someone like that. People like him live to harass, distort quotes and show their racism and bigotry. It's pathetic really.
@randyland inc , I saw where you said that the moon doesn't rotate? That's not true. It does rotate, it just takes it the same amount of time to rotate as it does to orbit earth. So it appears to not rotate. Before you start acting like you're right and being a dick, make sure you are right FIRST before acting like an idiot. You'll look less stupid then.
@IgnoranceIsNot AVirtue , right? It is hard to tell, but some of what he said is consistent with what flat earthers say. So it is safe to assume that he is one as well. Especially with that amount of incoherent babbling.
Chemical engineer and NASA’s oldest active astronaut at age 62, Don Petitt says, “I’d go to the moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don’t have the technology to do that anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and it’s a painful process to build it back again.”
Number 3 may not be true, meaning that quantum entanglement doesn't necessarily imply faster-than-light communication between the two entangled photons.
We need to be precise with what communication means here. As I understand it the communication is in fact instant, but we can never use it in a communication device because measuring the system would break the quantum entanglement. Also if we could use it it would make communication with the past possible thus leading to all sorts of time travel paradoxes. Just combine quantum entanglement with relativity of simultaneity and you will immediately see why.
3. Nothing can surpass light travel unless its pure energy - which light is. You’re saying that’s a lie about space because of the possibility of warping the space time continuum using quantum mechanics, which we wouldn’t even know where to begin on knowing how to do that.
Nope, even Einstein claimed that atoms and particles too small for us to see could "cheat" his theory. He continues this by saying that they use time not Light to 'cheat it" This is why EInstein claims Time-Travel forward and backwards would be possible. They "Cheat" they can appear in future or past, thus moving faster than light. Ive seen the experiments for this test, though I do not know how they created it. I have seen the results, and they suggest particles do exist that move faster than Light. It is now a given that while Einstein theory is still sound, it doesnt take into account unknown particles that could 'cheat' the system. for example, we could bend/warp space to be in an area within seconds across the other side of Universe. However, to do this we need a power of at least one or more Suns. The Irony in this, Cowboy Bebop appears to have been correct with their gates. I give this example because we be using a type of system those particles do. Appearing in another location in seconds or minutes. In theory, we simply be "cheating" light ourselves. Star Trek uses a Warp system to do this. Though IRL, the Enterprise be acrosss the Galaxy in seconds or Minutes not days. Voyager attempted to use this in their show.
Stacie Meier I’ve heard that before but it really only works with things the size of the atoms themselves.. You’re talking about wormholes, those things smaller then atoms that “cheat the system”... they do exist, and they’re all around us and what not but they’re too small to go through, the experiments that have been done with them aren’t necessarily for understanding how to use them but rather the understanding of them. I haven’t seen one in person but I’ve read about them. Hypothetically if you were to generate one or upscale one big enough for us to use that would take the same amount of energy you mentioned, but all of this is just theory - general knowledge of right now, anything smaller then atoms like string theory or quantum foam for example is just a theory... a fucking good theory that’s probably true, but not something we have valid proof of fact (as of yet), just like the idea of upscaling wormholes and what not. :p
Tyler Furtado, Thank you for generally explaining this. It saves me the time. Also, no rule in relativity says that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Only that, if it does, it is moving backward in time and , therefore, does not "exist" for us. Of course, to present understanding, those "things" would have to be massless. Otherwise, as you've stated, it would (theoretically) take an infinite amount of energy to propel them to such speeds, as their mass would creep ever closer to infinity as they are accelerated.
Tyler Furtado.... all you know... is what was told to you... Some one sold you on the idea and you bought it worse you believe it blindly.... Be it space or god or even atoms.. All word of mouth... smart folks speak from direct experience dreamers speak from replayed regargitsted prechewed batch of soggy donkey pubes and dingleberry slap grass and they do it in a manner that suggests their superiority...own your opinions
Most of the items on this list are not lies. They were assumptions made by most first graders. I was hoping this list would be interesting,, but far from it.
So basically, Earth is fucked if something happens to any other planet in our solar system? Here is my question: Is the debris rings around Uranus and Saturn collections from a missing destroyed planet from 6000 years ago? Samaritan Legends of Earth and two suns and moons kind of question? It was recorded in human history they existed... are the rings of those planets the collections of destroyed planets and does that explain the craters on the Moon?
It's also plausible that movies like StarWars could be fairly accurate. Its usually a ship that blows up in space. Ships filled with people, who breath air which the ship would need to be filled with in order for people to survive, so there would be an oxygen source to ignite if a ship hypothetically blew up, not really much different to your rocket fuels in the example.
Despite the efforts to change the curriculum and demote Pluto, the fact is that Pluto IS still a planet. Doubt me? Look it up, or ask your know it all buds what Pluto is. They'll likely say Pluto is a 'dwarf planet', or that it's a 'planet minor'. I rest my case. The very people claiming Pluto is NOT a planet in one breath are literally acknowledging in the next that Pluto IS still a planet. (This narrator was no exception) All they've done is add a descriptive of the TYPE of planet it is, and in order to be a special class of planet it must first and foremost be a planet. Is a Large pizza still a pizza? Yes. Is a small pizza still a pizza? Yes.
"the fact is that Pluto IS still a planet." -No... It's not, lol. A dwarf planet is not a type of planet at all, it's a type of celestial body, no different than Asteroids, planets or stars. Having "planet" in it's category doesn't mean it's a planet. If size was the only facotr, Mercury wouldn't be a factor, as some of Jupitor's moons are larger than it. Also, asking "know it all buds" is hardly grounds for calling something a fact... Most of those people speak out of their ass anyway.
@@TsarDragon the problem with your assertion is the word "planet". You can argue with the dictionary all you like, but if I agreed with you, we'd BOTH be wrong
@@criticalreview3633 No one cares about what the dictionary has to say when it comes to space or anything related 10 years or less information. It's outdated and completely useless in this topic.
Simply put, a LIE is something that is NOT TRUE! The ONLY basis for anything "science" currently BELIEVES is true is based on the BELIEF that they're being told the truth via the government, the military, and/or NASA! (...or their international equivalents!)
@@dragonhealer7588 So, if the idea of "trolling" has devolved to the point of JUST disagreeing, then... isn't it YOU that's the troll? (...with respect to my comment, that it?) You see, we've just simply come up with "names" to call people when we disagree with them. There are no "safe spaces" online, so - therefore - one must be "a troll"! OR, someone just actually had the temerity to disagree with you, you don't like it, and you have resorted to the last known "defense" of those ideas which are ACTUALLY quite indefensible: you call them names, as if THAT will be the "answer" to the problem of what was said! You see, the TRUTH can't be labelled as a troll, but individuals who SPEAK the truth can be! How is that any different than those of the Nazis in Germany and the Communists of Lenin's Russia/USSR? Online individuals who cannot win in the "market of ideas" resort to name-calling... which is SO 2nd grade! Learn how to communicate using your BRAIN!!!!!!! Don't like what I say? PROVE ME WRONG!? However, when doing so, DO NOT use other "personalities" or authoritative positions to suggest "my source beats your source," because I regard ALL sources as the same. You MUST use reason, logic, and LEGITIMATE SCIENCE (not simply the belief in what so many for far too long have come to BELIEVE is science... which I call "scientism")! Question EVERYTHING, use your brain, learn how to REALLY think for yourself... not simply parroting the things those in academia have been "preaching" for far too long that canNOT be SCIENTIFICALLY substantiated!!!
Can not believe you don't understand that above 63,000 feet pressure altitude the nitrogen will come out of solution in your blood, and YES called boiling. Due to the lack of enough pressure, not heat.
You even described this in one of the earlier points. The orbiting object is falling towards the larger object. But it is going so fast that it moves around the larger object.
Your 11 is wrong. Radiation would be the mechanism that would cause you to freeze. This assumes you are not too close to the Sun. This is why the Earth does not continue to heat up from the nuclear decay that takes place in it's interior. Space can have a temperature as determined by the radiation field. The cosmic background radiation has been measured to be about 2.7 Kelvin, or about 270.3 Celsius below zero.
FYI, the bible has been telling us the earth is round since the 8th century BC Isaiah 40:22 "It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in."
@@L337g4m3r Your not as smart as you think, if you were you wouldn't be knocking down people who are actually telling the truth. As for your buddy a little further up in the comment section (David Bowie) I suppose when the Bible says that the Earth hangs on nothing that it was just making believe. Before you both piss on somebody else, make sure you're smart enough not to be pissed on your self.
The TRUTH isn't based upon someone's desires! The TRUTH is a universal standard that we are ALL held to... whether we like it (or believe in it) or not! The TRUTH is not a democratically-based belief system, nor is it an individual choice! We MUST get to the point that the TRUTH is the TRUTH... because it's the TRUTH. If you're LEGITIMATELY seeking it and aren't "there" yet, that's a noble pursuit; but don't brow-beat someone because the TRUTH doesn't comport to YOUR "version" of it! Seek the TRUTH, NOT what you think it is and are trying to get everyone to believe!!!
THE Truth is not subject to "your version" or mine, ...or anyone else's! It's subject to it holding up to the barometer of THE TRUTH! Start to think for YOURSELF!!! Stop perpetuating the KNOWN and PROVEN lies of the indoctrination (or "education") system. So, now comes the MUCH bigger question: What is YOUR barometer of THE TRUTH!? If it is not sound in reasoning, it cannot be relied upon... can it? My barometer for THE TRUTH is NOT the "scientific community," NASA, the government (including the indoctrination - er, "education" - system), the military, etc. You MUST decide what your BAROMETER for measuring what is true will be; for me, it's the Bible. Yep, it's a WORLDVIEW "thing" ...and NOT a 'scientific' "thing"! What if the Bible has NEVER been proven false; what then? What if what YOU have been believing was TRUE has been proven false... time and time again? What then? THINK FOR YOURSELF! What are "the powers that be" trying to make you believe? And, better yet... WHY?!? Start to QUESTION everything! Back-up, back-up, back-up... start to see the BIG PICTURE! You're in the matrix of a worldview THEY have created, and you think (and believe) that YOU are a "free thinker." That's hilarious! START TO THINK FOR YOURSELF. Come BACK to the last REAL thing you KNOW is true! Then, question WHY you believe that THAT is "true." You need to start THINKING FOR YOURSELF! Not trying to be mean, harsh, etc... trying to help you become a human BEING... instead of a human "DOING"! Back-up, back-up, back-up... start to see the agenda into which you've been thrown! Stop arguing with human beings, and start arguing with yourself in terms of what you believe... and WHY you believe it! What makes you think you're RIGHT!? THINK! Question everything, until you get BACK to "the Solid Rock" on which you can stand! You were CREATED, you didn't EVOLVE from pond scum! The Earth is NOT a spinning ball soaring through "space"! "Gravity" is actually just density with respect to your relative atmosphere. START THINK for YOURSELF!!! Prove to YOURSELF the things which your indoctrination is pushing you to "believe" (yet cannot PROVE) to be true!
The scientist who decided that Pluto should be a dwarf planet is the same guy that discovered the alleged "planet nine." His daughter even suggested he find a new planet nine before he "found it!"
As far as faster than light speed, there is still much well-researched argument about the "speed" of gravitational propagation. Many "great minds" (Laplace and others) demonstrated that gravity must propagate much faster than light, (possibly VERY much faster), and planetary orbital mechanics seem to support these theses (orbital stability being dependent on instantaneous propagation). Plenty of info on this for those who might be interested.
If im not mistaken Laplace was proved wrong. I believe the best testing we have so far points to gravity propagating between 3*10^17 m/s slower and faster than the speed of light and many interpret that answer as pointing towards gravity propagating at the speed of light due to such a small margin of error.
This is supported by other, more recent work (which includes the very recent gravity wave propagation results). Even "if" gravity was to propagate supraluminally I cannot think of any (feasible) means to exploit this fact - since (As far as we are aware) gravity requires mass, so "modulating" real (vs spin-) gravity means mass modulation. I just threw this one in to stimulate conversation (with success!)
You need space to measure the speed of anything, and I'm sure there are things faster than the speed of light that humans haven't observed or calculated.
I felt I had to reply to this comment since it felt really strange to me thinking about gravity that way. I'm convinced gravity has nothing to do with speed, imo it would be the same as saying the speed or rate at which an object stays as the same object. That doesn't make much sense, you're saying that basically at a certain interval of time gravity goes from point A to point B and it exerts its properties!? I don't see it at all like that, the effect of gravity for me it's like an object in itself, it is constant, it doesn't go from point A to B. An example, imagine the ISS orbiting the planet, i see gravity as a CONSTANT invisible connection between the ISS and the earth, like a rope, there is no speed involved since the two objects were already connected from the beginning. If the ISS moved further away from earth to an higher altitude orbit the rope would get thinner (hence gravity pull being lesser) and the opposite would thicker the rope thus making the force of stronger.
Odruida, it seems much the same to me. The idea of gravity 'traveling' (aside from figuratively) makes no sense to me. It's a constant, non-quantized, force. If it weren't, then, apart from distance, one's rate of movement toward or away from a gravitating body would also increase or decrease the experienced gravitational force as one "ran into" or "ran away from" these supposed gravitons, like a doppler effect. Until and unless science records an effect like that...
Star Trek "StarTrek Return to archons" the Archons "community" can be seen from space by the Enterprise! LIE nither can my own hicktown of a populace of less than a couple thousand people. but Archon Settlement is SO cool to see on the planet from space with the Enterprise flying by in the CGI rehash via Amazon Stream version.
Dark side of the moon... i never took it as BLACK side of the moon. More like dark in the the sense of it being hidden. Going dark, out of sight no contact.
The dark side of the moon is simply the side of the moon opposite to where the sun is. During a full moon, the dark side is away from us. During the new moon, the dark side is on our side. Simple. And no, it's not always full dark. You can sometimes see light from the sun reflected off the earth hit the moon. It's called Earthshine. Here's a picture: www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/earthshine.html
@@tommy3989 I explained what the dark side of the moon is in my first comment. Do you have a problem with the dark side being the side that doesn't have the sun shining on it at the time? Or, are you confused by the "back side"? H'm?
@@tommy3989 Common perhaps, no means universal, and technically *wrong*. During new moon, the side facing us is the dark side - the backside is fully lit.
well.. isn't any state simply just a previous state transitioning into the next? you can have plasma without fire, but you can't have fire without plasma. but then.. "where there's smoke there's fire," so maybe you can have fire without plasma? semantics should be banned from science.
where did you read that (if you can read). the sun is 70% hydrogen, most of the rest is helium, but there are many other elements. it's like saying the human body is only water and carbon, which is also not true. if the sun isn't plasma, then what is plasma? is it not the excited state of electrons? caused by high amounts of heat energy, like maybe, the sun? please explain if you think otherwise. maybe you have some interesting theory, but I'll more likely just facepalm to concussion.
Okay... #20. Earth really isn't a perfect sphere. No Shit. Because there is no such thing as a perfect sphere in nature. But what you fail to mention: If you *could* observe the entire Earth from space, the human eye can't tell the difference anyway. To an observer, the Earth is as much a perfect sphere as anything can be. Also that, if you shrunk Earth to the size of a pool ball, the Earth would be nearly perfectly frictionless. The pool ball (seemingly smooth), if grown to the size of the Earth, would have deeper valleys and higher mountains than Earth. In some cases, that "Pool Ball Earth"'s mountains would extend above its breathable atmosphere, and in the depths of those valleys, the weight of the atmosphere would kill a normal human being.
Carried on its back by banana loving turtles all the way down. Interestingly, they all wear bandannas. I saw this confirmed on a different utube video. Confirmed.
Oh and the whole time I thought it was the boomerang-like banana twizzling around the turtle with the donut in its mouth 0_0 so thanks +Lamster66 for clearing that up ^_^
Didn't know 13,12,10,8,6,5 and 4.and the bary centre,well kind of. I did know planets like jupiter dont orbit the their stars but the systems centre of gravity
The word orbit refers to the path being followed. The path the Earth and Jupiter follow take it around the Sun, therefor, the Earth and Jupiter both orbit the Sun. They also Orbit the barycenter. There is no rule that says your path may only take you around one thing...
Mary K --- I know what you mean. Some of those same people believe there were no dinosaurs, that water is NOT made of H2O, and that gravity doesn't exist. I would say it's funny, but it's not polite to laugh at stupid people.
John --- Yeah, I know what you mean. I grew up in the 70s, so I agree. I have a smartphone that I use for texting, and taking pictures, that's about it! As for the "triggered" thing ---- I don't like that word. Too immature for my liking. I'm a product of a time when "names will never hurt you". You learn to grow a thick skin, or you get thrown under the bus all the time. So I hardly ever get "triggered". Yes, I admit, I have dished out the odd insult here and there, but I'm not one who usually draws first blood, not usually. Sorry if that last post offended you. I was really trying to be funny, but my wife tells me I'm not funny. Maybe I should listen to her. LOL
This video contradicts a previous video you've made where you said your body would" pop like a balloon" and that most definitely your blood would boil your words not mine
The "weightless in space" part is totally incomprehensible. You are *effectively* weightless in *orbit*, because centrifugal force balances with gravity in orbit.
Dude, are you scraping the bottom of the barrel? , don't invent things just to have a channel , if you're running out of things to do a video on, move on man, move on.
I don't care, Pluto is still a planet to me, I like it 😂😂😂
Me Too !
Agree...🎇
Please don't dog Pluto. He don't like it.
Amen, i feel the same way.
Just don't ever go to Pluto, it's a Mickey Mouse planet...or...dwarf planet.
(Extra points to anyone who knows where I stole that from...)
How do you learn to fly?
Throw yourself at the ground and miss. 😆
@Carl Klinkenborg be
They don't like to be called dwarf planets they prefer to be called little planets.
😆😆😆😆
Awwww!!! That’s cute! 😍🙇♀️💞
This video should have been titled: 25 lies perpetuated by uneducated people
"Education is what remains after one has forgotten what one has learned in school." -Albert Einstein
Like the guy doing the video.
Ye like what person above the age of 8 doesnt know the sun isnt a big ball of fire
On top of that this video tells you a few lies of it's own.
#1. Is #15 ~ You lot need to stop half a**ing it with your research. This is at the end of the article I bet you got the info from.
"However, Planet Nine isn’t the only explanation for the orbital behaviors observed. A recent survey of the outer solar system found over 800 trans-Neptunian objects. A random distribution of this matter could also potentially have the same effect on the tilt on the traits observed in various orbits-but the jury is still out."
#2. Is #07 Sound does travel in space and that is why we know what each of the planets in our solar system sounds like. It is not something a person could hear though. This is also why I think the town in New Mexico is resonating with earth and not some mysterious alien base or alien attack on our psychology. FN aliens in everything these days it seems.
#3. Is #05 From NASA: Individual atoms of oxygen are common in space, particularly around massive stars. But molecular oxygen, which makes up about 20 percent of the air we breathe, has eluded astronomers until now. You could of found that out by doing what I did. I literally just typed in "oxygen in space".
#4. Is #03 I am not claiming I know anything more than just this simple little observation. Moving faster than light is simply a matter of how much force you can exert on an object. If this was not true, the force pulling everything in to a black hole would not swallow light and then would never of been proven to exist. Here is a quick little bonus on black holes. They do eventually die out and when this happens a large burst of gamma radiation is shot out of the center like a guy in bed for the first time.
#5. Is #00 You only gave us 21 of 25 in the end.
As I like to do when people are being fed the wrong info on a video and I choose to give a crap and type something, I will copy/paste it in a few comments.
25 SNEAKY Things Hollywood Told You About Space That You Assumed Was Fact
SirQuote This must be the title
25 THINGS...that you assumed WERE Fact. (Or, facts; or, factual).
Best comment to explain this :)
have you guys noticed that correlation between those who are asleep and those who are awake when looking at the likes I'm UA-cam comment sections? almost always the most likes are the blind and dumb and the least likes are those who are awake
Science FICTION is just that, FICTION! There is almost no science in science fiction!
This comment section is about to be full of shitty arguments without valid evidence 😂
...So basically like every other comment section on the internet?
I have valid evidence that your mom...
is an upstanding citizen.
It's FLAT, i tell yer - F. L. A. T. FLATTTTTT!!!
So was parts of this video.
Kinda like a list25 video
"in some sense, we're all orbiting around each other". That's a strangely beautiful thought.
You need to establish that you are an authority on space, astronomy or physics before you go clearing up the "Big lies". Or cite your sources. Most of the points you make are basically correct, and I (an astronomy professor) have been making them in class for decades. But you are especially wrong about the temperature of space (#12 and #11). Astronomers have myriad ways of defining temperature, some of which are independent of the "average kinetic energy of particles" concept. In a vacuum, you can still define temperature in space in terms of the radiation passing through that region. The best number for the average temperature of space (and the universe) is 2.74 Kelvin (~ -454 F) because that is the temperature of the cosmic background radiation (CBR). If a human body were floating in space, and the radiation from the Sun and nearby planets was blocked, it would freeze solid fairly quickly. The body would radiatively cool until it was in thermal equilibrium with the CBR (well, a little warmer than that b/c of radiation from the Milky Way). We're used to being bathed in IR radiation from the Earth/walls around us, but without that, it would be very cold. A common freezer set at -10 F (~250 K) is much warmer than the CBR. The fact that outer solar system objects (e.g., comets, Pluto) are so cold (
@JCP Explain this! For an observer from Earth, the objects in the sky do trace ellipses, but one should not conclude that a spoon is broken, only because one can see its broken image through a half-emptied glass of tea. Circles look ellipses when viewed at an angle, but there is no such thing as "elliptical orbit". "Orbit" is synonymous to "altitude", distance to the center of gravity. To change that distance, another force must be introduced. Otherwise, it's only horizontal momentum and gravity, and they don't change.
Mathematics is unsuitable for describing nature, because of this language's shortcomings. The Universe does not divide by zero or takes the square root of negative number etc. The World is analog, not digital. Through manipulation of Math, all modern pseudo-scientific hoaxes have emerged, be that: black holes, neutron stars, atom bombs, rockets flying in a vacuum and so on. The Math made an impossible possible, but only in Sweet Dreams: tinyurl.com/yy643j53
The most damning evidence of Space Hoax. Read tinyurl.com/y6vwwgv7
@@only2percent762 if as you state there is "no such thing as 'elliptical orbit'"- how then do you explain comets? We can observe their paths, some with periods lasting thousands of years.
...Just don't ask me why they always miss the sun. Perhaps from great distances it's a relatively small target..(?)
@@only2percent762 The force acting on orbits to make them elliptical is gravity. It accelerates the planets on their way towards the sun and then deaccelarates them on their way back. Look up Kepler's second law to understand it better.
I agree with a lot you said but not everything you guys with a PhD or in active work say. Usually you guy have the narrowest minds you guys tend to be the last to accept change and cling by the skin of your fingers to old theories. Maybe because of job role maybe because of pay or department. But believe me most people are not looking to you guys as an authority on the matter because of the industries track record. And we also have access to peer reviewed studies the exact same as you guys. So mate get over yourself and your degree you literally know nothing more than the average joe that’s interested in the subject with google lol
There is no dark side of the Moon. As a matter of fact, it's all dark . (Pink Floyd 1973)
what is the meaning of dark, if humans didn't exist, would the moon still have a dark side?
The Moon's albedo is only 12%. So indeed it is dark. It only looks bright in the sky because sunlight is so bright that even only reflecting 12% is still a lot of light.
infrasleep ki
Pete Lorenzo, Yes
It is I even learned this in school seem like your teachers were uneducated same time I'm homeschooled
How are that "lies"? I think for most entries a better title would be "25 misconceptions that many people have about space"
I agree with you
Sebastian Nolte too true
It’s just to up the views
I said a better title should be called "25 Things dummies think about space" lol.. I was never taught any of these 25 things in my life lol
Yes, there is a difference between a misconception and a lie. A lie is something untrue that is used to get someone to believe in something as a misconception is when someone thinks something is true when in reality it isn't. Basically, Lies are intentionally not true as misconceptions are unintentional and the person saying the misconception doesn't know that what they are saying is not true.
*sorry for the lecture btw XD*
i remember my teacher in elementary school telling us that we had 9 planets and that there was nothing beyond that lol.
The plural of phenomenon is phenomena, not phenomenoms.
@@orangehorse5037 Nice to know Lucky and I are not the only ones!
Actually either can be used.
Correction of language that's not even consider an official language 😩
I have only heard anyone say “the earth is a perfect sphere” once in my life. People tend to say “the earth is round” or “the earth is spherical,” both of which are true - an oblate spheroid is spherical, just not perfectly so, and it is round.
Try telling NASA then big noise. Because all they release is pics of the earth as A PERFECT SPHERE. THINK ABOUT IT.
666dtc - you may very well be the single greatest genius of our time. After all, it is impossible to tell the difference between an oblate spheroid from a perfect sphere at a glance without those nonsense fancy science tools - satanic they are. Brilliance you have. Unbridled brilliance. No has ever thought of this. Just brilliance. Brilliance like the sun orbiting our Earth. I tip many, many hats to your overwhelming and well thought out insight. You should be in charge of all of science. No really, I mean that. Greatness you have.
!
Yep - I was taught in 8th grade (1964) that our planet is an oblate spheroid. It sounded cool so I never forgot it.
io Elmeti you sound like one of these people who use the "water not sticking to a basketball" experiment to "disprove" gravity... Damn the internet for giving a platform to bottom 20% of the intellectual base...
The Plutonians would like to have a word with you.
Nano(meter) Nano(meter)
I was making a Rick and Morty reference. I dunno what Kenneth was doing. Mork and Mindy?
I thought rick and morty's title was supposed to sound like mork and mindy so that might be a point, that it's a reference.
possibly alluding to the fact that dwarf-planet still has the word planet in it. meaning pluto is still a planet. otherwise it would be classified as an asteroid, not a dwarf-PLANET!
"Planetoid" is the word you're looking for.
Don't think " Far Side Of The Moon " would've sold as many albums for Pink Floyd. 🌚
🚬👓
I think it’s a pretty good titel too.
List 25 always know how to get me to stop doing stuff at work and watch their videos
Dustin Tice my daughter as well ..LoL as soos as she gets a notification ....gone is any hope of school work (or chores!!!) ...lol
Thanks list 25 your heart made my day better!!
Ha..I'm taking a dump at work watching this..awesome man
Keith Sandoval tx for the over share ....LoL ( did u atleast enjoy your dump?) :D
Keith Sandoval was it a solid one?
I noticed that Psych reference with Pluto, well done
As usual, every video about space there will be "Flat Earth Trolls" on the comment section, even thought most of them aren't really "flat earth believer" more like *"we're trolling you because our post will make you cringe"*
Ernest Jay and I cringe every time... LoL.
You're right, I do cringe at them, even if i understand it's a joke
*"Earth is flat, it's 6000 years old, nasa lies, dinosaur made by satan, bible is the truth !"*
is that make you cringe yet ?
yup
How about that. A troll complaining about trolls!
We can land on the sun, but only if we do it at night.
funny isnt it that the closer you get to the sun the colder it gets. funny how the sun being a fake 93 million miles away shines all the way to flat earth but the higher you go the darket it gets.
@@questioneverything8301 life truly is curious, I personally don't believe in the flat earth theory, but then again I've never been to space to do a 360 around our planet so I can't say for sure. But each to their own. Take it easy.
@@leecullen7651 thats the thing no one as been to space. so do we know all the details no. but then nasa wont let anyone go up above a certain height either. you have to asks permission and then have the funding. also some that have been are told to use a fish eye lens. the red bull jump from space for example. but yeah its good that you dont just dismis it stay cool too.
@@questioneverything8301 You sir, are a fucking idiot.
LOL
Continuously falling over the horizon... sounds like an orbit
Yes .. falling over the horizon is a orbit ...
That's just confusing saying falling when their orbiting.
It's not flying its falling in style
@Jesse Franco your IQ is below 30
Merry Christmas Mike keep up the good work another year of great videos thank you for sharing
Absurd. Clearly the earth is 53 and 1/2 sided hexagonal prism
ua-cam.com/video/KJ9QR0PfOoQ/v-deo.html&nohtml5=False ~Mike
Monfe earth is shielded by a bubble as it floats silently withjn deep dark ocean of Luke warm water.. Would be the popular belief if someone in the past claimed it true..
The last point really makes you appreciate the balance of it all.
Pluto will always be a planet to me.
RealmOfWonders... Fool to you its nothing but a faint dot at best... Jackass
jupiter is a micro-star, not a planet either. stfu, a planet is a planet. it's all just groups of matter floating in the space-time plane of the universe. what makes something a planet is how we define a word. refining how we define a word doesn't change what that object was or still is.
Why hold onto junk knowledge, as if it were a treasure?
Far more exciting to find a real ninth planet.
dward planets are planets
All it is is a chunk of ice and rock floating in space that you can't even see. So why do you even care?
I love that you guys are still using the Pluto joke from Psych.
P.S. Does anyone else think that "Falling over the Horizon" would be a good song name?
Big Dave 88888 yeah I like it
No. But it would be a great album name in a situation where the name of the album is not based off of a single song on that album. For the record (pun intended), it would make a terrible band name.
I think it'd make a great title for my new novel! Cheers!
Meanwhile there are still people who believe earth is flat . They are #flatearthers
Only the retards still believe the 20th century NASA Disney fairy tale the Earth is a spinning ball flying around in a vacuum.
Go get an education mate ^
Muslims
Bruce Aiken since you're here someone said they didn't believe anyone was dumb enough to think the sun was a fire. What do you think the sun is?
I wasn't lied to. It's good to know that we may be able to keep ourselves warm in space with our own body heat!
RE Satellites: the GPS module uses satellites. The network and internet sides of it, yes mostly use wireless to the nearest access point which is largely a cabled global network.
Your videos may encourage more subscribers if you actually did some research and informed viewers rather than just telling mistruths.
GPS only use the signal coming from satellite. There's no traffic back. May the title changed to "Your mobile phone uses satellite to communicate over".
I laughed so hard when he said earth 🌏 doesn’t orbit the sun 🌞 like if you did too.
Technically masses like stars and planets are so massive that they distort space and it is the distortion caused by the sun's mass that the Earth orbits and not the sun itself. But he did fail to explain it very well.
This makes sense to me because I watched a video about 4D a long time ago and this is how they. kind of explained it so it makes sense
I'll "like" it when you can PROVE that Earth orbits the sun! Until then, ...not so fast! Stop BELIEVING that which you've been indoctrinated to believe is "education," learn to think for yourself, etc.
Earth orbits a point in space that's 1,500,000 km from the Sun. The Sun is at one focus of an ellipse and nothing is at the other focus. This orbit is so perfectly circular that you couldn't draw a circle 4 feet across that perfect with a fine nib ball point pen because that nib is too thick.
Typo correction "1,500,000 km" S.B. "2,500,000 km".
To save star wars a bit, you can hear explosions in space but not in the normal way. Instead of sound moving particles in the air, the explosion would cause particles to be shot out in all directions and some of them would probably hit your ear. Also, the simulated atmosphere around the death star and the oxygen from the fighters' life support systems would allow fire in some way in the event of an explosion.
Planet Hollywood used to be a restaurant chain. Now it's a dwarf restaurant chain.
I always wondered if Planet Hollywood really were since a planet is a wanderer. So your explanation is as good as any!
More simpler from their pov: Earth is flat and all is lie!!! :))))
Because #5 just debunked the Big Bang “Theory”.
how did it debunk the theory?
Just #25 alone was enough to make me stop watching this junk
So what is the correct answer?
@@Swonder1972 It's actually true. Like everything that is in orbit. People should do there research.
@@MegaRoder Correct...it is true... perhaps these nay-sayers should simply look at the definition of "orbit"...the middle point of being slung out and being drawn in...but it is much easier to act intellectually high and mighty.... leftists fade that philosophy all the time.... I adore calling these self deluding fools out...
Same
nela gordon low orbit IS falling. cause earths gravity IS pulling you down BUT because of the acceleration they don’t actually fall. So can u reconsider?
12. Wrong - Space is cold, you even contradict yourself, cold is the absence of heat/energy, with no partials to excite there is nothing to create any heat. What you are misunderstanding is that for an object to dissipate it's heat it needs to come into contact with particles of a lower energy state which then absorb some of the said energy, because there are significantly less particles in space this process takes a lot longer than say if it were in a cold atmosphere, but given enough time the heat would still dissipate, until the object and space reached an equilibrium, which at the temperature of space is about 2-4 Kelvin out of direct sunlight, which is approx. -270c. So no, space is most definitely very very fucking cold!
Luke Gibson Both are right. What you are forgetting is the audience. The video portrays the extreme simplicity for a mass audience. Pay attention to the vocabulary in the video: “nearly impossible” and “basically”. I’d also like to call into question grammar, spelling, and punctuation if you are a native English speaker. If you are not a native English speaker, allowances might be allowed.
@@sunh1213 Thank you so much for spotting the typos in my writing. I don't have time to fix them myself. If you would be so kind as the correct me with the adjusted version down below so i may learn from your infinite wisdom. I wouldn't want anybody thinking I'm some non native terrorist. The horror I feel to think that my lapse grammatical and spelling perfection was so easily mistaken for the incoherent ramblings of a dirty foreigner. I'm am forever in your debt for saving me from myself. Maybe this is why my cat went missing and my wife left me for that man with the funny accent. I must repent oh exalted one who is the keeper of the typo allowence and has the power to revoke my citizenship given at birth based on UA-cam comments. Please forgive me master!
I'm 12 and I got every single one right except 23
Get them at an early age, the programming runs deep....
Kristupas Petraitis good for you 12
i can actually explain 23 if you want to hear that
It isn't really much of a scientific mystery, it's primarily economics. The primary reason is that high bandwidth communications (as in gigabits or terabits per second you need for whole countries) is essentially impossible to do over radio, because you have narrow bandwidth you can use (competing with everything else), whereas with wired (or optical) you have a full spectrum to play with. Then of course there's also weather and interference to deal with with radio.
Wired/optical communications has FAR higher capacities and cheaper. As long as you can afford to run a wire to the nearest node on the network, or do a short wireless hop to someplace that is connected to the wired network, that's the way to go. Even cell phones do this.
Problem being if you're highly mobile, out of range of wireless, or in the middle of the ocean, you can't get access to the wired network. So you use a satellite phone. Similarly, rural areas even in developed countries, often get their TV or Internet by satellite. Sure cheaper than running miles of copper for one customer.
There was a period where satellite was more heavily used in communication, but that's when there were a *lot* fewer trans-oceanic cables, and the cables were just simple copper wire - you can't run the bandwidth really high with that. It wasn't until fiber optics hit its stride that the sheer quantity of data we want to send could be sent at all.
Apropos that: In the early 80s, the precursor to the Internet (UUCP/Usenet/email) travelled between Australia and North America by magnetic tape. Satellite was too expensive for what was essentially skunkworks. Once a day regular as clockwork, a tape would be shipped and another one received. Ironically, it was NASA doing it for us free - the NASA/Australian stations had no other way to move the vast quantities of data they produced to and from the USA, so they shipped whole cases of them daily, and let one magtape be used for Usenet/e-mail communications. I knew the NASA engineer at NASA Ames that did "our end". Which led to the line "never underestimate the bandwidth of a delivery truck full of magtapes" ;-). Especially 30Tb LT08 magtapes. Latency sucks tho.
Paul Curran yep. The deception has to start early
#25 is immediately wrong: astronauts truly are "weightless" in space. However, they're not "mass-less" and that's the difference.
Mass is both a property of a physical body and a measure of its resistance to acceleration when a net force is applied. The object's mass also determines the strength of its gravitational attraction to other bodies. The basic SI unit of mass is the kilogram.
1kg on Earth is = 1kg on the moon ... BUT that same 1kg on the moon would WEIGHT 1 / 6th of what it does on earth.
#1. Is #15 ~ You lot need to stop half a**ing it with your research. This is at the end of the article I bet you got the info from.
"However, Planet Nine isn’t the only explanation for the orbital behaviors observed. A recent survey of the outer solar system found over 800 trans-Neptunian objects. A random distribution of this matter could also potentially have the same effect on the tilt on the traits observed in various orbits-but the jury is still out."
#2. Is #07 Sound does travel in space and that is why we know what each of the planets in our solar system sounds like. It is not something a person could hear though. This is also why I think the town in New Mexico is resonating with earth and not some mysterious alien base or alien attack on our psychology. FN aliens in everything these days it seems.
#3. Is #05 From NASA: Individual atoms of oxygen are common in space, particularly around massive stars. But molecular oxygen, which makes up about 20 percent of the air we breathe, has eluded astronomers until now. You could of found that out by doing what I did. I literally just typed in "oxygen in space".
#4. Is #03 I am not claiming I know anything more than just this simple little observation. Moving faster than light is simply a matter of how much force you can exert on an object. If this was not true, the force pulling everything in to a black hole would not swallow light and then would never of been proven to exist. Here is a quick little bonus on black holes. They do eventually die out and when this happens a large burst of gamma radiation is shot out of the center like a guy in bed for the first time.
#5. Is #00 You only gave us 21 of 25 in the end.
As I like to do when people are being fed the wrong info on a video and I choose to give a crap and type something, I will copy/paste it in a few comments.
@@xXHadrielXx you make some good points but in the future you may want to edit out your tendency to write, "would of" rather than, "would have".
I know it may seem like a small thing but it's definatly not an error a highly educated person would ever let slip by in their writing. Think of it like one of those little social rules, such as which fork to use for what course at a fancy dinner, that easily inform the ultra rich they have a poser in their midst.
Trust me, the right people will take you far more seriously if you clean up your grammar.
Actually they are still within the Earth's gravitational pull so still have some weight not just mass.
The fact that we only see one side of the moon has nothing to do with the rotation of the earth, only the rotation of the moon and the revolution of the moon around the earth
it has nothing to do with any rotation.
The moon is in what scientist call a tidal lock, basically the gravity of the earth effects one side of the moon more than the other because one side is closer. It also has to do with the size of the moon relative to the earth, the orbit trajectory, the speed, etc. The point is that one side of the moon faces the earth at all times. When the moon is completely dark, the side facing away is lit up.
Good point, but how many have "deduced" that because what we see in the night sky (the shaped of the moon), it MUST FOLLOW that the Earth must ALSO be a "sphere"? (Which, of course, is stupid logic, being that we can't PROVE that the moon is a sphere, in that we ONLY see one "side" of it!) So, it begs the question: who is lying? Those "selling" that the Earth is flat or those "selling" that the Earth is flat-ish? NO ONE can prove it either way, which relegates one to a BELIEF one way or the other... which is NOT "science," but "faith," which is typically taught in a different building at our universities! :-)
I never saw this top 25. Very enjoyable to watch and learn.
We have a HUGE back-catalog.
Can someone explain to me why everyone is so distraught about Pluto not being called a planet?! It's still there, it's still really interesting, with its massive moon, its cool ice patterns. We didn't lose it from our Solar System! Is everyone so sad because they have to revise what they were taught at school (that our solar system has 9 planets)? It's shocking to me that everyone has such a hard time and a huge emotional response to a change in classification
Some things are just hard to let go of. -A
It failed on the the critea of "must not share its orbit with other objects, excluding moons" its orbit is shared with a LOT of other objects.
funlovincop because people are stupid
Pluto was only classified as a planet for 76.5 years during which time it only completed 1/3 of one solar orbit. Get over it people.
Yeah, it's silly. Pluto was just reclassified, it wasn't demoted or busted down to a lower rank or something. Pluto doesn't give a shit what we call it.
#13, I know there are flat~earthers & inner~earthers... But I met a guy today, that believes that the World doesn't spin on it's Axis. I guess the sun moves around us, along with the moon and stars. I think?... I am still trying to grasp or comprehend the entire concept... pretty sure it set Neil DeGrasse head spinning! lol
as for experience when traveling by air for very long 22 plus hours, you fly rather high into the levels of the atmosphere at a point you can see the curve of the planet. I know it is not flat.
I can see the night sky it's hourly changes.
also, it changes with the seasons. The Sun moves across the sky.
I have sat under a tree and been hit by the falling of leaves or fruit.
I have sat in a meadow, I heard the birds sing,
I have watched the coming, the going of a train, I experienced the Doppler effect.
I know from experience the effects of gravity,
I do not know everything.
I too have discovered much of passed down knowledge is flawed,
but to say, one knows nothing is rather presumptive.
there was a time I knew absolutely nothing.
but once a being has reached beyond the zygote stages, we begin to think. it might not be a full Consciousness but it is thought.
I have found the "you know nothing" as a copout.
this person I know did not have any real foundation.
from what I heard before I butted in... he stated the flat-earthers and inner~earthers are weird, although he said, the whole big blue ball spinning a 100 billion miles an hour, is equally weird, we would all spin off and go flinging out into the void.
To me after actually observing with my person.
I find it odd.
this is a belief, I had not heard for many many human years.
I found it amusing when the Flat~earthers reappeared...
I do not know everything, that be absurd.
although to suggest after so many years alive to know absolutely nothing is equally absurd.
Forever a student always learning.
never blank.
if you know absolutely nothing how can you school others for their lackings?
if you are flawless, what do you know of flaws?
Intelligence is. it can grow. but it never is nothing.
YOU CAN NOT SEE THE CURVATURE OF THE EARTH FROM AN AIRPLANE. FACT. So why say you can? Just to CON the great unwashed who have never been on an airplane?
I've been to Mexico, Spain, Portugal, Holland and Egypt. I always try to sit by a window and guess what? NO CURVE.
YOU CAN ONLY FOOL THE FOOLS. What do you get out of it?
I saw, what I saw. I am not telling you what to believe. I traveled the polar route. are you sitting or standing somewhere? do you see anything in front of you? have you ever stood where a rainbow prism light falls? I cannot fully describe those things either but they have been witnessed but. not just one. so those with that common knowledge can know what is meant. I do not know what makes people believe it is flat or a rock that does not spin or that there are advanced inner earthers? I did find the fact we do not spin. as unheard of. so I did "smirk" maybe they know something we do not. honestly, I have been too busy to look it up. I at first thought he was joking... but now? I must look into it... I have never claimed to have knowledge of everything or I would be a lot wealthier I would have ended world hunger, Had I unlimited knowledge I would cure the world's children. Of hunger, disease, homelessness, ignorance. I would not be weeping at our inability to do any of those things...ᵃᶫᵗʰᵒᵘᵍʰ, ᴵ ʰᵃᵛᵉ ᶰᵒᵗ ʸᵉᵗ ᵍᶦᵛᵉᶰ ᵘᵖ ᵗʰᵃᵗ ᶠᶦᵍʰᵗ⋅ ᴺᵒʳ ˢʰᵃᶫᶫ ᴵ ᵉᵛᵉʳ⋅
it is so terribly sad to see, others look into the abyss so long they lose humanity. retain only the ability to abuse, to judge not enlighten. hell, I was told is full knowledge of opportunities missed. having an ability to make something better but walking away, indifferent to life or death.
IDK just some little thing passed down... Some knowledge passed down is a blessing, if one can learn to listen? then maybe they will learn to hear as well? maybe only a whore's ass would know. Merry Christmas... ᴴᵉʸ, ˢᵃᶰᵗᵃ ᵖᵃˢˢ ᵐᵉ ᵗʰᵃᵗ ᵇᵒᵗᵗᶫᵉ⋅⋅⋅⋅
Mad honey bee I uh.. Well ya I'm a sorry for being so agressivly me it really just I'm jealous because you a M. H. B.... I amount to the just no higher than say a sac of smashed assholes...I m sorry
A better title would common misconceptions people make about space because they don't know much science
That seems suitable. I haven’t found a single Flat Earther who has studied physics.
@@Lamster66 Thats pretty funny!
Remember when you're teacher would scold you for not answering the question..
"right?"
People don't believe the earth is a giant boomerang smh, uneducated.
but it is
edwin serrano it is flat
Jeffrey Dean dude I just wrote this as a joke.
Jeffrey Dean True, I should've just said the Earth is a giant slice of pizza or something more easily identified as sarcasm.
Jeffrey Dean I believe the change I have made will fix future misconceptions.
"The sun is yellow." That is a new one on me. Unless the definition of yellow has been drastically changed, I would have never called the Sun yellow.
Indrid Cold You’ve never heard the sun is yellow? Huh? Kids color the sun yellow with crayons at just 2 years old or so. That’s an incredibly common thing that is said.
@@Sinnbad21 Are you taking advise from young children? The is white. Maybe kids colour it white so it contrasts against the white paper. But they also colour green people, pink horses, and blue dogs. It is a G type star producing visible white light, and ultraviolet light. Yellow light is not produced.
@@indridcold8433 I never said the sun was actually yellow. I just said that it considered and often labeled yellow by almost everyone. It surprised me that you’ve never heard it described as yellow
@@Sinnbad21 No, I have never heard it referred to as yellow. I have heard, "brilliant, white, shiny." I have heard it as, "class G," a few rare times.
...Flat earthers incoming....
opium extract Shut up MINCE For BRAIN'S.
Damnit I wanted the comment about how there would be an ass hole who would say such a thing.... Then I laughed because it was funny. Now I feel like a schmuck! Good comment (from a flat earther)
Mr Jones how do u know?????? Just because they said so???
kung fu kenny how do you know its flat? Because someone said so?
All lied earth not almost round nor almost flat. Its hexagon :P
The earth is not flat??? Holy shit!!!!
How do you know , like we can't go there to see ....
@@kaylalily1127 well if everything else is round by telescope the odds for us is pretty high miss flat earth 😂
Most claims in this vid are indeed true but they were not opposed or contradicted in the first place. So this vid in itself is in fact a bit of a sneaky lie. Btw, FIRE does not always need oxygen to be classified as fire, that's an inner orbit Earthern concept. Heliumfusion is also fire but without oxygen. Like life without oxygen is also life, it's called anaerobic life. Just another concept of functionalism
The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.
I KNEW IT!
BenderRodriguez10 man that was so corny I had to laugh!
Not only did NASA not pay to develop the pen; they didn't even pay for the ones they used. Fisher gave them two cases of pens (which NASA cheerfully accepted and used) so they could advertise that the pen is used by NASA in space.
Nope. They didn't use pencils as the chance of breaking a nib and the small piece of graphite floating off (or falling over the horizon) and lodging in a vital component was considered unacceptable.
Russia also uses these pens in their space programme. Before these pens the US and Soviet space programs used wax pencils (colouring pencils).
+STELLAFELLA
Pay attention. Stop listening to FE garbage. I remember when that first came out in the 60's. It was immediately walked back by the fisher company because of the cost.
@@spacecadet35 are you serious? They say exact the same thing in the video....
+Jeffrey Schouten. The video says something quite different from that which I said. The video says that the Russians used "Pencils" in space. This was not true because of the risk of a graphite based pencil lead snapping off and getting into a control pencil. Instead of using graphite pencils, as implied by this video, everybody used WAX pencils, also known as "colouring pencils". These are a very different item.
I would have liked this video if the “truths” hadn’t been so full of errors.
I was just about to write something similar... and then changed my mind. Until I read your comment. This video is so pathetic that even Trump understands it. The narrator makes a point, serves a question... and just moves on... SAD
Couldn’t agree more, this guy was wrong about some stuff
@IgnoranceIsNot AVirtue , it's no use trying to talk with someone like that. People like him live to harass, distort quotes and show their racism and bigotry. It's pathetic really.
@randyland inc , I saw where you said that the moon doesn't rotate? That's not true. It does rotate, it just takes it the same amount of time to rotate as it does to orbit earth. So it appears to not rotate. Before you start acting like you're right and being a dick, make sure you are right FIRST before acting like an idiot. You'll look less stupid then.
@IgnoranceIsNot AVirtue , right? It is hard to tell, but some of what he said is consistent with what flat earthers say. So it is safe to assume that he is one as well. Especially with that amount of incoherent babbling.
Lost me at Pluto. Pluto will always be a planet to me. #JusticeForPluto ...
His mic sounds like he is in space.
There's a bulge near my equator too what a cool coincidence.
From watching this video? (^_^(
Michael Bay hates number 5
Chris Deleon number 5 hates Michael Bay!!! 😆
Chemical engineer and NASA’s oldest active astronaut at age 62, Don Petitt says, “I’d go to the moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don’t have the technology to do that anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and it’s a painful process to build it back again.”
25 lies replaced with 25 new ones. SMH.
Great one liner! Not much truth out there anymore.
You are only kids because smh was actually made to mean "smash me harder"
...
Number 3 may not be true, meaning that quantum entanglement doesn't necessarily imply faster-than-light communication between the two entangled photons.
We need to be precise with what communication means here. As I understand it the communication is in fact instant, but we can never use it in a communication device because measuring the system would break the quantum entanglement.
Also if we could use it it would make communication with the past possible thus leading to all sorts of time travel paradoxes. Just combine quantum entanglement with relativity of simultaneity and you will immediately see why.
Its funny how he used more lies to replace the old ones... 😂😂
"Lies told to u bout space. Num.25, asteriods are weightless is space? Well SORT OF" I THOUGHT THEY WERE LIES NO SORTAS
3. Nothing can surpass light travel unless its pure energy - which light is. You’re saying that’s a lie about space because of the possibility of warping the space time continuum using quantum mechanics, which we wouldn’t even know where to begin on knowing how to do that.
Nope, even Einstein claimed that atoms and particles too small for us to see could "cheat" his theory. He continues this by saying that they use time not Light to 'cheat it" This is why EInstein claims Time-Travel forward and backwards would be possible. They "Cheat" they can appear in future or past, thus moving faster than light. Ive seen the experiments for this test, though I do not know how they created it. I have seen the results, and they suggest particles do exist that move faster than Light. It is now a given that while Einstein theory is still sound, it doesnt take into account unknown particles that could 'cheat' the system. for example, we could bend/warp space to be in an area within seconds across the other side of Universe. However, to do this we need a power of at least one or more Suns. The Irony in this, Cowboy Bebop appears to have been correct with their gates. I give this example because we be using a type of system those particles do. Appearing in another location in seconds or minutes. In theory, we simply be "cheating" light ourselves. Star Trek uses a Warp system to do this. Though IRL, the Enterprise be acrosss the Galaxy in seconds or Minutes not days. Voyager attempted to use this in their show.
Stacie Meier I’ve heard that before but it really only works with things the size of the atoms themselves.. You’re talking about wormholes, those things smaller then atoms that “cheat the system”... they do exist, and they’re all around us and what not but they’re too small to go through, the experiments that have been done with them aren’t necessarily for understanding how to use them but rather the understanding of them. I haven’t seen one in person but I’ve read about them. Hypothetically if you were to generate one or upscale one big enough for us to use that would take the same amount of energy you mentioned, but all of this is just theory - general knowledge of right now, anything smaller then atoms like string theory or quantum foam for example is just a theory... a fucking good theory that’s probably true, but not something we have valid proof of fact (as of yet), just like the idea of upscaling wormholes and what not. :p
Tyler Furtado, Thank you for generally explaining this. It saves me the time. Also, no rule in relativity says that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Only that, if it does, it is moving backward in time and , therefore, does not "exist" for us. Of course, to present understanding, those "things" would have to be massless. Otherwise, as you've stated, it would (theoretically) take an infinite amount of energy to propel them to such speeds, as their mass would creep ever closer to infinity as they are accelerated.
Tyler Furtado.... all you know... is what was told to you... Some one sold you on the idea and you bought it worse you believe it blindly.... Be it space or god or even atoms.. All word of mouth... smart folks speak from direct experience dreamers speak from replayed regargitsted prechewed batch of soggy donkey pubes and dingleberry slap grass and they do it in a manner that suggests their superiority...own your opinions
Tyler Furtado he said quantum entanglement. Could lead to evidence of faster-than-light travel.
Most of the items on this list are not lies. They were assumptions made by most first graders. I was hoping this list would be interesting,, but far from it.
25 things we used to think were true but have since updated due to better data.
So basically, Earth is fucked if something happens to any other planet in our solar system?
Here is my question:
Is the debris rings around Uranus and Saturn collections from a missing destroyed planet from 6000 years ago? Samaritan Legends of Earth and two suns and moons kind of question? It was recorded in human history they existed... are the rings of those planets the collections of destroyed planets and does that explain the craters on the Moon?
I still consider Pluto a planet. Call planet 9, Planet 10.
Too bad planet 9 doesn’t even exist
He's a dog
It's also plausible that movies like StarWars could be fairly accurate. Its usually a ship that blows up in space. Ships filled with people, who breath air which the ship would need to be filled with in order for people to survive, so there would be an oxygen source to ignite if a ship hypothetically blew up, not really much different to your rocket fuels in the example.
1:46 so that’s a Hollywood lie not a NASA lie. Plus, I think everybody already knew that
I don't think the video was meant to be aimed at NASA
Despite the efforts to change the curriculum and demote Pluto, the fact is that Pluto IS still a planet.
Doubt me? Look it up, or ask your know it all buds what Pluto is. They'll likely say Pluto is a 'dwarf planet', or that it's a 'planet minor'. I rest my case. The very people claiming Pluto is NOT a planet in one breath are literally acknowledging in the next that Pluto IS still a planet. (This narrator was no exception) All they've done is add a descriptive of the TYPE of planet it is, and in order to be a special class of planet it must first and foremost be a planet.
Is a Large pizza still a pizza? Yes. Is a small pizza still a pizza? Yes.
"the fact is that Pluto IS still a planet." -No... It's not, lol. A dwarf planet is not a type of planet at all, it's a type of celestial body, no different than Asteroids, planets or stars. Having "planet" in it's category doesn't mean it's a planet.
If size was the only facotr, Mercury wouldn't be a factor, as some of Jupitor's moons are larger than it.
Also, asking "know it all buds" is hardly grounds for calling something a fact... Most of those people speak out of their ass anyway.
@@TsarDragon the problem with your assertion is the word "planet".
You can argue with the dictionary all you like, but if I agreed with you, we'd BOTH be wrong
@@criticalreview3633 No one cares about what the dictionary has to say when it comes to space or anything related 10 years or less information. It's outdated and completely useless in this topic.
These are mostly just misconceptions centered around wording.
There are so many faults with this awful video it's difficult to know where to begin with a critique!
Go ahead... give it shot.
Matse Kase ū
Okay... Start at 1.
You have a strange definition of what a lie is.
Simply put, a LIE is something that is NOT TRUE! The ONLY basis for anything "science" currently BELIEVES is true is based on the BELIEF that they're being told the truth via the government, the military, and/or NASA! (...or their international equivalents!)
@@drileydriley2814 People talking about any belief are lazy fatasses that look only for excuses just to avoid testing something by themselves.
@@imiqar2607 If you're speaking about the so-called "scientific community," then you and I are in full agreement! I couldn't agree more!!! :-)
@@drileydriley2814
So incorrect you are just trolling.
@@dragonhealer7588 So, if the idea of "trolling" has devolved to the point of JUST disagreeing, then... isn't it YOU that's the troll? (...with respect to my comment, that it?) You see, we've just simply come up with "names" to call people when we disagree with them. There are no "safe spaces" online, so - therefore - one must be "a troll"! OR, someone just actually had the temerity to disagree with you, you don't like it, and you have resorted to the last known "defense" of those ideas which are ACTUALLY quite indefensible: you call them names, as if THAT will be the "answer" to the problem of what was said! You see, the TRUTH can't be labelled as a troll, but individuals who SPEAK the truth can be! How is that any different than those of the Nazis in Germany and the Communists of Lenin's Russia/USSR? Online individuals who cannot win in the "market of ideas" resort to name-calling... which is SO 2nd grade! Learn how to communicate using your BRAIN!!!!!!! Don't like what I say? PROVE ME WRONG!? However, when doing so, DO NOT use other "personalities" or authoritative positions to suggest "my source beats your source," because I regard ALL sources as the same. You MUST use reason, logic, and LEGITIMATE SCIENCE (not simply the belief in what so many for far too long have come to BELIEVE is science... which I call "scientism")! Question EVERYTHING, use your brain, learn how to REALLY think for yourself... not simply parroting the things those in academia have been "preaching" for far too long that canNOT be SCIENTIFICALLY substantiated!!!
Can not believe you don't understand that above 63,000 feet pressure altitude the nitrogen will come out of solution in your blood, and YES called boiling. Due to the lack of enough pressure, not heat.
this guy was really wrong about so many things
Half the stuff is stupid and wrong, most phone calls do go over underwater cables.
I was like wth when I heard that 😂
I thought these were all obvious? Who dident know these and why
dunno about most of these other muppits, but i enjoyed it and have nothing negative to say
of course you did, you are dumb and accept anything on youtube as true
@@gosubreboot713 straight to the insults, good for you
You even described this in one of the earlier points. The orbiting object is falling towards the larger object. But it is going so fast that it moves around the larger object.
Your 11 is wrong. Radiation would be the mechanism that would cause you to freeze. This assumes you are not too close to the Sun. This is why the Earth does not continue to heat up from the nuclear decay that takes place in it's interior. Space can have a temperature as determined by the radiation field. The cosmic background radiation has been measured to be about 2.7 Kelvin, or about 270.3 Celsius below zero.
Lol globe people don't even have solid explanations for how it works but tend to bash flat earthers, talk about hypocrisy with a capital H
Earth is the only "planet" not named after a"God"
Not really Its called Gaia in some cultures
The sun is nuclear. It doesn't require oxygen. In fact, in the late stages of a star, which is what our sun is, it makes oxygen.
I vote for the nuclear option!
Nuclear Fusion
Very interesting! I loved this one. Thanks!
FYI, the bible has been telling us the earth is round since the 8th century BC
Isaiah 40:22
"It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in."
@David Bowie How do you explain all the science facts in the bible, science facts that were't discovered until the past one hundred years.
@No problem No problem All that means is that the Bible is fake news.
@No problem No problem Yes I would have to work at being stupid because my high I.Q. keeps me too smart.
@@L337g4m3r Your not as smart as you think, if you were you wouldn't be knocking down people who are actually telling the truth. As for your buddy a little further up in the comment section (David Bowie) I suppose when the Bible says that the Earth hangs on nothing that it was just making believe. Before you both piss on somebody else, make sure you're smart enough not to be pissed on your self.
@@paulm.gilbert1096 All I know is that I am smarter than anyone who thinks the Earth is flat.
Why did you call them lies?....you need to call it your version.
The TRUTH isn't based upon someone's desires! The TRUTH is a universal standard that we are ALL held to... whether we like it (or believe in it) or not! The TRUTH is not a democratically-based belief system, nor is it an individual choice! We MUST get to the point that the TRUTH is the TRUTH... because it's the TRUTH. If you're LEGITIMATELY seeking it and aren't "there" yet, that's a noble pursuit; but don't brow-beat someone because the TRUTH doesn't comport to YOUR "version" of it! Seek the TRUTH, NOT what you think it is and are trying to get everyone to believe!!!
A lie is a lie lol. Its made up. Fantasy. He explained each point.
Why? Look up clickbait. That is all.
THE Truth is not subject to "your version" or mine, ...or anyone else's! It's subject to it holding up to the barometer of THE TRUTH! Start to think for YOURSELF!!! Stop perpetuating the KNOWN and PROVEN lies of the indoctrination (or "education") system. So, now comes the MUCH bigger question: What is YOUR barometer of THE TRUTH!? If it is not sound in reasoning, it cannot be relied upon... can it? My barometer for THE TRUTH is NOT the "scientific community," NASA, the government (including the indoctrination - er, "education" - system), the military, etc. You MUST decide what your BAROMETER for measuring what is true will be; for me, it's the Bible. Yep, it's a WORLDVIEW "thing" ...and NOT a 'scientific' "thing"! What if the Bible has NEVER been proven false; what then? What if what YOU have been believing was TRUE has been proven false... time and time again? What then? THINK FOR YOURSELF! What are "the powers that be" trying to make you believe? And, better yet... WHY?!? Start to QUESTION everything! Back-up, back-up, back-up... start to see the BIG PICTURE! You're in the matrix of a worldview THEY have created, and you think (and believe) that YOU are a "free thinker." That's hilarious! START TO THINK FOR YOURSELF. Come BACK to the last REAL thing you KNOW is true! Then, question WHY you believe that THAT is "true." You need to start THINKING FOR YOURSELF! Not trying to be mean, harsh, etc... trying to help you become a human BEING... instead of a human "DOING"! Back-up, back-up, back-up... start to see the agenda into which you've been thrown! Stop arguing with human beings, and start arguing with yourself in terms of what you believe... and WHY you believe it! What makes you think you're RIGHT!? THINK! Question everything, until you get BACK to "the Solid Rock" on which you can stand! You were CREATED, you didn't EVOLVE from pond scum! The Earth is NOT a spinning ball soaring through "space"! "Gravity" is actually just density with respect to your relative atmosphere. START THINK for YOURSELF!!! Prove to YOURSELF the things which your indoctrination is pushing you to "believe" (yet cannot PROVE) to be true!
@@drileydriley2814 agreed.
No, no, no..the moon is made of cheese and the Empire blew our other 3 after trump was elected. Lmfao
Aye thanks so much for putting this together my dude
Pluto was voted down by galaxy astronomers. I just ignore them.
Chevelle astronomers are much more trust worthy
It failed on the "must have no other bodies in the same orbit, excluding moons" category...it shares that orbit with a LOT of other things.
Pluto is a dog.
The scientist who decided that Pluto should be a dwarf planet is the same guy that discovered the alleged "planet nine." His daughter even suggested he find a new planet nine before he "found it!"
Does this guy even know what he's talking about...?!!!
Yes
Well with a question that vague I'm not even sure what your talking about.
As far as faster than light speed, there is still much well-researched argument about the "speed" of gravitational propagation. Many "great minds" (Laplace and others) demonstrated that gravity must propagate much faster than light, (possibly VERY much faster), and planetary orbital mechanics seem to support these theses (orbital stability being dependent on instantaneous propagation). Plenty of info on this for those who might be interested.
If im not mistaken Laplace was proved wrong. I believe the best testing we have so far points to gravity propagating between 3*10^17 m/s slower and faster than the speed of light and many interpret that answer as pointing towards gravity propagating at the speed of light due to such a small margin of error.
This is supported by other, more recent work (which includes the very recent gravity wave propagation results). Even "if" gravity was to propagate supraluminally I cannot think of any (feasible) means to exploit this fact - since (As far as we are aware) gravity requires mass, so "modulating" real (vs spin-) gravity means mass modulation. I just threw this one in to stimulate conversation (with success!)
You need space to measure the speed of anything, and I'm sure there are things faster than the speed of light that humans haven't observed or calculated.
I felt I had to reply to this comment since it felt really strange to me thinking about gravity that way. I'm convinced gravity has nothing to do with speed, imo it would be the same as saying the speed or rate at which an object stays as the same object. That doesn't make much sense, you're saying that basically at a certain interval of time gravity goes from point A to point B and it exerts its properties!? I don't see it at all like that, the effect of gravity for me it's like an object in itself, it is constant, it doesn't go from point A to B. An example, imagine the ISS orbiting the planet, i see gravity as a CONSTANT invisible connection between the ISS and the earth, like a rope, there is no speed involved since the two objects were already connected from the beginning. If the ISS moved further away from earth to an higher altitude orbit the rope would get thinner (hence gravity pull being lesser) and the opposite would thicker the rope thus making the force of stronger.
Odruida, it seems much the same to me. The idea of gravity 'traveling' (aside from figuratively) makes no sense to me. It's a constant, non-quantized, force. If it weren't, then, apart from distance, one's rate of movement toward or away from a gravitating body would also increase or decrease the experienced gravitational force as one "ran into" or "ran away from" these supposed gravitons, like a doppler effect. Until and unless science records an effect like that...
"Pluto's a fucking planeeeeeeet" Rick and Morty cleared that shit up...
You love star wars🤣🤣🤣
Star Trek "StarTrek Return to archons" the Archons "community" can be seen from space by the Enterprise! LIE nither can my own hicktown of a populace of less than a couple thousand people. but Archon Settlement is SO cool to see on the planet from space with the Enterprise flying by in the CGI rehash via Amazon Stream version.
Dark side of the moon... i never took it as BLACK side of the moon. More like dark in the the sense of it being hidden. Going dark, out of sight no contact.
The dark side of the moon is simply the side of the moon opposite to where the sun is. During a full moon, the dark side is away from us. During the new moon, the dark side is on our side. Simple.
And no, it's not always full dark. You can sometimes see light from the sun reflected off the earth hit the moon. It's called Earthshine. Here's a picture:
www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/earthshine.html
@@tommy3989 nope, comment still seems a bit confused.
@@tommy3989 Um, no. It's not hidden to the LRO. It's not black either.
I think someone is confusing this with a Pink Floyd album, and it's not me.
@@tommy3989 I explained what the dark side of the moon is in my first comment. Do you have a problem with the dark side being the side that doesn't have the sun shining on it at the time?
Or, are you confused by the "back side"?
H'm?
@@tommy3989 Common perhaps, no means universal, and technically *wrong*. During new moon, the side facing us is the dark side - the backside is fully lit.
#20 "The Earth is not a a perfect sphere, it's oblate."
True, but it's more smooth than any marble you can find.
fire is plasma, the sun is also plasma. a flame is a state of matter
well.. isn't any state simply just a previous state transitioning into the next?
you can have plasma without fire, but you can't have fire without plasma. but then.. "where there's smoke there's fire," so maybe you can have fire without plasma? semantics should be banned from science.
Pete Lorenzo
The sun is just 2 elements
Pete Lorenzo
It isn’t plasma
where did you read that (if you can read). the sun is 70% hydrogen, most of the rest is helium, but there are many other elements. it's like saying the human body is only water and carbon, which is also not true.
if the sun isn't plasma, then what is plasma? is it not the excited state of electrons? caused by high amounts of heat energy, like maybe, the sun?
please explain if you think otherwise. maybe you have some interesting theory, but I'll more likely just facepalm to concussion.
Pete Lorenzo fire is an oxidization process, fusion is not. no oxygen in the fusion process, therefore it us not fire.
Okay... #20. Earth really isn't a perfect sphere. No Shit. Because there is no such thing as a perfect sphere in nature.
But what you fail to mention: If you *could* observe the entire Earth from space, the human eye can't tell the difference anyway. To an observer, the Earth is as much a perfect sphere as anything can be.
Also that, if you shrunk Earth to the size of a pool ball, the Earth would be nearly perfectly frictionless. The pool ball (seemingly smooth), if grown to the size of the Earth, would have deeper valleys and higher mountains than Earth. In some cases, that "Pool Ball Earth"'s mountains would extend above its breathable atmosphere, and in the depths of those valleys, the weight of the atmosphere would kill a normal human being.
Are you saying my pool table has odd balls?
"The earth is smoother than a pool ball" thing is a myth. (Or lie, in this video's parlance).
Smells like shit coming out of your mouth.
A flat earth! That is preposterous!!! This new science proves the earth is banana shaped!
Rob Mobilia, you spelled donut wrong (banana)
Carried on its back by banana loving turtles all the way down. Interestingly, they all wear bandannas. I saw this confirmed on a different utube video. Confirmed.
Oh and the whole time I thought it was the boomerang-like banana twizzling around the turtle with the donut in its mouth 0_0 so thanks +Lamster66 for clearing that up ^_^
It's actually shaped like a dildo, but they don't want to get censored.
What variety of banana?
Fun fact... A dwarf PLANET is still a PLANET just small! :)
Didn't know 13,12,10,8,6,5 and 4.and the bary centre,well kind of. I did know planets like jupiter dont orbit the their stars but the systems centre of gravity
The word orbit refers to the path being followed. The path the Earth and Jupiter follow take it around the Sun, therefor, the Earth and Jupiter both orbit the Sun. They also Orbit the barycenter. There is no rule that says your path may only take you around one thing...
Some people today also think the earth is flat!
@Zeegangames yeah sure keep taking those pills
Mary K --- I know what you mean. Some of those same people believe there were no dinosaurs, that water is NOT made of H2O, and that gravity doesn't exist. I would say it's funny, but it's not polite to laugh at stupid people.
J --- Sorry, dude, but I didn't get to see your response to my last post before it was removed. Do you mind posting again?
John --- Yeah, I know what you mean. I grew up in the 70s, so I agree. I have a smartphone that I use for texting, and taking pictures, that's about it!
As for the "triggered" thing ---- I don't like that word. Too immature for my liking. I'm a product of a time when "names will never hurt you". You learn to grow a thick skin, or you get thrown under the bus all the time. So I hardly ever get "triggered". Yes, I admit, I have dished out the odd insult here and there, but I'm not one who usually draws first blood, not usually. Sorry if that last post offended you. I was really trying to be funny, but my wife tells me I'm not funny. Maybe I should listen to her. LOL
@John How come our Sun, Moon, and other planets are round? Go back to the 1600s where you will be accepted lmao
This video contradicts a previous video you've made where you said your body would" pop like a balloon" and that most definitely your blood would boil your words not mine
Maybe he realized he was wrong
Maybe he needed to lie, to make sure you were told a lie!. 🤔
Alan Hillhouse shut up bitch
The "weightless in space" part is totally incomprehensible. You are *effectively* weightless in *orbit*, because centrifugal force balances with gravity in orbit.
Dude, are you scraping the bottom of the barrel? , don't invent things just to have a channel , if you're running out of things to do a video on, move on man, move on.
@Beeg Succ , *Though*.