Eidetic Memory

[grumbler]

Remember we only use 3% of our brain, typically.

Not all of us, just the people who believe that myth.

[Viking]

remember, just because you cannot do it, doesn't mean no one else can. we do not all think the same way, not by a long shot

Sure. Telepathy, telekinesis, mind control, it's all within the realm of the possible. Remember we only use 3% of our brain, typically. I once spoke to a woman who claimed her dog was her spiritual guardian from Venus, and that she was from another galaxy. It's all within the realm of the possible, nay perhaps even plausible.

The reason we only use 3% or 5% or 10% (depending on who you ask) of our brain capacity is that the remaining 90% is junk matter that has accumulated over time. It is worthwhile for the genes to produce the brain in the manner it does because the brain capacity from the 3% is worth spending the energy on building the remaining 97%.

We don't have some massive hidden brain capacity. That much unused capacity is an extinction level waste of energy. We build the smallest possible brain for the greatest possible effect, losing any part of the genetic code writing any part of the brain would be a massive blow to human fitness for survival. 

[Brazen]

The reason we only use 3% or 5% or 10% (depending on who you ask) of our brain capacity is that the remaining 90% is junk matter that has accumulated over time. It is worthwhile for the genes to produce the brain in the manner it does because the brain capacity from the 3% is worth spending the energy on building the remaining 97%.

We don't have some massive hidden brain capacity. That much unused capacity is an extinction level waste of energy. We build the smallest possible brain for the greatest possible effect, losing any part of the genetic code writing any part of the brain would be a massive blow to human fitness for survival.

The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10%25_of_brain_myth

Neuroscientist Barry Beyerstein sets out seven kinds of evidence refuting the ten percent myth:[8]

• Studies of brain damage: If 90% of the brain is normally unused, then damage to these areas should not impair performance. Instead, there is almost no area of the brain that can be damaged without loss of abilities. Even slight damage to small areas of the brain can have profound effects.
• Evolution: The brain is enormously costly to the rest of the body, in terms of oxygen and nutrient consumption. It can require up to twenty percent of the body's energy--more than any other organ--despite making up only 2% of the human body by weight.[9][10] If 90% of it were unnecessary, there would be a large survival advantage to humans with smaller, more efficient brains. If this were true, the process of natural selection would have eliminated the inefficient brains. By the same token, it is also highly unlikely that a brain with so much redundant matter would have evolved in the first place.
• Brain imaging: Technologies such as Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) allow the activity of the living brain to be monitored. They reveal that even during sleep, all parts of the brain show some level of activity. Only in the case of serious damage does a brain have "silent" areas.
• Localization of function: Rather than acting as a single mass, the brain has distinct regions for different kinds of information processing. Decades of research has gone into mapping functions onto areas of the brain, and no function-less areas have been found.
• Microstructural analysis: In the single-unit recording technique, researchers insert a tiny electrode into the brain to monitor the activity of a single cell. If 90% of cells were unused, then this technique would have revealed that.
• Metabolic studies: Another scientific technique involves studying the take-up of radioactively labelled 2-deoxyglucose molecules by the brain. If 90 percent of the brain were inactive, then those inactive cells would show up as blank areas in a radiograph of the brain. Again, there is no such result.
• Neural disease: Brain cells that are not used have a tendency to degenerate. Hence if 90% of the brain were inactive, autopsy of adult brains would reveal large-scale degeneration.

[grumbler]

The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
(snip)

Yopu know, you could have a lot more fun here if you gave the internet experts more rope before you definitively disprove their claims. 

[DGuller]

The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
(snip)

Yopu know, you could have a lot more fun here if you gave the internet experts more rope before you definitively disprove their claims. 

Yeah. 

[Slargos]

Remember we only use 3% of our brain, typically.

Not all of us, just the people who believe that myth.

I thought the rest of my post would indicate the level of seriousness, but apparently as usual I am too optimistic when it comes to my predictions about how perceptive you people are. 

[Slargos]

The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
(snip)

Yopu know, you could have a lot more fun here if you gave the internet experts more rope before you definitively disprove their claims. 

I didn't realize you could use Wikipedia to definitely disprove things. Interesting assertion. 

[LaCroix]

Telepathy, telekinesis, mind control, it's all within the realm of the possible.

no

[citizen k]

Telepathy, telekinesis, mind control, it's all within the realm of the possible.

no

yes

[DGuller]

I tried to mind control Slargos, but it keeps telling me "Device not found". 

[LaCroix]

yes

okay, fine, maybe mind control, but not in the way slargos meant

[Slargos]

yes

okay, fine, maybe mind control, but not in the way slargos meant

i was making fun of you, you stupid git

[Malthus]

yes

okay, fine, maybe mind control, but not in the way slargos meant

i was making fun of you, you stupid git

I wanna hear more about the woman from another galaxy. 

[Viking]

The reason we only use 3% or 5% or 10% (depending on who you ask) of our brain capacity is that the remaining 90% is junk matter that has accumulated over time. It is worthwhile for the genes to produce the brain in the manner it does because the brain capacity from the 3% is worth spending the energy on building the remaining 97%.

We don't have some massive hidden brain capacity. That much unused capacity is an extinction level waste of energy. We build the smallest possible brain for the greatest possible effect, losing any part of the genetic code writing any part of the brain would be a massive blow to human fitness for survival.

The 10% myth is just that, a myth. Here's Wiki debunking it thoroughly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10%25_of_brain_myth

Neuroscientist Barry Beyerstein sets out seven kinds of evidence refuting the ten percent myth:[8]

• Studies of brain damage: If 90% of the brain is normally unused, then damage to these areas should not impair performance. Instead, there is almost no area of the brain that can be damaged without loss of abilities. Even slight damage to small areas of the brain can have profound effects.
• Evolution: The brain is enormously costly to the rest of the body, in terms of oxygen and nutrient consumption. It can require up to twenty percent of the body's energy--more than any other organ--despite making up only 2% of the human body by weight.[9][10] If 90% of it were unnecessary, there would be a large survival advantage to humans with smaller, more efficient brains. If this were true, the process of natural selection would have eliminated the inefficient brains. By the same token, it is also highly unlikely that a brain with so much redundant matter would have evolved in the first place.
• Brain imaging: Technologies such as Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) allow the activity of the living brain to be monitored. They reveal that even during sleep, all parts of the brain show some level of activity. Only in the case of serious damage does a brain have "silent" areas.
• Localization of function: Rather than acting as a single mass, the brain has distinct regions for different kinds of information processing. Decades of research has gone into mapping functions onto areas of the brain, and no function-less areas have been found.
• Microstructural analysis: In the single-unit recording technique, researchers insert a tiny electrode into the brain to monitor the activity of a single cell. If 90% of cells were unused, then this technique would have revealed that.
• Metabolic studies: Another scientific technique involves studying the take-up of radioactively labelled 2-deoxyglucose molecules by the brain. If 90 percent of the brain were inactive, then those inactive cells would show up as blank areas in a radiograph of the brain. Again, there is no such result.
• Neural disease: Brain cells that are not used have a tendency to degenerate. Hence if 90% of the brain were inactive, autopsy of adult brains would reveal large-scale degeneration.

Science FTW!!!!!

well, thats what I get for surplus credulity and sloppy thinking.

[Barrister]

I have to admit I'd just accepted the 10% figure and never gave much thought to whether or not it was true.

+1 for languish today.