Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Science & space fact checks

Explore claims publishers have checked about science & space. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.

1,577 published reviews in this topic

FACTLYScience & space

A video of a newborn baby lifting a tray in the operation theatre, which was connected to the Chandrayan-3 mission

Publisher’s rating: MISLEADING

The claim links a video of a newborn lifting a stainless-steel tray in an operating theatre to the Chandrayaan-3 mission, suggesting the baby was a “new scientist” born shortly after the mission raised the Indian flag on the Moon. The review says it could not establish exactly where or when the video was filmed, but investigated whether it predated the lunar landing. It reports finding, through reverse-image searches of video screenshots, a YouTube video with similar visuals posted on 21 August 2023. That date is two days before Chandrayaan-3 landed on the Moon, on 23 August 2023. The review also notes that the mission launched on 14 July. Its reasoning is that the video was already circulating before the landing, so it could not show a baby born in response to that event. The review therefore labels the claim “Misleading,” while distinguishing that conclusion from what it could not establish: the baby’s exact birth date and the video’s filming location and date. The review adds that other news reports covered the newborn lifting the tray but did not provide details about when or where the footage was taken. Its conclusion is limited to the video’s existence before the lunar landing and its lack of connection to that mission; it does not identify the child or establish the circumstances of birth.

YouturnScience & space

இந்தியா, எங்கள் 2.3 பில்லியன் பவுண்டுகளைத் திருப்பிக் கொடு!’, ஜிபி நியூஸின் தொகுப்பாளரான பேட்ரிக் கிறிஸ்டிஸ் இந்தியாவின் வெற்றிகரமான நிலவு பயணத்திற்கு வாழ்த்து தெரிவிக்கிறார், ஆனால் ‘நிலவின் இருண்ட பக்கத்தில் ஒரு ராக்கெட்டை ஏவ முடிந்த நீங்கள், வெளிநாட்டு உதவிக்காக இனி கைகளை நீட்டி எங்களிடம் வரக்கூடாது!’

Publisher’s rating: Misleading

Fact Crescendo Sri LankaScience & space

චන්ද්‍රයාන්-3 ව්‍යාපෘතියේ සිටි ඉන්දීය විද්‍යාඥවරියන් සම්බන්ධයෙන් තිලිණි ෂැල්වින් ප්‍රකාශයක් සිදු කළා ද?

Publisher’s rating: False

The claim concerned a social-media post attributing disparaging comments about Indian women scientists’ saris and independence to Sri Lankan teacher Thilini Shalvin. The post presented the remarks as hers and linked them to women scientists involved in the Chandrayaan mission. The review describes the circulating post as claiming that Shalvin said the scientists wore saris because of “very backward tribal cultural attitudes” and were not suited to the modern world. The investigation examined whether that statement had actually been published or made by her. The fact-checker searched the Facebook page named in the circulating post, “Ape Rata,” and reports finding no such post. It then contacted the page’s administrator, who said the page had not published a post containing the alleged statement and described the image as edited. The review also says it contacted Shalvin, who denied making the remarks and posted a response on her Facebook account. These checks directly address both the attribution and the post’s claimed source. The review further traces the image to an altered photograph of Shalvin. It says the original photograph had been posted in November 2022 in connection with her choosing ordinary, comfortable clothing suitable for school instead of wearing a sari to work during difficult economic conditions. The review suggests that footage of Indian women scientists wearing saris may have been used as the subject for a satirical false post, but presents that as an inference. Its conclusion is that Shalvin did not make the attributed statement and that the image used to support it was edited.

Fact Crescendo Sri LankaScience & space

චන්ද්‍රයාන්- 3 යානය සඳෙහි දකුණු ධ්‍රැව ප්‍රදේශයට ගොඩබැස්වූ අවස්ථාවේ වීඩියෝවක් ද?

Publisher’s rating: Misleading

The review examines a social-media video presented as footage of Chandrayaan-3’s successful landing near the Moon’s south pole. It focuses specifically on the video’s opening portion, before 0:48, and asks whether that footage is genuinely from Chandrayaan-3. The investigation states that India achieved the landing on August 23, but concludes that the circulating clip was not footage of that event. To check the clip, the publisher compared it with landing videos released to the media and by ISRO, reporting that the clip did not appear in those materials. It then used reverse-image search on frames from the video. That search led to a YouTube video posted in 2021, whose creator, Hazegrayart, identified it as depicting the Apollo 11 Moon landing of July 20, 1969. The review also cites a 2018 post in which Hazegrayart described the videos as animated creations. The review’s conclusion is that the purported Chandrayaan-3 landing footage is an animation about Apollo 11, not a recording of Chandrayaan-3 landing. It distinguishes this clip from the genuine landing video posted by ISRO. Thus, the misleading element is the social-media presentation of an older animation as footage of the 2023 Indian mission.

FACTLYScience & space

Visuals of the Vikram lander making soft landing on moon captured by NASA

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerned a video shared after Chandrayaan-3’s Vikram lander touched down on the Moon on 23 August 2023. The post presented the visuals as footage captured by NASA of that landing. FACTLY’s investigation concluded that the video did not show Vikram or real footage of Chandrayaan-3’s landing: it was an animation depicting Apollo 11’s lunar module landing. To check the attribution, the review says it searched for footage officially released by NASA from the landing but did not find any. It then used reverse image search on keyframes from the circulating video. That search led to the same video, uploaded to YouTube on 8 June 2021 under the title “The Apollo 11 Moon Landing: A Historic Moment in Space Exploration”—well before Chandrayaan-3’s landing. The review’s identification of the video as animated also drew on its multiple camera angles and drone shots, which it said suggested an animated rendition, and on the uploader’s earlier statement that their videos were animated creations. As further contrast, the review noted that ISRO had released actual visuals of Vikram’s landing and Pragyan’s subsequent rollout. Taken together, the video’s earlier provenance and Apollo 11 subject matter contradict its circulation as NASA footage of Chandrayaan-3.