So technically, you could sink the whole US Navy fleet provided you have enough seagulls? This is dangerous knowledge if it falls in terrorists ears! :P
A Nimitz-class Carrier is 74 meters tall from keel to mast. 11.3 meters are already submerged under average load, leaving 62.7 meters of the ship remaining above sea level, equal to 62.7 billion nanometers. Obviously, this means that you would need 62.7 billion seagulls to completely submerge a carrier.
Show me a camel-jockey who can gather 62.7 billion seagulls and train them all to land in one massive several-mile-high pile on a boat, and I'll send a memo to President Barry.
''A mysterious tower of seaguls appeared in the atlantic ocean, scientists and phillosophers have tried to figure out the cause behind this strange phenomenon, but no conclusive evidence has been discovered.''
Actually, hair must grow much faster than the one nanometer per second quoted in this film. At that rate, hair would only grow 1e-9 x 60 x 60 x 24 x 365 ≈ 0.0315 meters per year, or about an inch and a quarter.
Thus a nanometer is actually quite a bit smaller than the amount your hair grows in a second! Wow!
Ledflyd... I think maybe you misheard rather than him mis-speaking! He says a nanometer is "one millionth of a millimetre", not one millionth of a meter!
Wow. My hair is 36 nanometers longer since the beginning of this video. I need a hair cut.
Spencerianism 8 months ago
What if i train the seagulls to be obese?
MniToster 11 months ago 5
I really needed a video to do a simply conversion for me. thanks.
baphomet58 1 year ago
Damn, that's huge!
paperorpaper 1 year ago
What if it was a really fat seagull,carrying two coconuts in the height of pregnancy.
JosephMelia 2 years ago
Are you saying coconuts migrate?
ElveeKaye 2 years ago
Only when they're being accosted by pregnant seagulls.
JosephMelia 2 years ago
no i think he means a seagull carrying a coconut...it porbably could be a european seagull but maybe a african seagull
kankurou1010 2 years ago
So technically, you could sink the whole US Navy fleet provided you have enough seagulls? This is dangerous knowledge if it falls in terrorists ears! :P
intigfx 3 years ago 49
lolz
darkagent343 2 years ago
A Nimitz-class Carrier is 74 meters tall from keel to mast. 11.3 meters are already submerged under average load, leaving 62.7 meters of the ship remaining above sea level, equal to 62.7 billion nanometers. Obviously, this means that you would need 62.7 billion seagulls to completely submerge a carrier.
Show me a camel-jockey who can gather 62.7 billion seagulls and train them all to land in one massive several-mile-high pile on a boat, and I'll send a memo to President Barry.
TheNilvarg 2 years ago 22
That would be funny. If terrorists could do that on all US boats, it would make the Earth look like an urchin.
intigfx 2 years ago
Comment removed
TheNilvarg 2 years ago
Ahahahahaha
Shouldiers 2 years ago
Someone doesn't understand humor.
thefesteringmaggot 2 years ago
@TheNilvarg Why not just bomb the shit out of it instead seems more effective/fun.
livedandletdie 6 months ago
@TheNilvarg Ok, it took me two years but i finally did it
RustlessPotato 2 months ago
@intigfx Yes but you would need 1 billion seagulls to sink the ship 1 meter.. Not really practical.
dylanm36 10 months ago
@intigfx
I'd definately would like to see that on tv xD
''A mysterious tower of seaguls appeared in the atlantic ocean, scientists and phillosophers have tried to figure out the cause behind this strange phenomenon, but no conclusive evidence has been discovered.''
~Jkun~
Jkun 6 months ago
Actually, hair must grow much faster than the one nanometer per second quoted in this film. At that rate, hair would only grow 1e-9 x 60 x 60 x 24 x 365 ≈ 0.0315 meters per year, or about an inch and a quarter.
Thus a nanometer is actually quite a bit smaller than the amount your hair grows in a second! Wow!
58beerman 3 years ago 4
well done! :) good to see people verifying "facts"!! thank you!
jasonguyperson 3 years ago 3
Man you are clever O.o
cuteboymimmi 2 years ago
I use Vileda,because I'm worth it.
JosephMelia 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
a nanometer in 10^-9 meters. That's one billionth, not one millionth. He misspeaks in the film.
ledflyd 3 years ago
Ledflyd... I think maybe you misheard rather than him mis-speaking! He says a nanometer is "one millionth of a millimetre", not one millionth of a meter!
nottinghamscience 3 years ago 18
oops, you're right. My apologies.
ledflyd 3 years ago