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

dpaScience & space

Deze video toont hoe het Internationaal Ruimtestation niet echt is. Het ligt eigenlijk gewoon in een zwembad en is een filmset.

Publisher’s rating: De beelden tonen het trainingscentrum In Houston waar astronauten onder water kunnen oefenen op het uitvoeringen van ruimtewandelingen. Het is helemaal geen bewijs dat het ISS niet echt in de ruimte is.

The claim takes footage of people in astronaut suits underwater as evidence that the International Space Station (ISS) is not in orbit and is instead a film set in a swimming pool. The original review says that a widely shared Facebook post used the video to make that allegation. Its investigation identifies the location as NASA’s Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory, part of the training centre in Houston, Texas—not a set containing the real ISS. The review describes how it checked the footage: a reverse image search led it to the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory. That facility has a pool 61 metres long, 31 metres wide and 12 metres deep, with scaled mock-ups of different ISS components. The review notes that even this very large pool is too small to hold a complete model of the station. The footage therefore shows training equipment and replicas, not the ISS itself. The review explains why astronauts train there: the buoyancy of people and objects in water produces an effect similar to, but not fully equivalent to, weightlessness in space. That makes underwater practice useful for rehearsing spacewalks, but it does not establish that the ISS is located in a pool. The video is evidence of astronaut training in Houston, not evidence that the ISS does not exist in orbit.

FACTLYScience & space

Image of a two-bodied cow with single head

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

FACTLY examined a social-media image presented as showing a cow with one head and two bodies. Its review concludes that the image had been digitally altered: the apparent second body was made by flipping the body of a single cow. Thus, the image does not establish that it depicts an actual two-bodied cow. The review describes two checks: a reverse-image search, which found no relevant information about such a cow, and visual inspection of the viral image for signs of digital alteration. It also reports that it found no news reports of a cow born with two bodies and one head. The review distinguishes this claim from reports of calves with two heads, noting that multiple heads are a different condition and do not substantiate the image’s claim.

YouturnScience & space

”ஈகிள் நெபுலா” 1955ல் நாசாவின் ஹப்பிள் தொலைநோக்கி எடுத்த புகைப்படம் VS கடந்த ஆண்டில் விண்ணுக்கு அனுப்பப்பட்ட ஜேம்ஸ் வெப் தொலைநோக்கி எடுத்த ஈகிள் நெபுலாவின் மிகத்துல்லியமான சமீபத்திய புகைப்படம்

Publisher’s rating: Misleading

FACTLYScience & space

A marvellous view of a three-headed snake

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

FACTLY investigated a social-media post presenting an image as a “marvellous” view of a three-headed snake. Its conclusion was that the image does not show a real three-headed snake: the picture was digitally altered from an image of an ordinary, single-headed snake. The review also describes the post as an old internet hoax that had resurfaced. The review says it used a reverse image search, which returned multiple web links carrying the same image. It reports that the viral image had circulated online for a long time and that the original, single-headed snake image was altered to depict multiple heads. The review further notes that the image had sometimes been edited to show ten heads, and says an archived version of the original image was uploaded to the image-sharing website canv.as. These details support the review’s distinction between the source image and the altered versions; the excerpt does not provide the search results or the archived image itself for independent inspection. The review acknowledges that animals can be born with multiple heads, but that general possibility does not establish that this particular image is authentic. It cites a Guardian report about a two-headed snake found in the US in 2019 and refers to a National Geographic article about double-headed snakes. Those examples concern the condition generally, whereas the review’s image-specific evidence identifies this viral picture as an edit of a one-headed snake.

FACTYScience & space

Video of a giant snake spotted at a river pond

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns a video presented as showing a giant snake at a river pond. FACTLY says the footage depicts a five-headed, snake-like figure moving through a pond while people watch. Its investigation identifies the scene instead as a staged performance of the Samudra Manthan episode from Hindu mythology, held in December 2021 in Bijepur, Odisha. The apparent snake was a prop representing Vasuki, not a live animal. To investigate the footage, the review says it performed reverse-image searches on screenshots from the circulating video. That search led to a YouTube video published in December 2021 with similar visuals and the title “Sagar manthan PADA BIJEPUR.” FACTLY reports that the video shows a play portraying Samudra Manthan. It also points to news-channel reports from December 2021 that identified the same footage as a Samudra Manthan drama during a Laxmi puja in Bijepur. The key distinction is between the event shown and the later description attached to the clip: the footage shows a theatrical performance, not a real giant snake spotted in a pond. FACTLY explains that a man carried the large snake prop during the play, and that it represented Vasuki, used as the rope in the story’s cosmic-ocean churning. Thus, the pond setting and snake-like appearance do not establish that the animal was real; the matching earlier performance footage supplies a different, specific explanation for what viewers see.