Science teacher here: Thank you for these type of videos. I use them to engage my students into understanding Earth Science in a more interactive way. It helps them to connect terms and visualize concepts better. The use of technology has become an integral part of education so every tool we can use in a positive way to foment knowledge and discovery is useful.
Science and history are my favorite subjects. I want to follow a career that can mix the elements of both of them. The water to my oxygen and hydrogen. I want to be a linguist. I already have a conlang underway
Just got back from Alaska, spent three days at Denali National Park. The scale of Denali is so hard to understand unless you see it with your own eyes. Absolutely massive (and beautiful).
Just got back from the Kalapatthar (Everest base camp), The beauty of 360 mountain view is so surreal it's hard to believe unless you see it with your own eyes. Absolutely beautiful. The best panoramic view in the world. 😍
Technically the tallest mountain in the solar system may be Rheasilvea Mons on the asteroid Vesta. It is, however, all a bit of a guessing game because it is really difficult to measure accurately. So Olympus Mons is often placed at number one. It's also worth keeping in mind that earth is the only planet where mountains are measured from sea level, which is really arbitrary when you think about it. We are measuring mountains based on how much liquid happens to be standing on earth. By one argument you could measure Everest from its peak, right down to the bottom of Challenger Deep, assuming that everything is part of one gigantic mountain. This would make it around 20km high. Still slightly less the Olympus Mons, but getting close.
I've been loving these "Wren talks passionately about a specific subject" type videos! They are always amazing at getting information across in a unique and creative way. Amazing video!
I've really enjoyed all the videos on Corridor for years. Wren has always been amazing, but these types of videos he's been doing have made him my new favorite TH-camr. I'm really looking forward to sharing these videos with my daughter once she's old enough to understand. Thanks Wren.
Great comparisons! But you did leave out one important tidbit, Chimborazo, in Ecuador, is the peak closest to space. Despite being only 6,263m, due to the bulge of the earth at the equator the peak rises higher into the atmosphere than any other peak in the world!
It's the furthest point from the earth's centre but as mentioned not the closest point to space (space is further from the earth closer to the equator in addition to it being defined by height from sea level)
@@roadrash999 Semantics. Chimborazo rises higher into the atmosphere than any other peak. Even Neil deGrasse Tyson has used the term "closest to space" in this context.
@@mattshaman668 Semantics. Chimborazo rises higher into the atmosphere than any other peak. Even Neil deGrasse Tyson has used the term "closest to space" in this context.
Base camp is generally just as high as you can drive. It's the base of the peak, not the base of the mountain. Basecamp can be higher or lower purely depending on logistics (roads).
Before watching the video I was gonna guess Kilimanjaro is the tallest by some technicality, but hey what do I know I’m only 2 minutes in and my ADHD calls me to click on something else bye-bye
If you account for Mt Everest's base camp is an arbitrary way to measure 0 such as sea level, and account for the crustal-lithospheric "root" beneath the Himalayas, the height of Mt Everest is ~240 km. Though much of that is entirely within the Earth, it is formed by compression of the Indian sub-continent colliding with the Eurasian continent, folding the crust to form the mountains. This is like making a big heavy ship in the ocean of the mantle, the more ship weighs the more of it has to be underwater to displace material to buoyantly float. Definitely a cool way to look at how these compare to one another,! It's also cool to think about how much crust is beneath some mountains! It can even be enough to affect the strength of gravity depending on the different densities of the rock.
come on. That's a guess from some old scientists at best. There's 240km bore hole samples right that show this? I unfortunately paid for a geology degree and those old dudes were just making stuff up. They blasted some sort of electronic detection device down say even a kilometre? Okay sure. Pretty much everything we know comes from mining claims. Your professors probably have mining claims. Everything you wrote here is, at best, a guess. I apologize if you also paid for a Geology Degree.
It may be trivial from a geological perspective buuuut the bottom of the mountain to the top sounds like a pretty natural way to look at the size of a mountain to me.
literally been doing this math for the last month for D&D volcano battles. Super satisfying that this is basically a visual refresher of that month of research and model scaling to 25mm scale and calculating for D&D's interpretation of miles for spells that ignore the limitations of people's natural physical abilities. Great video Wren and team!
You definitely skewed the data to make Everest appear smaller by counting its "basecamp" as its base but counted the base of all the other mountains as basically the flood plains around them. The size of what you are considering a "mountain" in the end you could basically call all of the Himalayas a mountain.
Every measure mentioned in this video is f**ked up for to those crummy & obsolete units, your feet! Update your numbers to rational units, as most of Humankind already does: METERS.
I live on Maui and enjoy hiking up Haleakala every few months. To go from farmland to arid desert conditions over the course of a hike is truly exceptional. The West Maui Mountains look like little hills from the peak of Haleakala.
We drove to the summit of Haleakala on vacation, and when we got out of the car, I jogged across the parking lot and just about passed out. 🤣 I live at a fairly high elevation, but to spend a week at sea level and then drive up 10,000 feet--I've never experienced such a drastic elevation change in so short a time.
that example of hot spots was perfect, good use of practical effects and vfx to compliment each other. i could see this section being shown in classrooms
you could also ask a kid in class for their lighter, then move a piece of paper over the flame while keeping the lighter in place. It usually doesn't set of the fire alarm but most kids don't fess up that they have a light on them.
I'm glad this video was made. It bothers me that people think Mt Everest is the tallest mountain on Earth when it's really just the highest. It bothers me even more that official base-to-peak lists are wrong because no accurate catalog of base to peak heights exist - so you have to manually digitally measure mountains to get their height because articles are wrong. Off the top of my head, a few mountains taller than Everest: *- Namcha Barwa (21,000' base to peak)* *- Rakaposhi (20,000' base to peak)* *- Tirich Mir (19,000' base to peak)* There's literally dozens of mountains that exceed 12,000' base to peak
Lol, what a stupid comment. What is the difference between tall and high? It's just about definitions, and you think you have the end all be all of relevant definitions, but that is just your opinion. And you're wrong.
@@Targe0the problem with that is that it doesn't make Chimborazo taller for the same reason why a leg hair isn't longer than one on your head just because it ends further away from your brain. Chimborazo is in Ecuador not that far away from the equator. The Earth is not a perfect sphere. It's rotation makes the area around the equator bulge out quite a bit to the degree that any point above like 14000ft in the same area as Chimborazo is farther away from the center of the Earth than Everest and therefore technically "taller". To call it taller than Everest would be introducing the same issue that he was trying to correct with Everest and it's base camp. I mean shit, Chimborazo isn't even the tallest point in it's own mountain range.
5:30 "its one of the most iconic natural features in the entire country" To be fair Australias list of natural features is basically just: -desert -desert -great barrier reef -desert -desert -oh look at that, more desert -big rock -desert
From my understanding... where natural features meant anything natural for me. Desert, desert, desert, desert, big rock, desert, desert, desert, big reef, beach, beach ,beach, EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, SPIDERS, SPIDERS, SPIDERS, SPIDERS.... Great Emu war of independence.
i watched a very good slideshow/storytelling kinda show with my school class last week and the shit they captured is insane like idk which ones to say but theres a whole lot more
I'm still confused as to why we're using the base camp location as the foot of Everest. The two reasons I saw from the video is that Everest is "standing" on the Himalayan mountain range, and that "base" camp implies that it is the foot of the mountain since it has the word "base" in it. Personally I've always thought that the "base" in base camp referred to "centre of operations" within that area rather than "camp which is at the foot of the mountain". But considering that I might be wrong, I still don't see how the location of a base camp is supposed to denote the line between "part of the Himalayas" and Everest itself (e.g. where the building ends and the foot of the human standing on it begins), as I am not aware of any such geological study that determined where base camp should be. Not to mention the several base camps that Everest has, as well as other comments also pointing out that Everest is part of the Himalayas, so it's not analagous to a human standing on a building, but part of the building itself. The analogy would be more appropriate if sea level was used and if Mount Chimborazo was included in the comparison. However, I guess others might argue that these mountains are part of the Earth's crust itself, and perhaps a more meaningful measure would be "distance to centre of the Earth", although I understand if that might cause some issues with comparing between the different mountains using VFX. Lastly, I was really hoping that Rheasilvia would've gotten a special mention too!
I think the point of the video is that comparing mountain heights to sea level is essentially arbitrary, although obviously very consistent. And comparing other mountains to their 'base' from a human perspective is another arbitrary measure that gives different results.
@@CantWords I agree with you. However, this standard wasn't applied equally throughout the video. For example, unless I missed it, we didn't consider the height from the base camps of Denali or Mount Rainier, since they are also part of their respective mountain ranges similar to how Everest is "a human standing on top of a building". So I'm not sure why we're singling out Everest here specifically either. Perhaps I'm missing something geologically about how Denali and Mount Rainier are distinct from their mountain ranges?
@@glamouraz Yeah it wasn't I mean Wren used the sea floor to talk about the height of Hawaii. But tbh it's a fun 'exploring ideas' video, no rigours standards were applied and I don't think we need to expect that here. I'm sure Everest was singled out simply because it is considered the tallest mountain in everyone's minds
Yeah looking at base camp for this comparison is stupid, if you follow the waterways of the cols between p300s and you use the lowest intersection of these waterways than you will have a better "base height" for comparison. But in the case of Everest it does not really change much, but if you do this for other mountains in the Himalayas and and Karakoram you will see that they are still higher than even the elevation of Denali.
You keep stating that Everest only starts at its base camp but I think you are forgetting the fact that if you want to summit Everest and even reach the base camp your starting altitude is 2800m. So to get from the starting point to the top of Mt Everest is an accent of about 6000m, which is much bigger than any other climbable accent in the world
@@VegetaLF7 Sea level also varies in distance from the center of the Earth, based on latitude. Because the Earth is spinning, it is slightly wider at the equator.
I absolutely love that you've made an educational video about something other than CGI. Your presentation skills are so good it translates in to any topic, which is brilliant.
Interesting fact: Measured from the center of the Earth, Chimborazo in Ecuador is the highest mountain on the planet, exceeding the height of Everest by two kilometers. Chimborazo is colloquially known as "the closest point to the Sun."
@@dearcrush_XDYes, that's right, you can investigate it, and it is precisely because of the topic that Dren talks about in this video, Chimborazo is not bigger than Everest, but it is located in the Andes, measured in relation of the center of the earth, Chimborazo reaches 6,384m and Everest 6,382, there is a difference of almost 2,000 m , It is the highest peak, closest to the sun but not to space
Wren should have is own “discovery” channel 😊 Those videos are so well done and educational that they need to be part of the school curriculum. Most students can’t ingest the dry and boring textbooks… With those 3D representations, you can peek their interests👍
I get the purpose of the video, but it is a bit misleading. Ren isn't truly talking about height, but instead prominence, from surrounding ground to peak. But talking about how high a mountain can be, how should it be measured? From sea level like everest, or prominence like Manu Kea? Or how about how far from Earth's core it is? If we measure from Earth's core then it would be Mount Chimborazo in Ecuador. The reason why is because Earth isn't perfectly round, but instead it bulges at the equator making Earth have "little" love handles.
Prominence doesn't really measure height above surroundings, it measures a mountain's independence. This is a different metric from what they are using here. For instance, Mount Everest's prominence is equal to its elevation.
@TheWigglergler I think we are talking in the same terms, because prominence is the difference in heights between lowest contour lines ( which for everest would be sea level for wet prominence) which also in everest's case is its independence. But if you look at everest's sister peak Lhotse, it's prominence is only a couple hundred meters, because the nearest col it claims is taken by the higher peak of everest, but it's height is still 27000 meters.
@@godt9353 Indeed, but that isn't what's used in the video. Otherwise Mount Everest would still be the tallest on Earth, using either wet or dry prominence. Its wet prominence of 8848m exceeds any other, and its dry prominence of over 19000m also is the world's highest.
@TheWigglergler I see where we differ now, I use topographical isolation for wet prominence and you just use dry prominence, but I do not think manua Kea is anywhere near 19000m
@@godt9353 Mauna Kea has a dry prominence of ~9500m. Mount Everest's dry prominence is taken from the bottom of the Mariana Trench, meaning it has a dry prominence equivalent to the full range of elevation on Earth.
This is an interesting topic, but there are a few major flaws with the techniques used in this video. First of all, Mount Everest is measured from base camp, which is not the lowest base of the mountain. Denali and Mount Rainier are measured from their lowest surrounding ridges, which would get a somewhat greater height for Mount Everest (although Denali would still beat it and it would be close with Mount Rainier). Also, what constitutes a mountain's base is somewhat arbitrary, and different measurement techniques could change the order here. For instance, Mount Everest is visible from an elevation of ~3000m at the entrance to Sagarmatha National Park, putting it close to the maximum visible elevation gain for Denali (although few hundred meters shorter still). Elevation above sea level is the only way to measure height in absolute terms, which makes it the most important metric. The biggest problem, though, is that Denali is not the tallest mountain above its base on land. Nanga Parbat, Dhaulagiri I, Annapurna I, Annapurna II, and Kangchenjunga can all be said to rise higher from their respective bases. Nanga Parbat, for instance, rises a full seven kilometers above the Indus River valley, following continuous ridges in a basically identical manner to the method used for Denali here. These mountains are often overlooked, but they are extremely relevant to this particular topic.
@@penek6088 That's not what prominence is. Topographic prominence is a measure of the independence of a mountain. Follow the highest possible path from the summit of a mountain to the nearest higher mountain, then subtract the lowest point on that path from the mountain's elevation. Mount Everest has a prominence equal to its elevation, as there are no higher summits. The base to peak metric you are thinking of is flawed, for the reasons I outlined in my comment. It can be fine to use, but comparisons are impossible due to the subjective nature of where a mountain's base truly is.
@@Hydrargyrum8typical US guys. They find ways to show that every best stuff there is on earth is in or part of the US. Like the champions of NBA are called the World Champs 😂
Fun fact about K2: it is the second tallest (from sea level) mountain in the world and has a mortality rate of 20%, making it the deadliest mountain in the world, and comparing it to Mt. Everest’s 2%, Everest feels safe.
I’m not even from Alaska, but I’ve been saying for years that Denali is way taller than Everest if you measure properly. It’s about time someone did a video on this!
Technically Nanga Parbat, Dhaulagiri I, Annapurna I, Annapurna II, and Kangchenjunga can all be said to rise higher from their "base" (such a measurement is somewhat arbitrary). Nanga Parbat, for instance, rises a full seven kilometers above the Indus River valley. As such, Denali is not really the "tallest mountain on land" as is often claimed.
Same thing with Rakaposhi. Rakaposhi rises almost 6km from its base to its peak. You just don't see it often on the Internet because it's not as well known as Denali
Loved this video Wren, I love mountains! But there is one thing I’d like to say, Mt Everest is still considered the most prominent mountain, quite a bit more prominent than Denali. Picking Everest basecamp as the base of the mountain is very arbitrary while you consider the entire island of Hawaii as a Mauna Kea.
Everest is not standing on the himalayas it's a part of it. It would be like saying you are not really that tall because your torso is standing on your legs.
But the point kind of still stands. It's like a body had one set of legs with thousands of torsos on them, and one torso is considered the tallest torso in the world because the legs are so long.
Any reasonable definition of a mountain only considers the point that the ground starts sticking out from the rest of the surrounding area, not the entire continental plate that it's on. That is what people refer to when they talk about mountains. Does that mean there is no objective start for a mountain? Yes, and that's fine. The word wasn't created to have a scientific. It's supposed to be vibe based. Geologists have just decided to force a more scientific definition, but no normal person actually it
You are overcomplicating it. The simple science of what is being discussed comes down to how we perceive scale. To view Everest with the largest scale, you would need to be as close as possible laterally to the biggest elevation change. At base camp, 12,000 ft straight up is much bigger scale, than if you were to travel down valley for a dozen miles as the crow flies only to descend less than a mile vertically. So the point of prominence should be measured at base camp, not at sea level (where the scale is so small you can't even see Everest...)
I don't really agree, you don't share your legs with the 10 people next to you right ? As an individual entity, you are standing on the same ground as other people, that's the same as the "base" of the Himalayas The one thing though would be to go through a vertical slice to differentiate the rocks that are base layer vs Everest peak layer, the mountain would therefore be taller as they go way below sea level geologically underground.
Im begging you. Please create a series not just a youtube series but actual streaming series. The way you elaborate and explain topic is so much fun and incredibly engaging. My nephews are 7 and 8 and by watching youe video they cant stop screaming "I want to see more" and I'm deadly passionate about being an advocate for your videos. They sre simply AMAZING! These videos have the potential to be the new ways of teaching in classes and more!
Congrats man as someone who is studying science in uk college which is university over there in america its good to see someone who doesn't take stuff at face value thats the most important skill you can have
I've known a lot of these things for a while(not the numbers, but which ones are actually the tallest) but you and your team made the video in a way that captivates the viewer's attentions with stunning vfx.
I am from Nepal and I have started hearing about Everest being the 'tallest' mountain only in last couple of years, and it's always in one of these videos or articles where they argue that it is 'not actually the tallest'. I don't think anyone ever claimed that it was the tallest. We were always told it was the 'highest peak in the world's i.e. the top of Everest is at higher altitude than other mountains.
Olympus Mons is so staggeringly massive that you can’t even see all of it if you stand at the base. It is so large that if you stood at the top you wouldn’t even notice you are on a mountain as it expands past the horizon.
I am Nepalese and was getting mad but then thought who actually decides where the base camp of a mountain starts. Imagine how long would it take if one had to trek all the from the beaches of India to the top of Everest or even from the lowest point in Nepal
elevation is still huge factor, and the informed ones know that nepal still has the most giant mountains. He's cherry picked the best the US has to offer, and yet those are just standard sizes for all of the himalayas. And while he said that denali is the highest, real ones know Annapurna is king.
@@bentownsend4017 The elevation starts way before the everest base camp. Its onlly named base camp cuz its the max point you can reach without mountaineering gear which is not reccognized while comparing other mountains i this video
Dhaulagiri I, Annapurna I, and Annapurna II are taller than Denali base to peak by typical measurement methods. Where the base of a mountain lies is unclear, though, and such metrics are almost never used.
You missed a mention for Mount Chimborazo in Ecuador. It is the tallest mountain on Earth in terms of distance from the centre of the earth, due to the equatorial buldge caused by earth's rotation. Over 2000m taller than Everest in this respect!
I guess that would depend on where we consider space starting. The Karman line is a rough measure but the atmosphere is also thicker at the equator as well so space is maybe considered further away?
I keep mentioning this in the comments but no this is wrong. The equatorial bulge makes Chimborazo further from earths center than Everest but the atmosphere also bulges outwards with the land. So space is just as far away from here as it is anywhere else in the world. Elevation above sea level is the only metric for getting to space
@@SirWrender Chimborazo is closer to celestial bodies and objects in space, but it is NOT closer to the vacuum of space. Chimborazo is often credited as being closer to space than Everest because Chimborazo is the furthest distance from the center of the earth, but at the equator the atmosphere is not anylower, so there is more atmosphere above Chimborazo than Everest. If Chimborazo really was closer to the vacuum of space though, climbers would have even more breathing difficulty than Everest, but its not the case Chimborazo at its peak has around 30% more oxygen than Everest, except colder temperatures do mean there is more oxygen as colder air is heavier and Chimborazo can be 60 F in the summer making have only 20% more oxygen, still more and still not closer to space though.
I mean how do you even define the "bottom" of a mountain? The whole concept kinda falls apart as soon as you try to. You can easily define the highest point on Earth just by seeing how far up into the atmosphere it goes. So Mount Everest is still the tallest mountain in my books
That will also depend on how thick the atmosphere is in that area, which will depend on gravity in that area, and the shape of the planet in that area (the Earth is wider at the equator than it is from top to bottom). so even the Sea Level is not adequate to measure! My opinion is that the center of the Earth should be the point of reference!
Real bro like what if we measure mt Everest from Earth's core then mt Everest would be the highest peak too so there's no concept of base. And We are talking about the nearest point to the space or the highest point on earth. So that means it's either mt Everest or Chimborazo
There is no science to his analysis very random. But what he is trying to refer to is mountain prominence. How tall is the mountain relative to its “base”. Killi looks massive because the area around it is at sea level. Everest sits on a high plateau so will look smaller. He is a pretty stupid guy for not giving more context
I work in Denali, and this is my favorite fact to share with people that it is actually bigger than Everest from the base. It is mind blowing seeing Denali in person.
My gf is a scientist. Geology is her specialty, and I'm just an electronics/arcade tech, so I love sending her stuff like this. She usually sends me back any incorrect info she finds within minutes, as she was also a teacher. Told her she might like this and she watched and her response was: "It's a correct but kinda depressing because none of that information should be surprising to anyone who took earth science bc all of it (except some of the details about Mars) is taught in Earth science..." -A Scientist
Nice video! Having stood atop Mt rainier, Fuji and dozens of other mountains I can truly say rainier is massive. In a class of its own at least when it comes to mountains I’ve climbed. I’d love to see more comparison videos like this, maybe of freestanding volcanoes for instance. Thanks again for the awesome vid!!!
At 0:30 you said the peak of Mount Everest is the closest thing to outer space in the entire world. This would actually be Chimborazo in Ecuador, which is the highest mountain on Earth, when measured from the Earth's centre rather than sea level. Because the earth gets squashed by its own rotation, the peak of Chimborazo is 1.5miles closer to space.
Fun fact, actually Rakaposhi in Pakistan has the greatest elevation change from its base to its summit above land. Roughly 5900 vertical meters are gained in the space of roughly 11km
no offense, but i feel dissapointed as an Ecuadorian that Wren didnt even mention Chimborazo in the whole video, its technically the tallest if youre measuring with the proximity to the sun
No love for Chimborazo? It's the tallest mountain on Earth if you measure from the lowest you can go... THE CORE!!!! (Because Earth is an oblate rather than perfect spheroid, it gets a boost for being nearer to the equator)
Olympus Mons is so big that if you were standing at the bottom you couldnt see the top as it would be over the horizon
Underrated comment.
I believe you can also see it protruding off the surface from orbit, like a giant pimple on otherwise smooth skin
And vice versa.
Standing at the peak, the surface is beyond the horizon.
@@muffinman3052 Olympus Mons the zit of Mars
if you were at mid point you would not be able to see bottom nor top for same reason.
Science teacher here:
Thank you for these type of videos. I use them to engage my students into understanding Earth Science in a more interactive way. It helps them to connect terms and visualize concepts better. The use of technology has become an integral part of education so every tool we can use in a positive way to foment knowledge and discovery is useful.
Science teacher with an N7 logo? Nice! your students are in good hands Im sure
@@TheHippyProductions if the students even exist that is
@@khorvair who else but a teacher would use a word like foment? hahaha
Science and history are my favorite subjects. I want to follow a career that can mix the elements of both of them. The water to my oxygen and hydrogen. I want to be a linguist. I already have a conlang underway
Less homework please
Just got back from Alaska, spent three days at Denali National Park. The scale of Denali is so hard to understand unless you see it with your own eyes. Absolutely massive (and beautiful).
As someone from Alaska, when I finally got a proper view of Denali I almost started crying from the beauty
Just got back from the Kalapatthar (Everest base camp), The beauty of 360 mountain view is so surreal it's hard to believe unless you see it with your own eyes. Absolutely beautiful. The best panoramic view in the world. 😍
Unless you’re Anatoli Boukreev, then it’s just a hill you run up in 10 hours without a tent or oxygen.
It's so nostalgic watching this. It's like watching TV in my younger years.
This feels like an old school discovery channel and I LOVE it.
Yeah, it's Myth Buster-esque.
Wren’s probably done like ten of these, but sure.
Seriously, this is like the Magic School Bus or Mister Rogers, feels good man
A more subtle version of Beakman's World
The caulking and screen is the best representation of that I have ever seen.
Damnit, practical effects! My immersion in this video has been ruined!
Now they have to figure out how to squish the caulk back down into the ocean like the Hawaiian islands when they shrink.
@@NotSoMuchFrankly Using a spray can of whipped cream instead?
Hi
@@HenryLoenwindYeah, that was my thought too. A lot easier to clean up as well.
Technically the tallest mountain in the solar system may be Rheasilvea Mons on the asteroid Vesta. It is, however, all a bit of a guessing game because it is really difficult to measure accurately. So Olympus Mons is often placed at number one.
It's also worth keeping in mind that earth is the only planet where mountains are measured from sea level, which is really arbitrary when you think about it. We are measuring mountains based on how much liquid happens to be standing on earth. By one argument you could measure Everest from its peak, right down to the bottom of Challenger Deep, assuming that everything is part of one gigantic mountain. This would make it around 20km high. Still slightly less the Olympus Mons, but getting close.
You can't have a mountain on an asteroid. That's just a funny shaped asteroid.
@@redrick8900 I could say the same for a planet.
@@redrick8900 considering vesta is 500 km+ thick that'd be like saying your face is deformed for getting a pimple
@@Trippitaka2 You can say wrong things all you like.
@@nyanchat2657 You are terrible at analogies.
Wren's enthusiasm on these VFX artist reveals, is contagious 🔥
Dude would be a great school teacher.
@@John-Doe-Yo maybe he is, you can have multiple jobs in that line of work
@@jsalinasbarros A sub maybe, my gf and sisters are teachers and the workload is insane. If he is though I'm jealous of those kids lol.
This "True Scale" series has got to be one of the most underrated things on TH-cam right now. Absolutely stoked every time I see a new episode pop up!
It’s just a guy moving the goalposts so that some broken idea becomes ‘true’
Couldn't agree more
A lot of this isn't true a lot of thee biggest mountains are the bending of plates.
Jesus loves you @@porkchop7605
@@sirFakeyJesus loves you
Mt.Everest just happens to be the highest point on earth and nothing is beating that.
Mount Chimborazo is the highest point
Highest meaning "in the atmospheric column"? Yes. Highest meaning "furthest from the center of the Earth"? No, that's Chimborazo.
Yes the equitorial bulge makes Mt Chimborazo's peak the farthest point from the earth's centre...Earth is an oblate spheroid
@@JoviaI1 reference point is always sea level
Airplanes.
I've been loving these "Wren talks passionately about a specific subject" type videos! They are always amazing at getting information across in a unique and creative way. Amazing video!
Wait Eret omg
This is why Wren is my favorite of the Corridor Crew
I've really enjoyed all the videos on Corridor for years. Wren has always been amazing, but these types of videos he's been doing have made him my new favorite TH-camr. I'm really looking forward to sharing these videos with my daughter once she's old enough to understand.
Thanks Wren.
the video has many factual errors
Great comparisons! But you did leave out one important tidbit, Chimborazo, in Ecuador, is the peak closest to space. Despite being only 6,263m, due to the bulge of the earth at the equator the peak rises higher into the atmosphere than any other peak in the world!
Yeah when he said the summit of Everest is the closestpoint to space I was like "wait what about that mountain in Ecuador?!"
"space" is defined in terms of altitude from sea level (100km, Karman line), so Everest is still the peak closest to it.
It's the furthest point from the earth's centre but as mentioned not the closest point to space (space is further from the earth closer to the equator in addition to it being defined by height from sea level)
@@roadrash999 Semantics. Chimborazo rises higher into the atmosphere than any other peak. Even Neil deGrasse Tyson has used the term "closest to space" in this context.
@@mattshaman668 Semantics. Chimborazo rises higher into the atmosphere than any other peak. Even Neil deGrasse Tyson has used the term "closest to space" in this context.
I'd say it's average.
I will say it's Smaller than a mountain
Yeah, it’s fine
Your mom says it’s small
This will be top comment
Wdym by that 🧐
So basically this: Mount Everest is the *highest* mountain on Earth, but not necessarily the tallest.
Thank you.
The highest in the room-
Everest scholars disagree. It is listed in just about every source as having a prominence equal to its altitude.
Nah, the climate is far too harsh for any weed to grow there man.
Base camp is generally just as high as you can drive.
It's the base of the peak, not the base of the mountain.
Basecamp can be higher or lower purely depending on logistics (roads).
Before watching the video I was gonna guess Kilimanjaro is the tallest by some technicality, but hey what do I know I’m only 2 minutes in and my ADHD calls me to click on something else bye-bye
If you account for Mt Everest's base camp is an arbitrary way to measure 0 such as sea level, and account for the crustal-lithospheric "root" beneath the Himalayas, the height of Mt Everest is ~240 km. Though much of that is entirely within the Earth, it is formed by compression of the Indian sub-continent colliding with the Eurasian continent, folding the crust to form the mountains. This is like making a big heavy ship in the ocean of the mantle, the more ship weighs the more of it has to be underwater to displace material to buoyantly float.
Definitely a cool way to look at how these compare to one another,! It's also cool to think about how much crust is beneath some mountains! It can even be enough to affect the strength of gravity depending on the different densities of the rock.
Imagining mountain ranges as big boulders bobbing around in a bathtub full of magma is my new favorite way to visualize plate tectonics
come on. That's a guess from some old scientists at best. There's 240km bore hole samples right that show this? I unfortunately paid for a geology degree and those old dudes were just making stuff up. They blasted some sort of electronic detection device down say even a kilometre? Okay sure. Pretty much everything we know comes from mining claims. Your professors probably have mining claims. Everything you wrote here is, at best, a guess. I apologize if you also paid for a Geology Degree.
Tectonics always scare me when i think about it. And then there is earthquakes.
It may be trivial from a geological perspective buuuut the bottom of the mountain to the top sounds like a pretty natural way to look at the size of a mountain to me.
@@checkle1 Oh it certainly is. I don't think there's anything wrong with how this was presented at all.
literally been doing this math for the last month for D&D volcano battles. Super satisfying that this is basically a visual refresher of that month of research and model scaling to 25mm scale and calculating for D&D's interpretation of miles for spells that ignore the limitations of people's natural physical abilities.
Great video Wren and team!
uh huh
Terrible your favorite word @@GraemeGunn
As if being a DM isn't enough work
@@TheJerbol haha 😂 I know right!
that seems.......unnecessary
You definitely skewed the data to make Everest appear smaller by counting its "basecamp" as its base but counted the base of all the other mountains as basically the flood plains around them. The size of what you are considering a "mountain" in the end you could basically call all of the Himalayas a mountain.
Exactly, we can also divide the other mountains into sub-mountains and find a relative bottom just like Everest base camp.
Not really, it would be pretty damn stupid to venture out 60 miles from Everest and include that in the model 😂
@@Pt-kn4zt boo
Every measure mentioned in this video is f**ked up for to those crummy & obsolete units, your feet! Update your numbers to rational units, as most of Humankind already does: METERS.
@@amigodaverdade4448 cry about it
I live on Maui and enjoy hiking up Haleakala every few months. To go from farmland to arid desert conditions over the course of a hike is truly exceptional. The West Maui Mountains look like little hills from the peak of Haleakala.
Chee braddah! 🎉
We drove to the summit of Haleakala on vacation, and when we got out of the car, I jogged across the parking lot and just about passed out. 🤣 I live at a fairly high elevation, but to spend a week at sea level and then drive up 10,000 feet--I've never experienced such a drastic elevation change in so short a time.
that example of hot spots was perfect, good use of practical effects and vfx to compliment each other. i could see this section being shown in classrooms
you could also ask a kid in class for their lighter, then move a piece of paper over the flame while keeping the lighter in place. It usually doesn't set of the fire alarm but most kids don't fess up that they have a light on them.
I'm glad this video was made. It bothers me that people think Mt Everest is the tallest mountain on Earth when it's really just the highest. It bothers me even more that official base-to-peak lists are wrong because no accurate catalog of base to peak heights exist - so you have to manually digitally measure mountains to get their height because articles are wrong. Off the top of my head, a few mountains taller than Everest:
*- Namcha Barwa (21,000' base to peak)*
*- Rakaposhi (20,000' base to peak)*
*- Tirich Mir (19,000' base to peak)*
There's literally dozens of mountains that exceed 12,000' base to peak
Lol, what a stupid comment. What is the difference between tall and high?
It's just about definitions, and you think you have the end all be all of relevant definitions, but that is just your opinion. And you're wrong.
You left out Mount Chimborazo?! Its the farthest from the center of the earth! Its 6800 feet farther from the center than Mount Everest!
I was waiting for Wren to mention Chimborazo.
I said the same but technically it's in no way the 'biggest' in actual mass
I said the same thing, it's one of the few ones with legitimate claim of being taller than Everest.
thats what is said chimborazo is the tallist
@@Targe0the problem with that is that it doesn't make Chimborazo taller for the same reason why a leg hair isn't longer than one on your head just because it ends further away from your brain. Chimborazo is in Ecuador not that far away from the equator. The Earth is not a perfect sphere. It's rotation makes the area around the equator bulge out quite a bit to the degree that any point above like 14000ft in the same area as Chimborazo is farther away from the center of the Earth than Everest and therefore technically "taller".
To call it taller than Everest would be introducing the same issue that he was trying to correct with Everest and it's base camp. I mean shit, Chimborazo isn't even the tallest point in it's own mountain range.
Wren's "VFX used to display scale" series is always my favorite content on this channel
Bros gonna loose his mind when he finds out about the Ancient Appalachian Mountains
yeah, he didn't hear about the Kodiak mountain
Your Mountain vs the Mountain she tells you not to worry about.
"Let's see Paul Allens mountain"
@@henrikholmberg777😂😂😂
@@henrikholmberg777 the subtle off white coloring...
@@RealAndySkibba "oh my God, it even has a volcano"
🤨
5:30 "its one of the most iconic natural features in the entire country"
To be fair Australias list of natural features is basically just:
-desert
-desert
-great barrier reef
-desert
-desert
-oh look at that, more desert
-big rock
-desert
Im Australian. You forgot about beach, beach, beach, beach, island, beach, beach, island, cove, forest. But like, it’s mostly desert.
From my understanding... where natural features meant anything natural for me.
Desert, desert, desert, desert, big rock, desert, desert, desert, big reef, beach, beach ,beach,
EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, EMU, SPIDERS, SPIDERS, SPIDERS, SPIDERS.... Great Emu war of independence.
i watched a very good slideshow/storytelling kinda show with my school class last week and the shit they captured is insane
like idk which ones to say but theres a whole lot more
And unfortunately we might have to scratch great barrier reef from that list in the (relatively) near future
Also the oldest rainforest on earth estimated to be upto 180 million years old
Olympus Mons is so big and "so flat", you can't feel that you were climbing even thought your altimeter is rising.
Yeah it's only around an average slope of 5%. You'd know you're going uphill but you could keep a decent pace walking up it.
I love these types of videos that Wren does. They are so much fun to watch, and you learn stuff too!
I'm still confused as to why we're using the base camp location as the foot of Everest. The two reasons I saw from the video is that Everest is "standing" on the Himalayan mountain range, and that "base" camp implies that it is the foot of the mountain since it has the word "base" in it. Personally I've always thought that the "base" in base camp referred to "centre of operations" within that area rather than "camp which is at the foot of the mountain". But considering that I might be wrong, I still don't see how the location of a base camp is supposed to denote the line between "part of the Himalayas" and Everest itself (e.g. where the building ends and the foot of the human standing on it begins), as I am not aware of any such geological study that determined where base camp should be.
Not to mention the several base camps that Everest has, as well as other comments also pointing out that Everest is part of the Himalayas, so it's not analagous to a human standing on a building, but part of the building itself. The analogy would be more appropriate if sea level was used and if Mount Chimborazo was included in the comparison. However, I guess others might argue that these mountains are part of the Earth's crust itself, and perhaps a more meaningful measure would be "distance to centre of the Earth", although I understand if that might cause some issues with comparing between the different mountains using VFX.
Lastly, I was really hoping that Rheasilvia would've gotten a special mention too!
I think the point of the video is that comparing mountain heights to sea level is essentially arbitrary, although obviously very consistent. And comparing other mountains to their 'base' from a human perspective is another arbitrary measure that gives different results.
@@CantWords I agree with you. However, this standard wasn't applied equally throughout the video. For example, unless I missed it, we didn't consider the height from the base camps of Denali or Mount Rainier, since they are also part of their respective mountain ranges similar to how Everest is "a human standing on top of a building".
So I'm not sure why we're singling out Everest here specifically either. Perhaps I'm missing something geologically about how Denali and Mount Rainier are distinct from their mountain ranges?
@@glamouraz Yeah it wasn't I mean Wren used the sea floor to talk about the height of Hawaii. But tbh it's a fun 'exploring ideas' video, no rigours standards were applied and I don't think we need to expect that here.
I'm sure Everest was singled out simply because it is considered the tallest mountain in everyone's minds
Yeah looking at base camp for this comparison is stupid, if you follow the waterways of the cols between p300s and you use the lowest intersection of these waterways than you will have a better "base height" for comparison. But in the case of Everest it does not really change much, but if you do this for other mountains in the Himalayas and and Karakoram you will see that they are still higher than even the elevation of Denali.
Yeah, I'm sure you all are fun at parties, eh?
You keep stating that Everest only starts at its base camp but I think you are forgetting the fact that if you want to summit Everest and even reach the base camp your starting altitude is 2800m. So to get from the starting point to the top of Mt Everest is an accent of about 6000m, which is much bigger than any other climbable accent in the world
More videos like this please… there’s a whole bunch of us who truly find this very informative and entertaining
Wait until Wren learns that that the sea isn’t level everywhere
"Sea level" tends to be an average of the high and low tide marks
@@VegetaLF7 Sea level also varies in distance from the center of the Earth, based on latitude. Because the Earth is spinning, it is slightly wider at the equator.
This video was mountainous in its information! Great job, Corridor Crew on the visuals and presentation as always!
I absolutely love that you've made an educational video about something other than CGI. Your presentation skills are so good it translates in to any topic, which is brilliant.
Interesting fact: Measured from the center of the Earth, Chimborazo in Ecuador is the highest mountain on the planet, exceeding the height of Everest by two kilometers. Chimborazo is colloquially known as "the closest point to the Sun."
If that's the case then the Olympus will be one of the smallest.
Yeah, but you can summit Chimborazo without oxygen and be back in time for dinner.
Closest to sun but not closest to space.
@@dearcrush_XDYes, that's right, you can investigate it, and it is precisely because of the topic that Dren talks about in this video, Chimborazo is not bigger than Everest, but it is located in the Andes, measured in relation of the center of the earth, Chimborazo reaches 6,384m and Everest 6,382, there is a difference of almost 2,000 m , It is the highest peak, closest to the sun but not to space
@@Bothandle70yup, correct
I'm glad you made this video because this is something ive thought about for years. Nice work!
We need more Wrens in this world.
Wren should have is own “discovery” channel 😊
Those videos are so well done and educational that they need to be part of the school curriculum.
Most students can’t ingest the dry and boring textbooks…
With those 3D representations, you can peek their interests👍
So everest is saying "my shoes count to my height but yours don't shorty"
I get the purpose of the video, but it is a bit misleading. Ren isn't truly talking about height, but instead prominence, from surrounding ground to peak. But talking about how high a mountain can be, how should it be measured? From sea level like everest, or prominence like Manu Kea? Or how about how far from Earth's core it is? If we measure from Earth's core then it would be Mount Chimborazo in Ecuador. The reason why is because Earth isn't perfectly round, but instead it bulges at the equator making Earth have "little" love handles.
Prominence doesn't really measure height above surroundings, it measures a mountain's independence. This is a different metric from what they are using here. For instance, Mount Everest's prominence is equal to its elevation.
@TheWigglergler I think we are talking in the same terms, because prominence is the difference in heights between lowest contour lines ( which for everest would be sea level for wet prominence) which also in everest's case is its independence. But if you look at everest's sister peak Lhotse, it's prominence is only a couple hundred meters, because the nearest col it claims is taken by the higher peak of everest, but it's height is still 27000 meters.
@@godt9353 Indeed, but that isn't what's used in the video. Otherwise Mount Everest would still be the tallest on Earth, using either wet or dry prominence. Its wet prominence of 8848m exceeds any other, and its dry prominence of over 19000m also is the world's highest.
@TheWigglergler I see where we differ now, I use topographical isolation for wet prominence and you just use dry prominence, but I do not think manua Kea is anywhere near 19000m
@@godt9353 Mauna Kea has a dry prominence of ~9500m. Mount Everest's dry prominence is taken from the bottom of the Mariana Trench, meaning it has a dry prominence equivalent to the full range of elevation on Earth.
4:10
I live in Washington State and have been to Rainer and I have to say:
Rainer is amazing.
I'm from not washington state and i agree, very good mountain (pats mountain) very good.
You should see Kanchenjunga . It looks sleeping buddha and it looks very awesome.
Rainer is the best, for sure. PNW represent :D
:D@@chancepaladin
Rainier is an S tier mountain. Absolutely gorgeous.
I was just at the summit of Mauna Kea a few weeks ago. Breathtaking sunsets and incredible view of the stars.
This is an interesting topic, but there are a few major flaws with the techniques used in this video. First of all, Mount Everest is measured from base camp, which is not the lowest base of the mountain. Denali and Mount Rainier are measured from their lowest surrounding ridges, which would get a somewhat greater height for Mount Everest (although Denali would still beat it and it would be close with Mount Rainier). Also, what constitutes a mountain's base is somewhat arbitrary, and different measurement techniques could change the order here. For instance, Mount Everest is visible from an elevation of ~3000m at the entrance to Sagarmatha National Park, putting it close to the maximum visible elevation gain for Denali (although few hundred meters shorter still). Elevation above sea level is the only way to measure height in absolute terms, which makes it the most important metric. The biggest problem, though, is that Denali is not the tallest mountain above its base on land. Nanga Parbat, Dhaulagiri I, Annapurna I, Annapurna II, and Kangchenjunga can all be said to rise higher from their respective bases. Nanga Parbat, for instance, rises a full seven kilometers above the Indus River valley, following continuous ridges in a basically identical manner to the method used for Denali here. These mountains are often overlooked, but they are extremely relevant to this particular topic.
Wow, you are smart. And cool
This. Glad to see people talk about this issue and other underrated mountains. I dont't know why there's this internet to bring everest down.
@@penek6088 That's not what prominence is. Topographic prominence is a measure of the independence of a mountain. Follow the highest possible path from the summit of a mountain to the nearest higher mountain, then subtract the lowest point on that path from the mountain's elevation. Mount Everest has a prominence equal to its elevation, as there are no higher summits. The base to peak metric you are thinking of is flawed, for the reasons I outlined in my comment. It can be fine to use, but comparisons are impossible due to the subjective nature of where a mountain's base truly is.
@@Hydrargyrum8typical US guys. They find ways to show that every best stuff there is on earth is in or part of the US. Like the champions of NBA are called the World Champs 😂
@kevlo1387 considering how mauna kea is in hawaii, would they talk so much about it if hawaii wasnt part of the us, we know how us took over hawaii.
Does Puget sell to Canada yet?
🇨🇦🇨🇦
Fun fact about K2: it is the second tallest (from sea level) mountain in the world and has a mortality rate of 20%, making it the deadliest mountain in the world, and comparing it to Mt. Everest’s 2%, Everest feels safe.
Seeing the video title I thought you would do the point farthest from earth's center, also.
Mt. Chimborazo
As an Alaskan I’ve been explaining this for years. Thank you so much for this amazing video!
A fellow Alaskan who is thankful he called it Denali and not McKinley
I’m not even from Alaska, but I’ve been saying for years that Denali is way taller than Everest if you measure properly. It’s about time someone did a video on this!
Everest is the tallest. This argument is dumb. Measuring from the sea floor is dumb too.
Technically Nanga Parbat, Dhaulagiri I, Annapurna I, Annapurna II, and Kangchenjunga can all be said to rise higher from their "base" (such a measurement is somewhat arbitrary). Nanga Parbat, for instance, rises a full seven kilometers above the Indus River valley. As such, Denali is not really the "tallest mountain on land" as is often claimed.
Same thing with Rakaposhi. Rakaposhi rises almost 6km from its base to its peak. You just don't see it often on the Internet because it's not as well known as Denali
These videos w Wren are some of the best knowledge based vids on YT. Keep them up!
Sometimes I forget Wren has done a TedTalk. What a talent
Bro, he's done so much more than that
i did not know that
Loved this video Wren, I love mountains! But there is one thing I’d like to say, Mt Everest is still considered the most prominent mountain, quite a bit more prominent than Denali. Picking Everest basecamp as the base of the mountain is very arbitrary while you consider the entire island of Hawaii as a Mauna Kea.
" 80 million years " , from science to fantasy land in seconds .
🤔
Everest is not standing on the himalayas it's a part of it. It would be like saying you are not really that tall because your torso is standing on your legs.
But the point kind of still stands. It's like a body had one set of legs with thousands of torsos on them, and one torso is considered the tallest torso in the world because the legs are so long.
@@EricJ0hansson It's more the Himalayas are just one Mountain, and we've named individual strands of hair on its head.
Any reasonable definition of a mountain only considers the point that the ground starts sticking out from the rest of the surrounding area, not the entire continental plate that it's on. That is what people refer to when they talk about mountains. Does that mean there is no objective start for a mountain? Yes, and that's fine. The word wasn't created to have a scientific. It's supposed to be vibe based. Geologists have just decided to force a more scientific definition, but no normal person actually it
You are overcomplicating it. The simple science of what is being discussed comes down to how we perceive scale. To view Everest with the largest scale, you would need to be as close as possible laterally to the biggest elevation change. At base camp, 12,000 ft straight up is much bigger scale, than if you were to travel down valley for a dozen miles as the crow flies only to descend less than a mile vertically. So the point of prominence should be measured at base camp, not at sea level (where the scale is so small you can't even see Everest...)
I don't really agree, you don't share your legs with the 10 people next to you right ? As an individual entity, you are standing on the same ground as other people, that's the same as the "base" of the Himalayas
The one thing though would be to go through a vertical slice to differentiate the rocks that are base layer vs Everest peak layer, the mountain would therefore be taller as they go way below sea level geologically underground.
Can we do the true scale of why my ex wife took the children?
😂😂😂😂😂
L
Dayum...gonna need to travel forward in time to find a suitable technology.
😭😭😭
Why does anyone do what they do? Incentives!
Me, while watching older corridor videos: "man, how does wren keep breaking so many bones..?"
Wren 5 minutes later: "im standing on a building!"
They need to show these videos in schools!
Great example of critical thinking
Oceanography class!
As a teacher I can say… yes we do 😊. My form love them!
Im begging you. Please create a series not just a youtube series but actual streaming series. The way you elaborate and explain topic is so much fun and incredibly engaging. My nephews are 7 and 8 and by watching youe video they cant stop screaming "I want to see more" and I'm deadly passionate about being an advocate for your videos. They sre simply AMAZING! These videos have the potential to be the new ways of teaching in classes and more!
youtube > streaming, lol! There's a lot of very good channels if you look for interesting stuff that's not made by and for the impatient.
Congrats man as someone who is studying science in uk college which is university over there in america its good to see someone who doesn't take stuff at face value thats the most important skill you can have
Stellar video. The visualizations do so much in presenting the ideas in an understandable way. They're also gorgeous to look at!
Wren absolutely kills it every time, you should really have your own show by now my dude
I can't tell you how much I love this. Denali is truly an impressive sight.
Wren you have done it again! 😊
Using that same logic, every continent starts underwater and Everest should also be counted from the sea floor.
I've known a lot of these things for a while(not the numbers, but which ones are actually the tallest) but you and your team made the video in a way that captivates the viewer's attentions with stunning vfx.
Every one of Wrens videos brings me joy
I am from Nepal and I have started hearing about Everest being the 'tallest' mountain only in last couple of years, and it's always in one of these videos or articles where they argue that it is 'not actually the tallest'. I don't think anyone ever claimed that it was the tallest. We were always told it was the 'highest peak in the world's i.e. the top of Everest is at higher altitude than other mountains.
Olympus Mons is so staggeringly massive that you can’t even see all of it if you stand at the base. It is so large that if you stood at the top you wouldn’t even notice you are on a mountain as it expands past the horizon.
1:01 4 year old logic
Is that so Sherlock? Dang
These videos from Wren where he uses CGI to explain cool stuff are top tier youtube content. Well done!
I am glad you put context on this.
I am Nepalese and was getting mad but then thought who actually decides where the base camp of a mountain starts. Imagine how long would it take if one had to trek all the from the beaches of India to the top of Everest or even from the lowest point in Nepal
elevation is still huge factor, and the informed ones know that nepal still has the most giant mountains. He's cherry picked the best the US has to offer, and yet those are just standard sizes for all of the himalayas. And while he said that denali is the highest, real ones know Annapurna is king.
@@bentownsend4017 The elevation starts way before the everest base camp. Its onlly named base camp cuz its the max point you can reach without mountaineering gear which is not reccognized while comparing other mountains i this video
Dhaulagiri I, Annapurna I, and Annapurna II are taller than Denali base to peak by typical measurement methods. Where the base of a mountain lies is unclear, though, and such metrics are almost never used.
Hoina ,,,waiyyat ho,,,base camp ko Artha base nai hoina,,,,american trying to become american
Bro Is Beefing With A Mountain 💀💀☠
YES!!!
I’ve been wondering about it for so long!!
Thank you!
You missed a mention for Mount Chimborazo in Ecuador. It is the tallest mountain on Earth in terms of distance from the centre of the earth, due to the equatorial buldge caused by earth's rotation. Over 2000m taller than Everest in this respect!
Yeah
0:25 is incorrect. Chimborazo's peak is the closest point on earth to space because of the equatorial bulge.
Correct.
I guess that would depend on where we consider space starting. The Karman line is a rough measure but the atmosphere is also thicker at the equator as well so space is maybe considered further away?
I keep mentioning this in the comments but no this is wrong. The equatorial bulge makes Chimborazo further from earths center than Everest but the atmosphere also bulges outwards with the land. So space is just as far away from here as it is anywhere else in the world. Elevation above sea level is the only metric for getting to space
@@SirWrender
Chimborazo is closer to celestial bodies and objects in space, but it is NOT closer to the vacuum of space. Chimborazo is often credited as being closer to space than Everest because Chimborazo is the furthest distance from the center of the earth, but at the equator the atmosphere is not anylower, so there is more atmosphere above Chimborazo than Everest. If Chimborazo really was closer to the vacuum of space though, climbers would have even more breathing difficulty than Everest, but its not the case Chimborazo at its peak has around 30% more oxygen than Everest, except colder temperatures do mean there is more oxygen as colder air is heavier and Chimborazo can be 60 F in the summer making have only 20% more oxygen, still more and still not closer to space though.
Corridor crew never disappoints. Not a single miss
5:12 that's my favorite smith's song!!!!
WHY IS NO ONE TALKING ABOUT MARK ROBER AT 0:13
It just sounds like him look at his face
@boxedbyclipse oh yeah I know, just pointing it out
Such a great video! Really cool to see your passion in some different nerdy ventures! Also really mind blowing how big of a mountain Hawaii really is.
I mean how do you even define the "bottom" of a mountain? The whole concept kinda falls apart as soon as you try to. You can easily define the highest point on Earth just by seeing how far up into the atmosphere it goes. So Mount Everest is still the tallest mountain in my books
That will also depend on how thick the atmosphere is in that area, which will depend on gravity in that area, and the shape of the planet in that area (the Earth is wider at the equator than it is from top to bottom). so even the Sea Level is not adequate to measure! My opinion is that the center of the Earth should be the point of reference!
Real bro like what if we measure mt Everest from Earth's core then mt Everest would be the highest peak too so there's no concept of base. And We are talking about the nearest point to the space or the highest point on earth. So that means it's either mt Everest or Chimborazo
There is no science to his analysis very random. But what he is trying to refer to is mountain prominence. How tall is the mountain relative to its “base”. Killi looks massive because the area around it is at sea level. Everest sits on a high plateau so will look smaller. He is a pretty stupid guy for not giving more context
0:39 Half-Life 2 Citadel be like:
"And if you see Dr. Breen, tell him I said Fu-- you!"
- Barney Calhoun 2004 Half-life 2
Nah it's more like citadels in jtoh
I work in Denali, and this is my favorite fact to share with people that it is actually bigger than Everest from the base. It is mind blowing seeing Denali in person.
Where is that music at the end from? Starts at 9:05
yeahh idk too
@@bee.xtremethen why ru replying
I think it might be Halo music, but I can't quite put my finger on which song.
5:24
"Ahh... BIG!"
I got an ad and it was a perfect cut scream
This was unintentionally biggest Mount Everest Slander video
My gf is a scientist. Geology is her specialty, and I'm just an electronics/arcade tech, so I love sending her stuff like this. She usually sends me back any incorrect info she finds within minutes, as she was also a teacher. Told her she might like this and she watched and her response was:
"It's a correct but kinda depressing because none of that information should be surprising to anyone who took earth science bc all of it (except some of the details about Mars) is taught in Earth science..." -A Scientist
So it's the highest not the tallest.
@shsumant126 did you even watch the video?
Brilliant video! Creative, entertaining, and chock full of information!
6:36 whats this website called?
We were always taught in Hawaiʻi that Maunakea is the largest mountain in the world. It’s awesome to see that visually represented.
Nice video! Having stood atop Mt rainier, Fuji and dozens of other mountains I can truly say rainier is massive. In a class of its own at least when it comes to mountains I’ve climbed. I’d love to see more comparison videos like this, maybe of freestanding volcanoes for instance. Thanks again for the awesome vid!!!
Everyone is always trying to shit on Everest's size
At 0:30 you said the peak of Mount Everest is the closest thing to outer space in the entire world. This would actually be Chimborazo in Ecuador, which is the highest mountain on Earth, when measured from the Earth's centre rather than sea level. Because the earth gets squashed by its own rotation, the peak of Chimborazo is 1.5miles closer to space.
actaully no, the atmosphere also isn't spherical, which means space is farther away in that location.
0:28 Actually, Mt.Chimborazo is the closest place to space on Earth because of the Earth's bulge near the equator.
0:03 He said whats the biggest mountain. Like volume or mass?
Skibidi?
@@TURKIYESTRONGESTEVER1482BRUH
Fun fact, actually Rakaposhi in Pakistan has the greatest elevation change from its base to its summit above land. Roughly 5900 vertical meters are gained in the space of roughly 11km
What about Nanga Parbat?
Loved this. Huge love for geology and plate tectonics so this was just a fun watch for me! 😊
no offense, but i feel dissapointed as an Ecuadorian that Wren didnt even mention Chimborazo in the whole video, its technically the tallest if youre measuring with the proximity to the sun
That caulk through the screen idea to show magma flow is brilliant!
mmmmmmmm........ Well none of all of these gimmicks stands as tall as Mount Everest
No love for Chimborazo?
It's the tallest mountain on Earth if you measure from the lowest you can go... THE CORE!!!!
(Because Earth is an oblate rather than perfect spheroid, it gets a boost for being nearer to the equator)