It will dumb down your intelligence and more importantly your capacity to, and awareness of the need to resist! Search Challenger disaster survivers and the Van Allen belts. QI is worse than mythbusters. (Take this seriously; it's not every day somebody is so honest.)

Graeme Waddell Lol you are deluded, you have deprived yourself of the capacity to think...

@@oldpondfrog788 what's wrong with you?

@@JamesForster1123 the hint is in his name, i believe ;)

SpliffHound 420 ...Ackchyually...

@Aslan T Vorlon Sean previously worked as a writer and script editor for Bill Bailey's show _Is it Bill Bailey_ .

And he was so chuffed at himself lol

His sitcom was amazing.

To be fair British people have been making jokes like this for decades.

not a llama farmer then?

same here

He’s like the grandfather that tells you stories of his youth

Teddo Bomb tis the wisdom of the rural Buddha, the Dalai Farmer 🤣

I fear I don’t get it.

It doesn’t work written down, he says farmer like fama so instead of Dalai Lama it’s dalai fama

*laughing as though scorning a peasant*

I want what he's on

What is funny is that Johnny is actually correct about the Sun being the center of the observable Universe because the earth rotates around the sun and we can make observations from earth at any point in its rotation around the sun, leaving the outside of the orbit the observable universe, placing the sun at the center.

THIS is the Good Place !

Awwwww!

Why did this make me laugh so hard?!

Well, technically things don’t float in space, they fall, so a fly in space would be “flyfalling”.

@@nocalsteve a fall

And they're lying

@@zapkvr read what I wrote. Not what you think I wrote.

@@sine-nomine they're not lying?

@@zapkvr He switched them around. That's the joke.

@@Khil-Minao you and me have a different definition of the word "joke".

Why? He doesn't have anything even approaching a sense of humour. He's funny to watch because he's pretty much a dolt who just doesn't get a joke. :)

@@andrewskopal3876 nah

I’d love to see Richard Hammond

69 likes, you have reached the peak of mankind

Never understood why he was on QI. Alan once said in an interview that they stopped having Hall on because he refused to get into the spirit of things. i.e. not at all funny.

"Which Moon?" was absolutely genius. As for not funny: Rich's humour requires active participation. In other words: He forces you to think before you laugh. I can see how this could prevent some people from finding him funny...

If you put a ladder on the South Pole would you go down int space.

quarterthrottle Only if you are a flat earther.

@@jimraq1 if the earth was flat wouldn't he have to put a ladder on the underside of the planet as putting a ladder on the south Pole in a flat Earth scenario would be exactly the same as any other point of the earth?

If you have your eyes open then you should be looking at the inside of your visor

@@quarteronline > depends how long it is

If Stephen was still on, they would probably move on to the Greek alphabet. Worth it, if only to see Alan's reaction.

The longest run on TV is meet the press. Seventy years.

@Eric Burkheimer coronation street ran longer than 26 years. And Blue peter

@Eric Burkheimer very funny.

Why not 0 through 9?

Couldn't agree more.... However we do get our fair share of garbage over here, but this is certainly a gift that just keeps giving

City lights

Did you really think you could see a golf kart from 1/4 million miles away?

The official QI record discloses that The Netherlands is an acceptable answer...

Only the base of the lunar lander remains. A portion of it (the landing gear, descent engine, and its fuel supply) was left behind upon departure of the crew capsule. It is very possible that the lunar lander crew capsule is still in orbit around the moon.

I don't think he knew it, I think he inferred from the fact that they're called "Ken and Barbie". "Kell Doll" is a pretty common shorthand for lacking genitals.

No. The "counterweight" would not be in orbit, it would be pulling the elevator cord taut via centrifugal force, tugging away from the Earth's rotational axis. For example, a space elevator anchored near Seattle (at 47 degrees latitude), would still get to space but, near the anchor, the cord would be at about a 43 degree angle to the ground. Anchoring it at the equator would mean the chord goes straight up, saving time and materials, as well as making it less hazardous to airplane traffic.

Holdenon3 there is no such thing as centrifugal force. Also yes the ‘counter weight’ would need to be in orbit otherwise the counter weight wouldn’t be a counter weight, it would collapse to the earth. You need a geosynchronous orbit of a satellite attached to the equator with a rope, the satellite would keep the rope taut.

saying "there is no such thing as centrifugal force" would net you a good klaxon-ing on QI.

@@LovableCoolGuy That's because QI is entertainment, not academics.

dalai farmer ?

No evidence its there apart from what we've been told, like most space facts. We do know structural things exist on Earth though.

More like the french flag now. :P It's white.

@@11Survivor LMAO

It's either ballsy, or, and that is a real possibility, that guy really believes it to be true.

Its both ironic and true, as he mentions with the whole "We were the same during our colonial period". The reason its in their DNA is because the colonizers were English and in English humour, self deprecation is normal.

2018

9:18

You sunk my battleship.

ChubbyChecker182, and there's a bloke down there with no strides on.

I'm guessing you had nothing else to do.

That was Jeremy

He’s like, “... that was COMPLETELY a random guess, but... yeah, I’ll just not SAY anything further and appear smarter than I really am!” 🤣🤣🤣

The Apollo landing sites are full of things you can see that are man made.

He didn't say that because it's wrong. While light reflecting from these objects would reach your eye, it would be far too dim for your eye to register, and the eye can't discern such small distances from that far away.

That's true, but you still can't see them from the Moon, why?, because you aren't on the moon.

English is my city

There is a town called Idaho City. So you could call him the mayor of Idaho, like how the mayor of NYC is often just called the mayor of New York.

No they used the pressurized pens. the thing is back then ball point pens were very expensive and quite unreliable. It was until BIC used mass production that ball point pens became affordable. The pressurized pen was the only realistic option for the astronauts.

@@austinpowers2033 1950 Bic ball point pen. 1957 Sputnik 1. 1969 Apollo 11. In 1960's ball point pens not expensive.

I think most kids in my school watched it. Every now and then there would always be a random QI fact brought up.

"My genius... it's almost frightening."

I don't get that joke and it's bugging me!

@@fabriciotorres6634 basically Alan is triggering Stephen.

@@fabriciotorres6634 Alan is indicating that he made the "stupid" comment just to wind Stephen up, and everyone is laughing at how successful he was

the universe is limitless not infinite🧐

The centre of the observable universe is the observer. THe centre of the entire universe, we don't know, the universe seems to be flat as far as we can see in our observable universe, but maybe it's a 4D donut shape, in which case there would be no centre,

A lot more than you realise.😂 He's very subtle.

Wasn't that only because Zaphod was in the artificial universe designed to hide him? He'd naturally be the most important person in it. As Gag Halfrunt said "Zaphod's just zis guy, you know?"

The total perspective vortex. I know. I heard the BBC radio show in 1978

@@zapkvr no way, Grunthos the Flatulent!

@@thenumbdave yes way. I have all the original recordings on CD

@@zapkvr Me too! I also have them on cassette recorded off the radio, and somewhere the vinyl version of the first series with Dawn French as Trillian, I was obsessed with it :)

fotbalmfotbalm still have not image from a telescope or the lunar orbiter or the Japanese orbiter ffs :(

Except Terry Gilliam.

That's not the only reason he looked at you like you are mental.

@@zapkvr Lol cheeky swine lol...

They were talking about the observable universe, not the whole universe itself. Even so, I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the universe doesn't have a centre or an edge, so everything is redshifting away from us at the same rate.

@@thidang6247 I am certain I've heard that things are expanding away from us at different speeds, and that the delta in redshift can be used to find the originating direction.

@@adamnshame can you find an authority for that?

Wherever you are in the universe everything appears to expand away from yourself.

@@adamnshame They are expanding away from us at different speeds, but that's a matter of distance, not direction. Everything that's the same distance is receding at the same speed, regardless of which direction we look. And we can measure distances out to about 10 billion light years using Type 1a supernovae, which all have the same intrinsic brightness.

If the moon whas flat like the earth than yes.😁

@@Ohmloud if you were standing right next to it, it wouldn't need the moon to be flat

Duhh..

Man made objects from the moon on the earth? So not made on earth, but actualy made on the moon? Stool/urine samples made by astronaute on the moon where collected in a bag and brougth back to earth fore research where labeld and stored and kept in a freezer . (If a nasa worker dint mastake it fore fudge took it out the freezer and eat it)

From space, yes. From the Moon, not so much. The ISS is the size of a football stadium, which coincidentally is about the same size as the smallest thing we can see on the Moon from the largest Earth-based telescope. So that's one thing. The other is that it's actually quite close to Earth, so there's never much separation between the ISS and Earth when seen from the Moon.

Tis the un-ageability of the royal buddha.

The question was "the centre of the observable universe", which is by definition the position of the observer, i.e. anyone who asks. :) The place where the big bang first banged doesn't really exist in our universe because it's a 4-dimensional event, see the ballon analogy.

@@xaverlustig3581 First of all thank you! Secondly, please be patient with me I'm trying to learn. This is what I was thinking, please explain where I went wrong? Keep in mind I'm an old man, with a strong foundation in the social sciences, and enough math too easily Ace high school algebra. LOL I was picturing, billions of years ago a singularity existing as a point somewhere or everywhere, in that case, I guess. Anyway the point began to expand or Bang, and thereby grow outward; filled with all that star stuff. All that stuff that would be all that we would ever know. Today we are here on Earth, a bluish dot, part of the Sol system. Given that Sol is traveling along at least relative to the galactic center I'm thinking that we could backtrack our trajectory? At the same time our nearest neighbour Centauri, 30 degrees down and off to starboard, it also could be back tracked? So, if we plotted its trajectory , also back toward galactic core, we would then have two lines representing two stars that have traveled through time-space. wouldn't those two lines intersect at some point billions of years ago? And, wouldn't that intersection give us an indication of a position in space completely independent of our observation? Now if we repeated that process of backtracking for a hundred or more other Stellar bodies wouldn't all those lines lead back to the singularity??? Again, thank you for your time. Stay safe and healthy in these covid times!😎🐱