Why we need the explorers | Brian Cox

Why we need the explorers | Brian Cox

We live in difficult and challenging economic times, of course. And one of the first victims of difficult economic times, I think, is public spending of any kind, but certainly in the firing line at the moment is public spending for science, and particularly curiosity-led science and exploration. So I want to try and convince you in about 15 minutes that that’s a ridiculous and ludicrous thing to do. But I think to set the scene, I want to show — the next slide is not my attempt to show the worst TED slide in the history of TED, but it is a bit of a mess. (Laughter) But actually, it’s not my fault; it’s from the Guardian newspaper. And it’s actually a beautiful demonstration of how much science costs. Because, if I’m going to make the case for continuing to spend on curiosity-driven science and exploration, I should tell you how much it costs. So this is a game called “spot the science budgets.” This is the U.K. government spend. You see there, it’s about 620 billion a year. The science budget is actually — if you look to your left, there’s a purple set of blobs and then yellow set of blobs. And it’s one of the yellow set of blobs around the big yellow blob. It’s about 3.3 billion pounds per year out of 620 billion. That funds everything in the U.K. from medical research, space exploration, where I work, at CERN in Geneva, particle physics, engineering, even arts and humanities, funded from the science budget, which is that 3.3 billion, that little, tiny yellow blob around the orange blob at the top left of the screen. So that’s what we’re arguing about. That percentage, by the way, is about the same in the U.S. and Germany and France. R&D in total in the economy, publicly funded, is about 0.6 percent of GDP. So that’s what we’re arguing about. The first thing I want to say, and this is straight from “Wonders of the Solar System,” is that our exploration of the solar system and the universe has shown us that it is indescribably beautiful. This is a picture that actually was sent back by the Cassini space probe around Saturn, after we’d finished filming “Wonders of the Solar System.” So it isn’t in the series. It’s of the moon Enceladus. So that big sweeping, white sphere in the corner is Saturn, which is actually in the background of the picture. And that crescent there is the moon Enceladus, which is about as big as the British Isles. It’s about 500 kilometers in diameter. So, tiny moon. What’s fascinating and beautiful … this an unprocessed picture, by the way, I should say, it’s black and white, straight from Saturnian orbit. What’s beautiful is, you can probably see on the limb there some faint, sort of, wisps of almost smoke rising up from the limb. This is how we visualize that in “Wonders of the Solar System.” It’s a beautiful graphic. What we found out were that those faint wisps are actually fountains of ice rising up from the surface of this tiny moon. That’s fascinating and beautiful in itself, but we think that the mechanism for powering those fountains requires there to be lakes of liquid water beneath the surface of this moon. And what’s important about that is that, on our planet, on Earth, wherever we find liquid water, we find life. So, to find strong evidence of liquid, pools of liquid, beneath the surface of a moon 750 million miles away from the Earth is really quite astounding. So what we’re saying, essentially, is maybe that’s a habitat for life in the solar system. Well, let me just say, that was a graphic. I just want to show this picture. That’s one more picture of Enceladus. This is when Cassini flew beneath Enceladus. So it made a very low pass, just a few hundred kilometers above the surface. And so this, again, a real picture of the ice fountains rising up into space, absolutely beautiful. But that’s not the prime candidate for life in the solar system. That’s probably this place, which is a moon of Jupiter, Europa. And again, we had to fly to the Jovian system to get any sense that this moon, as most moons, was anything other than a dead ball of rock. It’s actually an ice moon. So what you’re looking at is the surface of the moon Europa, which is a thick sheet of ice, probably a hundred kilometers thick. But by measuring the way that Europa interacts with the magnetic field of Jupiter, and looking at how those cracks in the ice that you can see there on that graphic move around, we’ve inferred very strongly that there’s an ocean of liquid surrounding the entire surface of Europa. So below the ice, there’s an ocean of liquid around the whole moon. It could be hundreds of kilometers deep, we think. We think it’s saltwater, and that would mean that there’s more water on that moon of Jupiter than there is in all the oceans of the Earth combined. So that place, a little moon around Jupiter, is probably the prime candidate for finding life on a moon or a body outside the Earth, that we know of. Tremendous and beautiful discovery. Our exploration of the solar system has taught us that the solar system is beautiful. It may also have pointed the way to answering one of the most profound questions that you can possibly ask, which is: “Are we alone in the universe?” Is there any other use to exploration and science, other than just a sense of wonder? Well, there is. This is a very famous picture taken, actually, on my first Christmas Eve, December 24th, 1968, when I was about eight months old. It was taken by Apollo 8 as it went around the back of the moon. Earthrise from Apollo 8. A famous picture; many people have said that it’s the picture that saved 1968, which was a turbulent year — the student riots in Paris, the height of the Vietnam War. The reason many people think that about this picture, and Al Gore has said it many times, actually, on the stage at TED, is that this picture, arguably, was the beginning of the environmental movement. Because, for the first time, we saw our world, not as a solid, immovable, kind of indestructible place, but as a very small, fragile-looking world just hanging against the blackness of space. What’s also not often said about the space exploration, about the Apollo program, is the economic contribution it made. I mean while you can make arguments that it was wonderful and a tremendous achievement and delivered pictures like this, it cost a lot, didn’t it? Well, actually, many studies have been done about the economic effectiveness, the economic impact of Apollo. The biggest one was in 1975 by Chase Econometrics. And it showed that for every $1 spent on Apollo, 14 came back into the U.S. economy. So the Apollo program paid for itself in inspiration, in engineering, achievement and, I think, in inspiring young scientists and engineers 14 times over. So exploration can pay for itself. What about scientific discovery? What about driving innovation? Well, this looks like a picture of virtually nothing. What it is, is a picture of the spectrum of hydrogen. See, back in the 1880s, 1890s, many scientists, many observers, looked at the light given off from atoms. And they saw strange pictures like this. What you’re seeing when you put it through a prism is that you heat hydrogen up and it doesn’t just glow like a white light, it just emits light at particular colors, a red one, a light blue one, some dark blue ones. Now that led to an understanding of atomic structure because the way that’s explained is atoms are a single nucleus with electrons going around them. And the electrons can only be in particular places. And when they jump up to the next place they can be, and fall back down again, they emit light at particular colors. And so the fact that atoms, when you heat them up, only emit light at very specific colors, was one of the key drivers that led to the development of the quantum theory, the theory of the structure of atoms. I just wanted to show this picture because this is remarkable. This is actually a picture of the spectrum of the Sun. And now, this is a picture of atoms in the Sun’s atmosphere absorbing light. And again, they only absorb light at particular colors when electrons jump up and fall down, jump up and fall down. But look at the number of black lines in that spectrum. And the element helium was discovered just by staring at the light from the Sun because some of those black lines were found that corresponded to no known element. And that’s why helium’s called helium. It’s called “helios” — helios from the Sun. Now, that sounds esoteric, and indeed it was an esoteric pursuit, but the quantum theory quickly led to an understanding of the behaviors of electrons in materials like silicon, for example. The way that silicon behaves, the fact that you can build transistors, is a purely quantum phenomenon. So without that curiosity-driven understanding of the structure of atoms, which led to this rather esoteric theory, quantum mechanics, then we wouldn’t have transistors, we wouldn’t have silicon chips, we wouldn’t have pretty much the basis of our modern economy. There’s one more, I think, wonderful twist to that tale. In “Wonders of the Solar System,” we kept emphasizing the laws of physics are universal. It’s one of the most incredible things about the physics and the understanding of nature that you get on Earth, is you can transport it, not only to the planets, but to the most distant stars and galaxies. And one of the astonishing predictions of quantum mechanics, just by looking at the structure of atoms — the same theory that describes transistors — is that there can be no stars in the universe that have reached the end of their life that are bigger than, quite specifically, 1.4 times the mass of the Sun. That’s a limit imposed on the mass of stars. You can work it out on a piece of paper in a laboratory, get a telescope, swing it to the sky, and you find that there are no dead stars bigger than 1.4 times the mass of the Sun. That’s quite an incredible prediction. What happens when you have a star that’s right on the edge of that mass? Well, this is a picture of it. This is the picture of a galaxy, a common “our garden” galaxy with, what, 100 billion stars like our Sun in it. It’s just one of billions of galaxies in the universe. There are a billion stars in the galactic core, which is why it’s shining out so brightly. This is about 50 million light years away, so one of our neighboring galaxies. But that bright star there is actually one of the stars in the galaxy. So that star is also 50 million light years away. It’s part of that galaxy, and it’s shining as brightly as the center of the galaxy with a billion suns in it. That’s a Type Ia supernova explosion. Now that’s an incredible phenomena, because it’s a star that sits there. It’s called a carbon-oxygen dwarf. It sits there about, say, 1.3 times the mass of the Sun. And it has a binary companion that goes around it, so a big star, a big ball of gas. And what it does is it sucks gas off its companion star, until it gets to this limit called the Chandrasekhar limit, and then it explodes. And it explodes, and it shines as brightly as a billion suns for about two weeks, and releases, not only energy, but a huge amount of chemical elements into the universe. In fact, that one is a carbon-oxygen dwarf. Now, there was no carbon and oxygen in the universe at the Big Bang. And there was no carbon and oxygen in the universe throughout the first generation of stars. It was made in stars like that, locked away and then returned to the universe in explosions like that in order to recondense into planets, stars, new solar systems and, indeed, people like us. I think that’s a remarkable demonstration of the power and beauty and universality of the laws of physics, because we understand that process, because we understand the structure of atoms here on Earth. This is a beautiful quote that I found — we’re talking about serendipity there — from Alexander Fleming: “When I woke up just after dawn on September 28, 1928, I certainly didn’t plan to revolutionize all medicine by discovering the world’s first antibiotic.” Now, the explorers of the world of the atom did not intend to invent the transistor. And they certainly didn’t intend to describe the mechanics of supernova explosions, which eventually told us where the building blocks of life were synthesized in the universe. So, I think science can be — serendipity is important. It can be beautiful. It can reveal quite astonishing things. It can also, I think, finally reveal the most profound ideas to us about our place in the universe and really the value of our home planet. This is a spectacular picture of our home planet. Now, it doesn’t look like our home planet. It looks like Saturn because, of course, it is. It was taken by the Cassini space probe. But it’s a famous picture, not because of the beauty and majesty of Saturn’s rings, but actually because of a tiny, faint blob just hanging underneath one of the rings. And if I blow it up there, you see it. It looks like a moon, but in fact, it’s a picture of Earth. It was a picture of Earth captured in that frame of Saturn. That’s our planet from 750 million miles away. I think the Earth has got a strange property that the farther away you get from it, the more beautiful it seems. But that is not the most distant or most famous picture of our planet. It was taken by this thing, which is called the Voyager spacecraft. And that’s a picture of me in front of it for scale. The Voyager is a tiny machine. It’s currently 10 billion miles away from Earth, transmitting with that dish, with the power of 20 watts, and we’re still in contact with it. But it visited Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune. And after it visited all four of those planets, Carl Sagan, who’s one of my great heroes, had the wonderful idea of turning Voyager around and taking a picture of every planet it had visited. And it took this picture of Earth. Now it’s very hard to see the Earth there, it’s called the “Pale Blue Dot” picture, but Earth is suspended in that red shaft of light. That’s Earth from four billion miles away. And I’d like to read you what Sagan wrote about it, just to finish, because I cannot say words as beautiful as this to describe what he saw in that picture that he had taken. He said, “Consider again that dot. That’s here. That’s home. That’s us. On it, everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you’ve ever heard of, every human being who ever was lived out their lives. The aggregates of joy and suffering thousands of confident religions, ideologies and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species, lived there, on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam. It’s been said that astronomy’s a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we’ve ever known.” Beautiful words about the power of science and exploration. The argument has always been made, and it will always be made, that we know enough about the universe. You could have made it in the 1920s; you wouldn’t have had penicillin. You could have made it in the 1890s; you wouldn’t have the transistor. And it’s made today in these difficult economic times. Surely, we know enough. We don’t need to discover anything else about our universe. Let me leave the last words to someone who’s rapidly becoming a hero of mine, Humphrey Davy, who did his science at the turn of the 19th century. He was clearly under assault all the time. “We know enough at the turn of the 19th century. Just exploit it; just build things.” He said this, he said, “Nothing is more fatal to the progress of the human mind than to presume that our views of science are ultimate, that our triumphs are complete, that there are no mysteries in nature, and that there are no new worlds to conquer.” Thank you. (Applause)

You May Also Like

About the Author: Oren Garnes


  1. If former USA president Bill Clinton says it's fake, I trust he maybe knows a touch better than fucking Shadowkilla250. Don't you?

  2. Understandably the "why the soviets did't say anything" speculation is your best argument.since you have nothing else. But believe me. It's like I say that I was fucking Elizabeth Taylor in the ass during the 60s and proof for that is the fact that none of her embarrassed husbands never said anything.. In other words, if you go to the court with your "why the soviets" theory you'll be laughed at.
    And BTW. google search "Port Duluth Soviet grain" to start getting the point.

  3. If you're referring to the quote from his autobiography about the skeptical carpenter, then no. The quote doesn't imply that he believes the moon landings were a hoax.
    If not, then cite references.
    Moon landing conspiracy nuts go in the same bin with 911 truthers, Holocaust deniers, 2012 doomsayers, and Hollow-Earth proponents. Show me some hard evidence, and I'll change my understanding of history. Stop with the retarded theories that can be debunked with high-school physics.

  4. LOL! Evidence? And who are you to be able to evaluate anything, let alone evidence, moron? The only reason why your ridiculous fairytale is passing around for true event is because there is no justice in the criminal shithole of USA.

  5. So let me get this straight. Your argument that an Apollo 11 never landed on the moon involves an Apollo 14 astronaut not remembering the range of the Van Allen belts 30 years after the fact?
    No wonder you're annoyed.
    P.S. you posted on the wrong account. 😉

  6. …And yet the Soviet Union never said a word, despite having every means and motivation to expose such a hoax.

    I think there's one major source of bullshit here.

  7. 'Bill Clinton said it's fake'. when and where, and Clinton also said he didn't have sex with Lewinsky. Are you that stupid? Oh yeah, you believe the moon landings were hoaxed.

  8. In other words; you have no evidence for your theory, just insults and rhetoric. Still, people like yourself don't look at evidence, because of your need to believe the moon landing was hoaxed is strong enough to conform to a preconceived narrative and Voodoo history of a 'shithole' corrupt America. You feel special because you are privy to some occult information and others are 'dupes', It is your drug, and your delusion.

  9. Wait so…. there are still people around who say the moon landing was faked? Seriously? If you are one of those, by all means, get rid of everything you have that uses satellite communication. That includes TV, cellphone, GPS, internet etc, which are a direct result of of space observation and exploration. Clearly, you're still stuck in the 19th century. You might want to avoid hospitals too, cause you know, they use magic (or at least they do for one who still lives in your far outdated era).

  10. there are still people around that believe in a invisible fictitious entity that will punish them for no reason what so ever.

  11. Conspiracy nuts in here.

    1. Watch the mythbusters show
    2. Realize that faking the moon tapes would be about as hard as actually going there.. The amount of detail you need to get right is staggering.

  12. If you got any brains whatsoever and watch the documentary "Astronauts Gone Wild" you can never believe these people went to the Moon. The moon landing never happened, it was filmed here on Earth and everyone person who researched the authenticity of it concluded it was fake. Even if they were not stupid propagandists for their boss NASA, P.Moore, B.Cox, M.Kaku, and other TV personas would not be willing to risk their careers, or even their lives, in expressing their doubts or telling the truth.

  13. Funny how my love for Carl Sagan lead me to Mr. Cox. I always said our world needed more people like Sagan; and we are lucky to have Brian Cox as a representative of the human race's thirst for knowledge. If more people humbled themselves and realized we're all in this together Earth would be a peaceful utopia. Isn't it time we stopped hurting, belittling and hating each other and learned to love and respect not only our genetic brothers and sisters but the world we share and everything in it

  14. Yes .. the endeavour to make the 100k+ ppl involved, without a SINGLE 1 ever spilling their guts …Incredibly likely! Though, (I know, it's incredible) the russians never denied that the americans put foot on the moon, nor did the chinese … THAT alone should make you doubt your 'sources' of information, and maybe even make you grow as a human

  15. "Physics is like sex, Sure it has some practical results, But that's not why we do it" -Richard Feynman 🙂

  16. What I love about this conspiracy theory is that the only way it would possibly work is if the people it most wanted to dupe – the Russians – were complicit in its construction. Add to that the easy, iron-clad refutation of every single one of the arguments made by hoax proponents such as yourself and it's pretty clear that man has, in fact, set foot on the Moon.

    Of course you won't believe that, you're a special snowflake with special knowledge the rest of the sheeple don't have.

  17. The topic you referring to is a speculative excuse. Offered by Aldrin and other criminals and is targeting your sense of patriotism in a non existed bipolar frame. Real enemies don't give each other money. Besides, this is just your idea about how things work. No evidence. Try to tell your theory about "the silence of Russians" in a court (a court will open its doors for the Apollo scam sooner or later) so we can have a laugh. No need for reply, from your picture one can assume you're a fruit.

  18. I'm not American; patriotism is invalid here.
    You talking to me about profile pictures is frankly hilarious. Pot, meet Kettle. And, by the way, an ad hominem fallacy, but let's not get into that. I'm wondering, out of a sort of morbid curiosity, what you think happened to the massive rockets they very definitely sent into space, and particularly what the reasoning behind faking an abortive Moon landing was in the case of Apollo XIII.

  19. I don't care why and how was done. I guess I'm still too busy being pissed off because it was done. If you have questions about the specific details of the 1969-72 fake moon landings (since you love intrigue and yet got the nerve to call others as conspiracy theorists..) I suggest you ask NASA. I have the feeling they know better about the details and circumstances of the Apollo scam. If you're not an American then your case is twice as bad and I feel shame on your behalf if you are European.

  20. So what you're saying is… we should accept your argument largely on the basis simply that you make it, and that you don't actually care about how any of the details of your argument fit together (or don't). You don't know how this persuasion thing is supposed to work, do you?

    "I feel shame on your behalf." – The feeling is mutual, believe me.

  21. Nothing to argue. The issue is crystal clear and all the evidence you'll ever need are widely available here on the net. An adult citizen is expected to see this badly made hoax within 20 minutes. Search for "astronauts gone wild" and watch it. I don't try to convince anyone. The only reason why I even reply to you is your personal attack against me . Somehow I developed reflexes since I am permanently dealing with criminals and stupid supporters of the Apollo scam and sometimes I reply.

  22. The people who are assuming control of the world are psychopaths & semi psychopaths.
    Their minds are set on bloodlines and world domination.
    Their world-conquering agenda is being carried out in plain site, but virtually everyone has been trained to not be able to see it.
    When it comes to public belief of what's going on there are usually only two significant determining factors: What mainstream media tells them and what the majority of their peers appear to believe. They investigate nothing.

  23. lol people who think it was faked don't believe so because "we didn't have the technology!" they believed so because faking it would help tremendously in terms of politics at the time, and some weird photo's. Everyone who thinks the first moon landing was fake, still believes we did go to the moon later, just that the initial one was faked to beat the russians.

  24. It's amazing men like Brian Cox who inspire many others to study the Cosmos, physics, etc. Here I am, learning more. One day I will see you live Brian, would love it if you could do more talks in the USA. (hint) We appreciate you Brian. xo

  25. Carl Sagan's words are very inspiring when I think of unnecessary war among us…for nothing!!

  26. Michelson Morley ( DYNAMICA EDITION ) !!!

    THEORY :
    James Clerk Maxwell, in 1861–64, published his theory of electromagnetic fields and radiation, which shows that light has momentum and thus can exert pressure on objects.

    SI units :
    ENERGY/SPACE = [ Joul / cubic meters = Newton *meter / cubic meters = N/m^2 ]


    How big force is registering left /right wall ( intensity ? )
    1 NOT EXIST C+V !
    2 where 3D signal started?
    3 where are walls ?


    POLAND 2012

    I made many new steps !!!

  27. Interesting comments below about faking the Moon-landing. Sorry to have to break it to the conspiracy theory folks but… wait for it…..it doesn't matter if it was faked. It's too long ago, too much has happened since, so what? We're clearly capable of space travel now. I see the Space station and other satellites in the night sky. We may as well believe it happened because so what if it didn't?

    As for the message of the talk, it's clear, stop fighting and start spending all that military budget on productive science.

    We never seem to run out of budget when a General requests another $100,000 bomb gets dropped on far away brown people.

  28. at the risk of reducing this great vid to a political debate, it perfectly sums the situation up. if we want to solve humanity's problems? we need to start executing the politicians. now I'm NO anarchist. as a species, we are naturally pack animals & every pack has it's hierarchy. the problem is we place the most corrupt, venal, degenerate, greedy & self-serving of our kind at the heads of our respective nations. this is what MUST change. NO gov't/political body wants an intelligent populace. thinkers ask questions. those who ask "why" are far less easy to control than the two-legged sheep who simply do what they're told. the most obvious example – Pol Pot & his Khmer Rouge. to consolidate his grip on power, he wholesale eradicated his nations scientists, professors, lecturers, teachers, doctors/nurses, lawyers – he even got to exterminating people with eye defects because the (unfounded) base idea was those with spectacles, whether rightly or wrongly, were deemd to be more intelligent than those without. that is an extreme example – & simplistically put. but the point stands. we will NEVER get anywhere as a species while we elect the parasites & ruled by to this day as our "illustrious leaders".

  29. Thank you Brian for serving our society and being one of the few bright lights showing us the way in this continuously dark and sometimes regressive world. Your passion for the sciences and eloquence of passing on knowledge is simply inspiring.
    Peeter from Estonia

  30. Could listen to Brian all day, dont always get what he's talking about but I believe it and find it fascinating

  31. According to that statistic UK spends the same on science and health compared to what we spend on roadwork only pr year…………………thats alarming :

  32. Mr Magoo, there is no way this goon has a clue about the universe .Get some DMT down him and then see what he has to say .

  33. This guy is a sham folks. Not only will he tell you we went to the moon and back, he'll tell you he's a scientist!!!!!!!! Use the most basic trig to realize at 7 miles an object would be 16 feet under your eye level. But its not. Its all a huge Sham and this guy is here to tell you the "TRUTH". He is walking propaganda to an idea so retarded its extra retarded. No beach is curved, no salt flat, nothing. wake up

  34. How does he know the bottom of a moon from the top of the moon??? As a non Australian I demand parity of uprightness for all moons

  35. For Jupiter to have a magnetict field, it is fundermental that it also must have sun like hot molten core which exacts these gravitational forceses.

  36. War?? Let's spend a trillion and then figure out why we wasted so much, a decade later. Science study? Let's just spend the bare minimum and hope kids learn the bare minimal knowledge needed to keep the economy afloat.

  37. At 14:22 when he shows the image Voyager took of earth and reads what Carl Sagan wrote about this photo, this speech is also quoted in the "Universe is way bigger than you think" video. Carl Sagan's famous words resonates profoundly when you look at this famous image.

  38. A genuine and cool ambassador for science at a time reality shows with low life form celebrities corrupt, alienate and obliterate the human spirit.

  39. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIQ99zaO7RE


  40. I don't think we need to spend money on space even though it's so interesting, we need to sort out own planet out before anything else

  41. we dont need them,,The prisons are waiting for the freemasonry satanists whom have sold humanity our for a few pieces of silver,,They are Judas

  42. Follow 'Fast-track' at www.cdadd.com – A quick observation that proves Opticks (with a 'k')(wrongly attributed to Newton) are wrong:- orient a prism to obtain 'rainbow' pattern, move prism to surface & observe 'rainbow' splits out to roy & vib patterns at apex points – thus prism does NOT split out white light, colours are NOT frequency related but arc-angle related – thus Einstein, Hubble, Higgs, CERN are wrong → e≠mc2 , etc., etc., …..
    → Understand how Optics (no 'k') and the Universe really functions ….. follow the fast-track at www.cdadd.com

    Opticks (wrongly attributed to Newton) are wrong → e≠mc2
    Refraction is NOT Refraction
    Perspective: singular proof that Einstein, Hubble, Hawking, Higgs, CERN etc. are wrong
    Quantum Theory contradicts Classical Physics because QT is wrong.
    etc., etc., etc. …….
    John Nash (Nobel Economics 1994) – models are defective -> massive socio-economic destruction
    Fermat's Last Theorem: Andrew Wiles' 'proof' is NOT a PROOF; cf Proof that 1=0; also Wiles' 'proof' too complex to PROVE a PROOF; CDADD has developed a classical PROOF.
    etc., etc., etc., ….

  43. wake up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Qy6xn2NZ4s&fbclid=IwAR3e3oc42LkgnQVmYFCIiDK1bjYbkr5SqId7irDjjoKsE7N1_FoFZ2mxt3M

  44. One of the damn thing that these so called scientists regularly say is "we think" or 'we think that we have cosmic dust that created the whole world , sentence like "We think there is no God" etc. No apparent answer. Not only this one but every other so called scientists sucks!!!!

  45. I got d's and f's in math…there is still hope for me…but what is beautiful and fascinating is that many things can be transformed with the faith to find it

  46. Scientists cant accept there is life around every star in the universe.we have other kinds coming here since time recorded.

  47. Why is he laughing fake lyer yes..he thinks by laughing he gets people exited to pay attention .. but in real behind that mask or camera..secret society seperate from the people.. goodluck roundglobers your stuck in mine opinion just like flatearthers on this syntethic playground with a dome above us.. stuck like a rat ..
    No mars for nobody.
    Its all hollywood … real bad movie .. those astronauts with their special training .. real lol for them,why? I know how somebody is who is in shape and they did not have coastguardtraining .. and especially not for space .. o yeah they have a fake spacestation build on earth so they can believe in themself that they actually went in space,like it is normal for their own brain like a selfhypnose….
    He ain't human .. ofcourse he is bought .. the mainstream has all the money like nasa .. good to go fakers no free energy for us all ..no help for the poor, fake believe the rest your whole live lye after an other new lye and still people believe in lyers.. advice?throw first that t.v.alway,cheers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *