Host 5

um nasa says no what do you mean nasa says no when did that happen like a couple days ago what so that's just giving up we have till april to observe it and then it's gone it's going to be too far for for it to be observed next time we could observe it is in 20 was it 2028 i believe

um nasa says no what do you mean nasa says no when did that happen like a couple days ago what so that's just giving up we have till april to observe it and then it's gone it's going to be too far for for it to be observed next time we could observe it is in 20 was it 2028 i believe

um nasa says no what do you mean nasa says no when did that happen like a couple days ago what so that's just giving up we have till april to observe it and then it's gone it's going to be too far for for it to be observed next time we could observe it is in 20 was it 2028 i believe

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah, so every four years it comes back. And so they're going to be able to look at it, but they're saying that it's going to be too close to make any impact to where they can move it.

Yeah, so every four years it comes back. And so they're going to be able to look at it, but they're saying that it's going to be too close to make any impact to where they can move it.

Yeah, so every four years it comes back. And so they're going to be able to look at it, but they're saying that it's going to be too close to make any impact to where they can move it.

They're obviously more concerned about it than they're letting on. They're like, oh, it's a 2.3% chance. But they're allowing basically any astronomer, any scientist to have access to the James Webb telescope to observe it while they can to make better predictions. Yeah.

They're obviously more concerned about it than they're letting on. They're like, oh, it's a 2.3% chance. But they're allowing basically any astronomer, any scientist to have access to the James Webb telescope to observe it while they can to make better predictions. Yeah.

They're obviously more concerned about it than they're letting on. They're like, oh, it's a 2.3% chance. But they're allowing basically any astronomer, any scientist to have access to the James Webb telescope to observe it while they can to make better predictions. Yeah.

It's not that big to jolt any planet. It's basically just like it would destroy a city. Yeah. And cause earthquakes. And tsunamis. I forgot to mention that part. They said it could be a chain reaction for a ton of earthquakes.

It's not that big to jolt any planet. It's basically just like it would destroy a city. Yeah. And cause earthquakes. And tsunamis. I forgot to mention that part. They said it could be a chain reaction for a ton of earthquakes.

It's not that big to jolt any planet. It's basically just like it would destroy a city. Yeah. And cause earthquakes. And tsunamis. I forgot to mention that part. They said it could be a chain reaction for a ton of earthquakes.

And maybe a tsunami. Anyways, it won't destroy the Earth, but it would be not good. You could change the channel now.

And maybe a tsunami. Anyways, it won't destroy the Earth, but it would be not good. You could change the channel now.

And maybe a tsunami. Anyways, it won't destroy the Earth, but it would be not good. You could change the channel now.

Usually your flat earthers, when they're like, gravity is not real. How can a butterfly fly, but yet the entire ocean is stuck where it is? I don't know. Checkmate. How do you know?

Usually your flat earthers, when they're like, gravity is not real. How can a butterfly fly, but yet the entire ocean is stuck where it is? I don't know. Checkmate. How do you know?