+The Bread Boy I had never thought of it like that. All I knew is that if you used 100% of your brain in one instant it is very likely you are having a seizure (maybe a stroke one or the other)
+Dark Doctor A seizure is random, uncontrolled firing between neurons. A stroke, on the other hand, is typically caused by a blockage within a blood vessel or by a bleed within the brain. Proper brain function isn't just about how much you use at one time, but how much order there is within that use. There's no reason (that I can see) why a brain can't be 100% active and start malfunctioning without there being an error in the circuitry.
I fucking hate that first lie. All these already dumb movie peddling an even dumber idea that can be easily corrected. And every time I see or hear it, it's like a hammer to the temple
And most likely there is something in the world widely regarded as fact that you believe in with full conviction, because you're not an expert in the field and haven't happened to come across a youtube video explaining why it's incorrect. I highly doubt you drew all these conclusions yourself the first time you heard about that theory. So quit trying to be a badass acting like you know fucking everything and that everyone that doesn't is a dumbass. Because if you actually try to convince someone about how things work in that tone of voice, no one's going to listen and everyone's gonna think you're a supercilious asshole, rather than a person who happens to sit upon an interesting bit of knowledge.
viljamtheninja calm down. I learned it in psych class. What I'm saying is, if someone tells you that you only use 10 or 30 % of your brain it only takes 5 seconds to say "No. You actually only use 10% at a time, because different parts of the brain are specialized for different tasks". And It's just a case of the lie spreading faster than the truth. And why are you writing so much? Are you lonely or something?
Grnvolpe Well then, I guess we should both calm down. Works for me. I'm very well aware that it's a huge misconception, I just dislike the unproportional anger and/or arrogance people sometimes show when they happen to know things like this. This because of a simple reason: being called "dumb" and hearing that other people "fucking hate" when you believe what you believe, strangely enough, doesn't cause them to be more open to new knowledge (having taken psychology class, I'm sure you're aware of that better than me). And, I was writing so much because I was stalling before having to get down to studying, of course!
The gun thing is very true. My son dropped his weapon and had an accidental discharge. He contacted the gun manufacturer. They paid to have it shipped back *immediately* and sent him a replacement free of charge. They contacted him after a MONTH of tests, told him the issue, assured him that the problem was unique to his gun and it was over. Why did they do all of that? Because if there's a type of gun out there that fails when dropped (and yes. A gun going off when dropped is a huge *failure*) , they might need to recall a bunch of guns.
shotguns with a shell in the chamber will likely go off if dropped. that's why cops store their shotguns "cruiser ready" in their vehicles ( the shotgun loaded with nothing in the chamber and the safety off)
We use all of our brain. And by all, I don' t mean the whole brain, the whole time. That would made as sick or die or burn all of our body's energy immediately. I don' t know. I mean that sometimes we use some areas and othertimes we use other areas of our brain. But for each time, each group of areas that we are using that particular time, sums up to 10% of our brain in use. From the other hand, I don't think that this is an absolute number. For example, when you sleep you may use 8% or more. 1% for heart beating + 1% for breathing + 1% for moving your body + 5% for dreaming.
+Andrew Washington please shut the fuck up. you're giving me cancer. the brain works constantly all the fucking time and it works its parts all the time. just skip
I tried to explain the ludicrous Lucy thing to my mom, she just kept defending it. We got into a middle-loud argument in the middle of the mall. Brought it up the other day, she still believes that if you just 'unlock your brains potential' through her hippie meditation and stuff, it will do... Something. Why me...
John Doe I'm a teenager. For the next few years I am entitled to be a bit ungrateful. It's just kind of annoying that I like to be logical and scientific and my parents are a new agey hippie and a religious person who legitimately believes in creationism.
Emily Black I can relate to the fact that this is probably a bit annoying, but does she try to force you into accepting her own world view? If not, maybe you should try to accept hers as well: it's possible having a discussion about world views without trying to convert one another, you know. And maybe you can both reach a deeper respect and understanding for one another, if you both keep open minds and whatnot. Then again, of course I don't know your mother, maybe it's impossible to speak to her. But it's worth a shot, maybe?
viljamtheninja "maybe you should try to accept hers as well: " While we're at it, let's also accept every conspiracy theory on the planet, because logic, reason, and science are completely unimportant. "if you both keep open minds and whatnot. " Not this crap! Having an open mind is no good if it is so open your brain falls out (the creationist hippy parent being a solid example). Only some things are true, so one must be selective in approaching all claims. I commend Emily Black for trying *not* to be an adulate to ignorance and superstition and pseudoscience.
The 10% of the brain thing used to drive me crazy, like dude you use all of your brain that's why brain damage is an issue. But then I just gave up and decided to suspend my disbelief.
You must have access to the part of your brain that allows you to do that, since I'm only limited to a mere 10% this movie "fact" continues to annoy the hell out of me. It's in so many TV shows as well where it's either the basis of the show, or the theme of an episode or something. It's not as if there is no shortage of other bullshit ways you can justify super powers, but it seems to be the default setting that if you want super-powers to seem plausible then you say the 10% thing as if that means anything. I mean, a chunk of your brain is memory, but you're not accessing every memory you've ever had at all times; same with parts for motor control, you only need the pieces for what you're currently doing and so-on. I want to see the film where someone unlocks the full 100%, has a massive fit in which they are forced to relive their entire life and then dies.
The number 10% Is in regards to cognitive thoughts and what makes you , YOU. Ofcourse 100% of the brain is utilized and the brain is capable of distributive processing (plasticity) in cases of damage or large chunks of it being missing.
+Haravikk It's a shame they use the 10% thing because most of the time it's completely unnecessary. Like in limitless; Did the drug dealer really need to mention it? It's not like it was a major plot point or anything. At the end of the day, it just comes Down to sloppy writing, and most of the time I feel like the "fact" is shoehorned into the script. I would much rather they give us an unrealistic excuse for the "powers" rather than spewing out this overused bullshit.
Why would it specifically identify attributes that aren't real? Language and numbers are man-made concepts. Your brain isn't gonna know how to identify the functionality of those parts because your consciousness has no connection to those parts of the body.
+bug k Shocking how a movie made in America, with mostly American cast and crew, budgeted by American companies would be set in America, it is un-fucking-believable how that happens. I mean it's not like the original movie was set in France, with a French cast and crew was budgeted by a French company and was set in France or anything... oh wait a second, IT WAS!!!
Okay, that scene where the machine gun is falling down the stairs is hilarious. That thing was clearly firing up the stairs at the woman who dropped it, yet she's totally unaffected.
Most people don't know a gunshot when they hear one because they expect them to sound like they do in movies. Most people also don't realize it when they've been shot. One of the guys who survived the Aurora theater shooting said he thought some kid was setting off firecrackers, and when he got hit, he thought somebody kicked him.
It's the coconut effect in action. You know how older movies and radio/tv shows always used to bang coconuts together to simulate a horse's hoofbeats? Well people got so used to hearing it that they started thinking realistic hoofbeat sounds sounded fake. The same thing applies to "silencers" and the "thwip" sound they always make in movies and TV. The misconceptions became so widespread that manufacturers changed the term to "suppressors" to distance them from the Hollywood silencers.
Here's another one: "Even in death, the human body remains active. Hair and fingernails continue to grow", as quoted in 2002's Resident Evil, just one of multiple films over the years to perpetuate this myth. In reality, this has long been proven false on two main accounts: A) Skin requires hydration in life to stay healthy. After death, dehydration causes it to gradually retract around hair and nails, creating the illusion that the nails and hair themselves have grown. B) All living tissues require energy in order to function. In death, all systems and mechanisms that allowed biological growth in life no longer do so. Simply put, DEAD is DEAD, period. Interesting note: This myth is largely believed to have inspired the first depictions and concepts of vampires, long before Vlad Tepes inspired Dracula, due to the nails and teeth appearing like fangs and claws following skin retraction. Think about it, if you saw something like that in a coffin back when almost everything was blamed on the supernatural, how would you react? :3 www.drweil.com/drw/u/ART02909/Seven-Medical-Myths.html
***** This explains the science behind it better than I did. The source is at the bottom: "In order for fingernails to grow, new cells need to be produced and this can’t happen without glucose. Fingernails grow by an average of 0.1mm per day, a rate which slows as we age. A layer of tissue beneath the base of the nail called the germinal matrix is responsible for producing the vast majority of the cells which form the newest-growing part of the fingernail. The new cells push the older ones forwards, making the nail appear to lengthen from the tip. Death puts a stop to the supply of glucose, and therefore to fingernail growth." "A similar process occurs for hair. Each hair sits within a follicle that drives its growth. At the base of the follicle is the hair matrix, a group of cells that divide to produce the new cells that make hair strands longer. These cells divide very rapidly, but only when supplied with energy. This comes from the burning of glucose, which requires the presence of oxygen. Once the heart stops pumping oxygen round the body in the blood, the energy supply dries up, and so does the cell division that drives hair growth." www.bbc.com/future/story/20130526-do-your-nails-grow-after-death
***** Right, I gotcha. Did you know, it's also possible to recall information you never consciously learned after taking brain damage? There are rare cases of people who suffer head trauma and suddenly, their subconscious mind randomly brings dormant data to the surface without their knowledge. Our brains constantly process and log information, even when we're not paying attention. You could randomly walk by someone on the street speaking Russian on their cell phone. Get into an accident that hits the right parts of the brain, and you may end up speaking that same Russian in the hospital. Some experts also theorize that this would explain cases of supposed demonic possession, in which victims started speaking in languages they were proven to never have taken lessons in. The brain truly is an amazing organ :)
In the U.S. they tied strings to the body that would ring a bell above ground if the person woke up. It's where the common saying "dead ringer"( used to describe someone who looks just like someone else) comes from.
@@CrystalWilliamsBrownArt The expression 'dead ringer' comes from American horse racing and originated at the end of the 19th century, when a horse that would be raced under a false name and pedigree was called a ringer. The word 'dead' in this expression refers not to lifelessness, but to “precise” or “exact.”
So cops DON'T have to admit being a cop when directly confronted (kudos to the Fast and the Furious for not joining in that lie) but entrapment is still a thing. If an undercover cop encourages or enables a crime to be committed, the case against the actual criminals will completely fall in a hole because it becomes a reasonable point that the only reason the crime happened is because the cop wanted it to. As a banal example: this is why officers in unmarked police cars don't just try and drag race every driver in a slightly sporty car - they'd never get an convictions from it because it could be argued that the only reason the defendant was driving dangerously or speeding was because he or she was goaded into that action by an officer.
+rickee I'm not sure if this is everywhere, but you can always demand their name and badge number. You can justifiably argue that people do pose as cops and be completely difficult until he/she gives it up. After all, if it is cooperation they want, that is a two way street.
If they identify themselves as a cop you can ask to see their name and badge, but they don't have to say they're a cop until they try to arrest you or shoot you.
Yep, though police can legally entrap people in some circumstances (Sting operations). Eg. they can offer to buy drugs - if someone is selling, it's assumed they would sell it to anyone.
they should have done you can't file a missing person report for 24 hours. it's quoted more often than these but less common knowledge that it isn't true.
duel4ever2012 Nope I'm not. When looked up it talks about using 10% of our brain power then goes to using only 10% of our brains. We use 100% of the brain but only 10% is synapses the other 90% supports the 10%. There are people that can control more of their brain and withstand extreme pain, calculate large numbers in their mind, remember huge amount of items, and observe people or places and detect more info than others.
it's not 10 percent of the PARTS of the brain. it's 10 percent of what it can DO. if you have a car that can drive up to !)) KPH, and you drive it at 10 KPH, you're not using 10% of the car. you're using 100% of the car to do 10% of what it's capable of.
are you guys under the impression that all people have the same mental capacity? or are you under the impression that people with low IQs use less of their brain than people with high IQs or people who can't play piano simply aren't using the piano-playing lobe? everyone uses !))% of their brain. but there are a lot of factors that determine how much they can DO with their brains. the statement that the "myth" is completely wrong is based on a complete misunderstanding of what it means.
neomp5 the brain (expecially the cognitive parts) are like a muscle. Its has much potential but must be worked out and trained in order to increase it stregth. You actually grow more brain matter in parts of your brain associated with the activities you engage in. For some its reading books for others its watching cracked videos.
exactly my point. but like a muscle, it can also be artificially enhanced to perform tasks it never could naturally. that's all these movies are talking about. that we only use a fraction of the potential of the brain, and hat that potential can be unlocked and even enhanced
Yeah, Hollywood has a way with guns... they make marksmen protagonists impossibly perfect and guns have unlimited rounds (until a convenient safe place appears).
Yeah, movies keep pushing the "10% of your brain" BS, but Lucy gets a pass. Luc Besson has said he knew that when he wrote the script - he wrote it as a "Yeah, but what if that were true?" So complaining about Lucy using the "what if we could use more of our brain?" would be like calling out Superman for repeating the BS fact "what if men from other planets could fly?"
Oh, and "entrapment" is definitely a thing. It just doesn't mean "cops have to tell you if they're a cop." It means a female cop can't pick you up in a bar, take you to a motel, have sex with you, and demand money to make her go away before charging you with paying for sex. (Yeah, it's really that hard to win an entrapment defense)
+Philo Janus Yep...basically entrapment states that "the defendant had no prior intent to commit said crime in the first place, and was coerced by a law enforcement official into committing the crime," ie, when I was a teenager and was following a Florida state trooper three car lengths behind and he pulled over. waited for me to pass, then pulled behind me to light me up citing that he was exceeding the speed limit and I was matching his speed so therefore I was guilty of speeding...we fought the charge and it was all dismissed and called entrapment by the judge. Fun fact, a few years later I happened to have a friend that was a trooper and asked if he knew the guy, and he informed me that he had been transferred to the panhandle (4 hrs away) for messing with some girl and was now serving time for stalking after being discovered in her bushes around 3 am shortly after!
Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang is amazing and everyone should watch it. Entrapment IS a thing, but it has nothing to do with magic codes of honor that cops are forced to abide by. A cop can sit there and do coke right in front of you to convince you that he's a legitimate drug dealer/customer and not a cop. However, if you get caught committing a crime you wouldn't normally commit under normal circumstances, like if you were persuaded or coerced into it, that is entrapment.
lightsoul007 like when an autistic kid in california with no friends bought marijuana because his new friend kept on insisting that he did, his new friend was a cop and the autistic kid with no friends got charged with a felony. JUSTICE
+Pete Detrick Your brain has different brain patterns for reading, writing, hearing, seeing, speaking, singing, listening to music, listening to someone talk, feeling a piece of cloth with a finger, feeling a piece of plastic with the bottom of your foot, feeling something in your bellybutton, controlling the movement of your eyes, dreaming, being on drugs, being on a different TYPE of drug, thinking about flowers, thinking about punching someone in the face, thinking about someone you love, eating chili, eating ice cream, drinking a soda, walking, running, smelling hairspray, doing math, so on and so forth. You couldn't possibly use all of your brain functions at the same time because there's no possible way to stimulate EVERYTHING at once.
+Aaron Treno (paratrooperfury) Legally it's true. But of course there are many loopholes to every law in existence, and with the right prosecutors they can easily exploit those loopholes.
+Lil' Poot no legally it's not true. it's a complete myth. not sure where you're getting your fact from. An undercover cop is under no obligation to trek you they are a cop. Maybe you're thinking of patrolman in uniform. I believe they might get in trouble if they somehow denied they were a cop while on duty.
Lucian Warren You sir, are completely wrong. www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-645-entrapment-elements Just because someone you trust/believe told you it was a myth, doesn't actually automatically make it a myth.
It's actually the opposite. All I've ever been told is that it wasn't a myth. But logic dictates that can't be true. Going undercover is inherently a lie to begin with. It would make no sense. Then I researched to confirm. Please quote the article you posted where it says an undercover detective must say they're a cop if asked.
To be fair, though, it is also pretty high up on the list of common misconceptions it is hard to believe that anyone could ever genuinely think was true.
+Lil' Poot Now lets mix things up a bit...if someone passes the bong to you and you drop it, should you get shot in the face as punishment ? That is a high end legal question right there...no pun intended. One for the ages.
Lil' Poot No worries, at least you are honest about it. I hate to think what you would do if somebody dropped your priceless Ming vase...or scratched your car!
+Shrap Nelface Drop-testing became the industry standard because hunters were dropping their old-timey shotguns on their hammers, which broke off and fired the gun. Modern firearms can't have an exposed firing pin - instead they have a "transfer bar" that only works when the trigger is pulled. It's actually less dangerous to let a dropped gun hit the floor because it means you won't accidentally grab the trigger when you snatch it.
The scene in True Lies is actually a fair representation of the MAC-10/11, which are open bolt and about as reliable as Bill Cosby's regard for consent. Wish that was mentioned.
About the part with the self firing guns. It is most definitely possible for a fire arm to fire if dropped, providing it has a hammer mechanism. If the hammer is pulled back and the weapon takes an impact the hammer can 'drop' back and fire a chambered round. It has happened before.
***** Ever heard of a run a way gun? The Mk.19 is known to continually fire without input from the user. You have to let it run out of ammo or hope it stops firing while keeping control of the weapon.
Marty Borton Are you kidding me? We are talking about hand held firearms here that are dropped. This has nothing to do with runaway belt fed crew served weapons. If you are carrying a Mk. 19 around it is going to be unloaded and separated from its tripod, because that sucker is heavy. I know because I have done it.
I know the fucker is heavy, it was my part of MOS for 6 years. I was just describing an instance of when a weapon can keep firing, but here is a link describing what happens. I don't know about you, but I would never want to drop or throw a loaded weapon on the ground especially if the safety is off.
The 10% of your brain thing is one of my biggest pet peeves...ever! I could not believe that people actually tried to make entire movies based off of such a stupid notion. That is like making a movie called "Women are good at Basketball" ...who the hell would watch this stuff.
Could you please, in the future, cite the names of the movies you show snippets of? Pretty please? Some of those movies I have not seen, and I would like to.
Yea Thanx for pointing out that 10% thing. I have been waiting for someone to call bullshit on that! I have had too many long arguments with people who were SURE that that was true... so much so that they would argue about it. All because they saw it in a movie.. and what you see in movies is ALWAYS true.
actually its is true but they say it wrong. humans use only 10% of their brain at any one time but they use all of their brain. the movies make it out that humans only use 10% of their brain all the time, thats wrong its 10% at any one given time.
Soraking007 That is actually also bullshit! If you used only 10% at a time you would only be operating maybe one part of your brain at a time. so the fact that i can FUCKING think, breath, walk, feel pain, and commit that all to memory at the same goddamn time should be an indication that what you just said is utter BULLSHIT. But people still believe it (maybe because they can actually only use 10% at a time?)
Phillip Hawks you know how much 10% actually is right? cause you don seem to understand just how much that actually is your thinking in parts it seems and most actions arent one side or the other they are more using both sides(youd probably for normal life use 5% one side 5 the other.)
weeelll... basically most humans are mutants, with the making a roll out of your tongue shit and stuff like that. woohoo mutations (warning. may not be as cool as X-Men)
Well there is a mutation called Hypertrichosis that happens to some people. (also called 'the werewolf syndrome' ) It makes you super hairy. (like Beast from x-men) Dwelling even further, evolution is small genetic mutations in DNA. So is cancer. Mutants everywhere!
Midnight Navigator technically that isnt a mutation, the hair thing. because the not having hair is actually the mutation, we used to have hair everywhere in out previous evolutions.
03:30 That part about guns going off when they are dropped is actually true on some weapons. Its also possible to have weapons fire none stop if they are open bolt types. Which the "True Lies" MAC10 or similar has. If you have a chambered round with a cocked triggering pin on a hunting rifle. Slamming the butt stock into the ground might have the weapon go off. If you have some kind of sniper rifle were you can alter the trigger pressure needed to fire you can actually have it such that firing it, if its semi, can trigger another bullet being fired. You can also have similar issues on pistols were a "trimmed" weapon can fire two bullets unintentional, even from the user setting such stupid settings, via one press of the trigger. The latter has actually killed a kid at a firing range because the first bullet gives kickback so that the angle of the next unintended bullet went higher and over that firing range and like a miracle of misfortune changed directions when hitting the underside roof of the next firing line, altering direction downwards again and hitting the kid in the head. Yes, he did die. As for the manufactory etc... I have seen police being given "test weapons", as in test these and buy a shit ton of one of them... Which the default settings on the sniper semi sniper rifle being such that it caused a double shot. Moral of the story? Guns are not toys.
The premise of Lucy (from what I remember) is that she was able to start accessing the parts of the brain that we dont access. The myth isnt that we only use 10% of our brain and the rest is just 'unused potential' in the off position waiting to be turned on, its that, like you said, we dont have access to the autopilot parts unless you train yourself to do something about it. For example, easy ones to take control of is breathing or swallowing, its usually on autopilot until you think about it. Some harder ones are higher control of your heart beat, hormone secretion, or even your metabolism. What Lucy was doing was taking control of all those systems and had full awareness and control of her body's functions. The telekinesis and such is just based on the random theory that people may have the potential to not only control yourself with your mind but potentially, things around you.
Maybe I just read into it in different manners than what people think of at first. The other way is more of what Limitless did. Again, its not about 10% of your brain in terms of surface area, but more of capacity. Compare it to driving a car at 10mph when you can easily be able to push it to 100mph. Learning is just making new neurons, then remembering/using that knowledge is going over those same pathways, but most people are limited in how many things they can do at once or how much they remember or how fast they can think. If limitless didnt explain is as 'now I have access to more of my brain' but rather 'I can push my brain much harder', it would be more plausible.
Actually, I don't have to. This is how logic works: you make a claim, then you provide the evidence. Rejecting a claim does not require one shoulder the burden of proof. You care so little about the accuracy of your beliefs that you didn't even try to cite evidence for your declarations, because you've pulled them all out of your ass, and you've done so in a manner that is absolutely transparent to anyone that knows jack shit about neuroscience, psychology, or enough about logic to comprehend a notion as simple as the burden of proof. I'm not even going to get into how intentionally vague you're being.
Shadow Games If I can make a less rude rejection of your claims: the brain uses different percentages at a time for different functions, and in a given day up to and easily over 90 percent of your brain will have been used to read, write, listen to music, talk, wash out your eyes, apply soap to knives, throw soy at hobos, etc. You're right in the potential explanation of 'I can push my brain harder' being correct, but at no point are there actual caps on either capacity or processing power.
1:48 I love that whoever did Dan's graphics put the "Not Fart" process in the prefrontal cortex, where all of a person's higher thought, abstract thinking, and intangible planning happens.
+Caleb F It's from the film "Lucy" which not only is one of the most boring films I've ever seen, it's also really dumb. Seriously, the film thinks that with 100 % brain power you can see energy flowing through plants... I'm fucking serious.
I’m done with news, I’m tired of hearing about Prez Dump, ima just watch stuff like this from Now on. This makes Me happy and not afraid of the future .
The significance of Lucy was in its attack of hyper rationalism at the end, where its like saying how mathematics and science are abstract and attempt to divide and categorise what is not divided in the material world. That was interesting, to see such a subversive idea expressed through Hollywood.
***** I agree. There was also the somewhat buddhist notion that emotions are an arbitrary mental construct and only get in the way of human efficiency. Before the film, I had an awfully messy room, but the moment the film ended I felt inspired to tidy it and the whole thing, I did with this strange efficiency, no worries, no emotions, just moving and rearranging things at the fastest possible pace I could afford to myself. Johansson's films are always about the same ideas nowdays. Post-humanism, machine consciousness, Buddhist non attachment/fluid identity. Under The Skin, Her and Lucy are all philosophically consistent with eachother.
***** Don't worry about it haha. I think we come from very similar philosophical positions in love for metaphysical questions but disgust for the kind of house wife enlightenment that you could buy for 9.99 in the 80's. I think you'd get on with people on the philosophy chat room on healthfulchat.com. I certainly do. We're always talking this stuff. My nick is 'The'. If not, all the best, peace and love and kudos for asking the big questions. ''The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.'' Friedrich Nietzsche
+MC Infliction I know this comment is a bit old but... I don't think emotions hold humans back. Empathy and compassion help aid in selflessness and working together, and anger/frustration can lead to great motivation to change a system for the better. Fear leads to heightened senses that could be life saving. I could go on. Emotion doesn't get in the way of rationality, bad logic gets in the way of rationality, and bad logic has used emotion as its scapegoat.
@Thomas Baddeley It's so painful to read crap like this that hardly continues a thought to the very end. Efficient would be to kill the elderly, the sick and dumb. If you really think so Stalin must be your idol.
Actually, in Lucy, they change the context of the 10% trope. They say that the human mind only uses 10% of it's capacity, which is different that saying 10% of the total brain. Think of it this way, you have a bucket and you fill it 1/10th of the way full. You are utilizing 100% of the bucket, but only 10% of it's capacity. Just something to think about on that....
Unfortunately, you are wrong about firearms. It is quite possible for an accidental discharge when dropped, even with the safety on. It is more accurate to add; possible, but unlikely! In MCT (Marine Combat Training) and likely SOI (School of Infantry); in the field, we were required at all times to have a Condition 1 weapon (look up the meaning) by having a blank round chambered with BFA (Blank Firing Apparatus; because blanks can still kill up to 20 yards) attached. Ask any Marine, there was always one unfortunate bastard who dropped their weapon and it had an involuntary discharge! Lending to the Marine saying, "You drop your weapon to the ground, you better follow it."
Speaking of guns, Dirty Harry shooting a .44 magnum, one handed, with zero recoil is the biggest bunch of BS ever perpetrated on film. You also rarely die instantly after being shot, even if you're shot in the head. And finally, shooting a gun with a silencer isn't a little 'pew-pew' like the movies show you. It's a lot louder than they show it to be.
Oh this is unfortunate... "Real guns don't go off when dropped" 2018: "Off-duty FBI officer drops gun while dancing and doing a back-flip which then goes off, into a crowd, injuring one."
sorry, they used to give it away, but then the warehouse workers caused too much product damage, so the managers cut everyone off. so now when something is still good but miss marked or not marked at all, it goes right in the trash. no dumpster diving. :(
I don’t think the specific instance you referenced of Jacky and Leo was him asking in that way. He was asking if he was still a cop, because it was readily available knowledge that he was at one point. He didn’t think he’d have to tell him if he was, just that if he hurt him enough he’d maybe crack if he was one still? 🤷♂️
There are a few I know of: one director pushed that it can be so cold that a person’s breath may not be visible but that would actually be the point where you are almost dead and unable to do anything. 2: Zip lines are like blades and if you try and climb on one, you are going to be cut. No zip lines are just metal rope. 3: you can use almost any my object as handlebars when going down a zip line when you put it over. A. too much friction for that and B. not even actual zip line set ups will function that great all the time. 4: Propane tanks can explode if shot. You would need a heavier riffle and a flame because most of the time a dent is just made or a leak of gas and you just get a lot of fire and then it’s done.
*Ahem* Yes - a gun CAN fire if dropped. Take a revolver for example: when the hammer is cocked and the gun dropped - said hammer CAN discharge and fire a live round if the gun is loaded. Same is true with any firearm that can be charged manually. All the manufacturer can really do, is sticking some barrier between the firing pin and the round , call it safety switch and pray no moron finds a way around it.
+Lorien vArden ....and guns can go off without being dropped or having anything mechanical go wrong with them. In rare cases, rounds can "cook off" through thermal ignition (though this mostly occurs only with machine guns, close-bolt assault rifles, and weapons firing caseless ammunition). There are also degrees of drop safety. Just like not every car that passes a crash test will do well in every accident, not every gun that passes a drop test is immune to every possible drop.
Deadly wrong. Working the trigger is only relevant IF the gun has a two-stage trigger in which the first stage releases a mechanical safety or the gun is charged by the first stage. If the hammer or firing pin is charged and has an unobstructed way to the primer of a round - the gun can fire. The rest is simply a matter of mechanical faults or defects.
Most modern fire arms are designed not to accidentally discharge under any circumstances. Most handguns are equipped with multiple safety features as well, such as my Springfield Armory XD with the grip safety combined with the USA action trigger make it pretty impossible to discharge a round without purposely pulling the trigger. Even with a round in the chamber and the hammer back it wouldn't allow a round to fire, the same can be said for most revolvers. Theoretically I suppose it might be possible, but it's almost impossible.
SandBox H3ro Now add wear and tear, physical abuse and plain human stupidity and you come from "almost impssible" to "unlikely". Guns left next to campfires, on heaters, safeties purposefully removed - I have seen WAY too much human stupidity.
Hollywood gets pretty much everything wrong about guns, not just that bit about dropping them. There's also how silencers sound, the fact that you can't fire a gun underwater, the way people go flying backwards after taking a bullet, etc
The scene from "true lies" with Jaime Lee is legit. Its a MAC 10 that fires from an open bolt and old ones have a habit of running away. The crew said it took one take, they literally loaded it, cocked it...and chucked it down the stairs.
One thing that has always bothered me, that no one ever seems to bring up in videos like these, is when they in sci-fi flicks talk about some alien technology and say "you can't even find it on the periodic table". WELL, THEN IT'S EITHER A MOLECULAR OR IONIC COMPOUND, no wonder you can't find it on a table consisting of literally the only possibly existing elements in the universe!
ACTUALLY, new elements are being discovered from time to time, there were 4 new ones back in 2016. The "periodic table" is only a table of the elements that we've discovered.
I don't think the "you use only 10% of your brain" thing is entirely fake. You use all of your brain at different times but given any one moment you only use a fraction of your brain (I've also heard it's more like 30%). Lucy's crap is just complete bs. But Inception and Limitless show a very realistic idea of this. In Inception they talk about how parts of our brains work more when we're asleep, which is proven to be true. And the drug in Limitless doesn't really let you access all of your brain (which everyone already does without the drug); it is just an intelligence enhancement. It just makes things run much more efficiently. Limitless is actually very realistic in portraying this, as everything you remember, for example, is always there. It's just a matter of remembering it, which is what the drug helps with. It's much, much more realistic that a person who takes that drug would become Sherlock Holmes rather than be able to control crap with your mind like in Lucy. Man, Lucy was stupid. Edit: For some reason RUclips won't let me reply to TheVandolizm, who asked for studies that show our increased brain activity while sleeping. Here's one that I found after 5 seconds: www.brainfacts.org/sensing-thinking-behaving/sleep/articles/2012/brain-activity-during-sleep And here's another one: faculty.washington.edu/chudler/sleep.html
+thebagelbomb You use 100% just sleeping. The human brain uses 20% of the total energy your body needs. If any of it was not constantly used, it would be the first thing to atrophy during times of malnourishment.
+Hermella kebede Oh because you can't read? Here, I'll read a book to you: Once upon a time, there was a perfectly reasonable RUclips comment that was backed up by scientific proof and was written by someone with better-than-average intelligence. Then, someone else decided to post a reply with a snide comment which showed absolutely no actual thoughts against the position posed by the original comment. The poster of the original comment won the brief argument that followed. The end. Edit: For some reason RUclips won't let me reply to TheVandolizm, who asked for studies that show our increased brain activity while sleeping. Here's one that I found after 5 seconds: www.brainfacts.org/sensing-thinking-behaving/sleep/articles/2012/brain-activity-during-sleep And here's another one: faculty.washington.edu/chudler/sleep.html
***** I'll respond to your comment line by line: >Oh because you can't read. >>Obviously I can read, else I wouldn't even comment. >Once upon a time. >>You are implicitly saying: 1.) this is B.S, as the phrase once upon a time in literature is used to paint the illusion that an event in folk lore actually occurred. 2.) Outdated information, once upon a time quintessentially means some time in the past. >There was a perfectly reasonable youtube comment that was backed by scientific proof >>I'm just going to presume that we have the same definition of reasonable. In terms of context we can call it reasonable, it is a response to the video. However unless you can get actual scientists--as in people who don't profit off hoaxes or aren't a blockbuster prop--then I still think you should read a book before pretending to know cognitive sciences. >...with better-than-average intelligence. >>First of all you can have a high I.Q and still be ignorant, an I.Q test again, having taken one before cannot quantify knowledge, rather predict one's capability to grasp concepts. >Then, someone else decided to post a reply with a snide comment which showed absolutely no actual thoughts against the position posed by the original comment. >>I was simply questioning the validity of your statement, in the simplest way possible. Simplicity within expression requires just as much thought. >The poster of the original comment won the brief argument that followed >>This is the sort of narrow thought that deters someone from further exploring, and spiral further in their ignorance. There is no such thing as win or lose in an argument, rather it is relative to opinions, winning could be defined as whose argument is more agreeable. The validity of a statement could be based on the amount of evidence support a claim. You CLAIM that it is backed up by scientific proof, rather than bringing any valid studies. >The end. >>Finally!!
I will probably get flamed, but am I the only one who gets annoyed when people constantly yell about the 10% of the brain myth? Honestly, the smartest people in the world know shockingly little about the brain in the grand scheme of things. People who post this probably just read that fact on some website designed to get views. Talking about the potential of the brain, I think there is a good possibility that it can be improved.. Otherwise why do some people have photographic memories while most don't? I don't pretend to know for sure but it irks me when people presume to know a factoid about something so incredibly complex -end rant
I think its like when you think about muscle contraction and the law of recruitment. you don't use 100% of your muscle capability all the time because its unnecessary and you don't need 100% to pick up a pencil without snapping it in half every time. the same with the brain, it doesn't take 100% of it to think or talk or remember stuff. also, the brain uses different parts to do different things. using all of you're brain isn't going to help you have perfect memory because only one part of that brain actually does that. that's how I see it anyway.
john gun agreed but don't you think that brain "muscle" capability and brain potential might be two different things? how would you explain people randomly having photographic memories? (not trying to be a jerk, just curious what you think)
swish007 No it's cool dude I didn't take the comment offensively. I looked up photographic memory though and most sites are saying it's not a real thing but instead just people with really good memory because the parts of the brain that hold information is bigger on average than other people. Even then the picture in their head isn't perfect(you only see what your brain tells you it saw) and the memory will change in their heads after a while. For the 10% thing, parts of the brain intentionally keep other areas quiet to stop too many neurons from firing because it would just give us a seizure.However, the brain does activate in different areas at the same time just not as strongly as the main part being used at the time.That's why damage to even a small part of the brain can really mess people up. Also the brain works on the "use it or lose it" system where if we didn't actually use the other 90% then we just wouldn't have it. If someone doesn't use their vision ever from birth but had the ability to begin with, they'd go blind anyway because when the brain develops, synapses are formed then are either strengthened or eliminated depending on if the person used those connections. That's what I got from google anyway lol I honestly thought photographic memory was real too though. Then again I may have gone to those buzz websites but I couldn't find any others that said otherwise.
The problem with the 10% myth is that we know where it originates from, and just like believing people thought the earth was flat before the 1400s, it is a common radicated misconception. A man, wrote in a book, (I'm not telling you who, if you care enough, you'll look for it, I'm not being lazy) the proverbial 10% phrase, and scientists got convinced it was real because a worker got impaled in the brain through the nose and survived with 10% of his brain intact. Later, in the 2000s we tested it, and using a machine that detects brain activity we, and i quote, "had difficulty finding this mythical not working 90%" so it was busted. It is false, and saying "we don't know much", doesn't disqualify what we know for sure. Also, i don't know who you are talking about when you say "the smartest people in the world know shockingly little" because i, could talk FOR FUCKING HOURS straight about how the brain works. Let alone the people who make a living out of observing the brain.
+LUCA SILVETTI I actually know the guy you're talking about.. Phineas gage. I think it's a bit arrogant to presume we don't know very little about the human brain (with regards to consciousness and intelligence). For example, there are some psychiatric disorders we can treat but surprisingly little we can fix (I.e. Schizophrenia, dementia, Alzheimer's, etc.) the brain is responsible for all of these things. I'm sure when doctors were giving people lobotomies they thought they knew most everything to know about the brain, too. What causes addiction? What's the root cause of autism? Why do we have savants who seem to be able to do incredible things. Why do taking drugs like dmt seem to make you see evil lizards? At best, we have lots of different opinions but little solid knowledge. The human brain (like the rest of the body, and like the rest of the universe for that matter) is incredibly complex and anyone who doesn't believe that hasn't really studied it much.
Yes, because no one has EVER been harmed by a gun discharging accidentally. And please forgive me for not believing that people responsible for developing and improving upon devices designed to kill have my safety as their first priority. After all, if a gun discharges when dropped and kills or maims someone, it performed its intended function.
thank you for the 10% of the brain bullshit. exactly what I hoped for based on the title of the video. O'Brien makes me feel better about my social skills and bad about my pop culture knowledge
+WhiteRaven696 Jamie Lee Curtis was one of the original "Scream Queens". You should look up her roles in the Halloween franchise, after her multiple nude scenes she was touted as having the most spectacular natural tits to ever grace a movie screen. There's also a brief shot of them in the Eddie Murphy/Dan Akroyd movie Trading Places. Sincerely, A 25+ year Jamie Lee Curtis fan.
Young Frankenstein I actually hate horror with a passion, but I do love her in "Freaky Friday". I would definitely watch more of her comedic roles for sure.
WhiteRaven696 Definitely go with Trading Places, then. Brilliant comedy, plenty of Jamie skin. Oh, and the human versions of those guys who used to sit up in the box heckling the Muppets (if you're old enough to remember that).
I thought you were gonna point out how most movies with guns have limitless ammo, maybe the guns are using more than 10% of their brains, it would explain why they're always going on when dropped, they're just scared and want to be held.
I love Luc Besson films cuz the guy knows how to entertain, but having seen all of his movies I am fairly sure he knows very little about real life. Maybe thats a requirement for good filmmakers.
+James Santoy Honestly he's awesome because the show is Obsessive Pop Culture Disorder. That's the whole point, him trying really hard and being awkward, like your stereotypical OCD person with a dose of social awkwardness.
If a gun could fire as soon as it hits the ground. Then the whole army staff would be rushing to get it decomitioned or to fix the reliability problem. Not too practical during war time if u shoot an ally by accident
Entrapment is a thing, its just misrepresented in movies. It does not mean a cop saying "I'm not a cop", but rather a cop convincing someone to commit a crime that they otherwise would not have committed.
I think 10% is the number of neurons firing at any one time. It is possible for some people to have more than 10% of their neurons firing at once, those people are epileptics having a seizure.
The gun dropping one is true for pistols as they mostly have a drop safety but old shotguns have quite a bad reputation for going off when being dropped 😂
Saying you only use 10% of your brain is like saying you only use 33% of a traffic light
+malobi100
Thanks for letting us know that bro. Some insightful shit right there....
+The Bread Boy Too funny. So funny, in fact, I am going to use this as my own.
+The Bread Boy I had never thought of it like that. All I knew is that if you used 100% of your brain in one instant it is very likely you are having a seizure (maybe a stroke one or the other)
+Dark Doctor A seizure is random, uncontrolled firing between neurons. A stroke, on the other hand, is typically caused by a blockage within a blood vessel or by a bleed within the brain.
Proper brain function isn't just about how much you use at one time, but how much order there is within that use. There's no reason (that I can see) why a brain can't be 100% active and start malfunctioning without there being an error in the circuitry.
+The Bread Boy You're using the traffic light at 33% of its capacity.
>Gets new drug to enhance brain power
>ALL of the brain is accessed
>Manual breathing mode
>Manual heartbeat mode
>Manual Digestion
>Dies
This comment is wayyy underrated
@@rupambanerjee2066 He probably got the idea for it from Manual Samuel, which used the exact premise.
@@qty1315 you beat me to it with Manual Samuel.
How you do that? Comment says on thing, click on view replies it says another.
Love it
I fucking hate that first lie. All these already dumb movie peddling an even dumber idea that can be easily corrected. And every time I see or hear it, it's like a hammer to the temple
And most likely there is something in the world widely regarded as fact that you believe in with full conviction, because you're not an expert in the field and haven't happened to come across a youtube video explaining why it's incorrect. I highly doubt you drew all these conclusions yourself the first time you heard about that theory.
So quit trying to be a badass acting like you know fucking everything and that everyone that doesn't is a dumbass. Because if you actually try to convince someone about how things work in that tone of voice, no one's going to listen and everyone's gonna think you're a supercilious asshole, rather than a person who happens to sit upon an interesting bit of knowledge.
viljamtheninja calm down. I learned it in psych class. What I'm saying is, if someone tells you that you only use 10 or 30 % of your brain it only takes 5 seconds to say "No. You actually only use 10% at a time, because different parts of the brain are specialized for different tasks". And It's just a case of the lie spreading faster than the truth.
And why are you writing so much? Are you lonely or something?
Grnvolpe
Well then, I guess we should both calm down. Works for me. I'm very well aware that it's a huge misconception, I just dislike the unproportional anger and/or arrogance people sometimes show when they happen to know things like this. This because of a simple reason: being called "dumb" and hearing that other people "fucking hate" when you believe what you believe, strangely enough, doesn't cause them to be more open to new knowledge (having taken psychology class, I'm sure you're aware of that better than me).
And, I was writing so much because I was stalling before having to get down to studying, of course!
viljamtheninja tldr
I hear you, every time my bus driver said this, I wanted to go up and slap him.
The gun thing is very true. My son dropped his weapon and had an accidental discharge. He contacted the gun manufacturer. They paid to have it shipped back *immediately* and sent him a replacement free of charge.
They contacted him after a MONTH of tests, told him the issue, assured him that the problem was unique to his gun and it was over.
Why did they do all of that?
Because if there's a type of gun out there that fails when dropped (and yes. A gun going off when dropped is a huge *failure*) , they might need to recall a bunch of guns.
And old revolvers will go off if you drop them in the firing hammer.
+Xortsa the operative word there is old.
+kyle magaro Your point?
+Xortsa Because that's the operative word there?
shotguns with a shell in the chamber will likely go off if dropped. that's why cops store their shotguns "cruiser ready" in their vehicles ( the shotgun loaded with nothing in the chamber and the safety off)
That statistic about only using 10% of our brains comes from screenwriter's estimates of the intelligence of the audience.
We use all of our brain. And by all, I don' t mean the whole brain, the whole time. That would made as sick or die or burn all of our body's energy immediately. I don' t know.
I mean that sometimes we use some areas and othertimes we use other areas of our brain. But for each time, each group of areas that we are using that particular time, sums up to 10% of our brain in use.
From the other hand, I don't think that this is an absolute number. For example, when you sleep you may use 8% or more. 1% for heart beating + 1% for breathing + 1% for moving your body + 5% for dreaming.
+Andrew Washington please go on. we all care. we really do.
+Andrew Washington please shut the fuck up. you're giving me cancer. the brain works constantly all the fucking time and it works its parts all the time. just skip
+Hektor Steel * just stop
+Hektor Steel
You know you can edit your comment?
I tried to explain the ludicrous Lucy thing to my mom, she just kept defending it. We got into a middle-loud argument in the middle of the mall. Brought it up the other day, she still believes that if you just 'unlock your brains potential' through her hippie meditation and stuff, it will do... Something.
Why me...
I'm pretty sure there are worse mothers out there.
John Doe I'm a teenager. For the next few years I am entitled to be a bit ungrateful. It's just kind of annoying that I like to be logical and scientific and my parents are a new agey hippie and a religious person who legitimately believes in creationism.
Emily Black
I can relate to the fact that this is probably a bit annoying, but does she try to force you into accepting her own world view? If not, maybe you should try to accept hers as well: it's possible having a discussion about world views without trying to convert one another, you know. And maybe you can both reach a deeper respect and understanding for one another, if you both keep open minds and whatnot. Then again, of course I don't know your mother, maybe it's impossible to speak to her. But it's worth a shot, maybe?
viljamtheninja Its more like a condescending ʻthere will be a time in your life...ʻ thing. Its best that i just avoid the subject entirely.
viljamtheninja
"maybe you should try to accept hers as well: "
While we're at it, let's also accept every conspiracy theory on the planet, because logic, reason, and science are completely unimportant.
"if you both keep open minds and whatnot. "
Not this crap! Having an open mind is no good if it is so open your brain falls out (the creationist hippy parent being a solid example). Only some things are true, so one must be selective in approaching all claims. I commend Emily Black for trying *not* to be an adulate to ignorance and superstition and pseudoscience.
The 10% of the brain thing used to drive me crazy, like dude you use all of your brain that's why brain damage is an issue. But then I just gave up and decided to suspend my disbelief.
You must have access to the part of your brain that allows you to do that, since I'm only limited to a mere 10% this movie "fact" continues to annoy the hell out of me. It's in so many TV shows as well where it's either the basis of the show, or the theme of an episode or something.
It's not as if there is no shortage of other bullshit ways you can justify super powers, but it seems to be the default setting that if you want super-powers to seem plausible then you say the 10% thing as if that means anything.
I mean, a chunk of your brain is memory, but you're not accessing every memory you've ever had at all times; same with parts for motor control, you only need the pieces for what you're currently doing and so-on. I want to see the film where someone unlocks the full 100%, has a massive fit in which they are forced to relive their entire life and then dies.
The number 10% Is in regards to cognitive thoughts and what makes you , YOU. Ofcourse 100% of the brain is utilized and the brain is capable of distributive processing (plasticity) in cases of damage or large chunks of it being missing.
+Haravikk
It's a shame they use the 10% thing because most of the time it's completely unnecessary.
Like in limitless; Did the drug dealer really need to mention it? It's not like it was a major plot point or anything.
At the end of the day, it just comes Down to sloppy writing, and most of the time I feel like the "fact" is shoehorned into the script.
I would much rather they give us an unrealistic excuse for the "powers" rather than spewing out this overused bullshit.
+Alidwee In limitless they could've easily made up something else like speeding up the synapses or something.
+kyle magaro
Exactly. Anything original would work.
It's hilarious how the brain can assume false facts about itself
It also named itself
Why would it specifically identify attributes that aren't real? Language and numbers are man-made concepts. Your brain isn't gonna know how to identify the functionality of those parts because your consciousness has no connection to those parts of the body.
Like how I think I'm smart....hmmmm....interesting.....
Language and numbers are not intrinsic parts of human beings as a whole. They just work.
@Jdawg Vapes425 that sounds... Very condescending.
i love the way this guy talks, he has sudden pauses and speed ups.
actually its annoying and whorish.
JadedeaJade He reminds me of Chris Pratt’s character in Parks and Recreation.
I can't stand it. It's such a waste that all of the creativity and research behind these videos is delivered by such a poor speaker.
I like it. Reminds me of a cartoon character😁
It's like he's trying to act like Steven Crowder but comes off as just an ass.
'We're supposed to laugh because they look and sound different and we don't understand them.' - spot on.
+bug k or... you know... they were terrorists who stole a nuclear weapon and were bent on blowing up a major American city.
in a hollywood movie? how convenient.
bug k yeah because never before have islamic extremist committed acts of terror before. Its so out of the ordinary.
never before did I say they didn't. I'm commenting on the general theme of American action films.
+bug k Shocking how a movie made in America, with mostly American cast and crew, budgeted by American companies would be set in America, it is un-fucking-believable how that happens. I mean it's not like the original movie was set in France, with a French cast and crew was budgeted by a French company and was set in France or anything... oh wait a second, IT WAS!!!
Okay, that scene where the machine gun is falling down the stairs is hilarious. That thing was clearly firing up the stairs at the woman who dropped it, yet she's totally unaffected.
Infinight Moon That's EXACTLY what I was thinking!!!!
True Lies was a parody of action spy thrillers so I don't think they cared too much about physics ;)
myriad d Good point!
Infinight Moon Because it's Jamie-Lee Curtis
Infinight Moon Also, it wasn't a machine gun.
Most people don't know a gunshot when they hear one because they expect them to sound like they do in movies. Most people also don't realize it when they've been shot. One of the guys who survived the Aurora theater shooting said he thought some kid was setting off firecrackers, and when he got hit, he thought somebody kicked him.
It's the coconut effect in action. You know how older movies and radio/tv shows always used to bang coconuts together to simulate a horse's hoofbeats? Well people got so used to hearing it that they started thinking realistic hoofbeat sounds sounded fake.
The same thing applies to "silencers" and the "thwip" sound they always make in movies and TV. The misconceptions became so widespread that manufacturers changed the term to "suppressors" to distance them from the Hollywood silencers.
Now that bit from Monty Python makes sense.
I've never heard a gunshot in real life. I only know what guns sound like from what I've heard on TV or in video games.
spinemelter2000
Then you should know that different calibers make different sounds.
Or they insist they hit their hand on something, because it felt like they hit their hand on something.
B..b..b.. but Morgan Freeman
Here's another one: "Even in death, the human body remains active. Hair and fingernails continue to grow", as quoted in 2002's Resident Evil, just one of multiple films over the years to perpetuate this myth. In reality, this has long been proven false on two main accounts: A) Skin requires hydration in life to stay healthy. After death, dehydration causes it to gradually retract around hair and nails, creating the illusion that the nails and hair themselves have grown. B) All living tissues require energy in order to function. In death, all systems and mechanisms that allowed biological growth in life no longer do so. Simply put, DEAD is DEAD, period.
Interesting note: This myth is largely believed to have inspired the first depictions and concepts of vampires, long before Vlad Tepes inspired Dracula, due to the nails and teeth appearing like fangs and claws following skin retraction. Think about it, if you saw something like that in a coffin back when almost everything was blamed on the supernatural, how would you react? :3
www.drweil.com/drw/u/ART02909/Seven-Medical-Myths.html
***** This explains the science behind it better than I did. The source is at the bottom:
"In order for fingernails to grow, new cells need to be produced and this can’t happen without glucose. Fingernails grow by an average of 0.1mm per day, a rate which slows as we age. A layer of tissue beneath the base of the nail called the germinal matrix is responsible for producing the vast majority of the cells which form the newest-growing part of the fingernail. The new cells push the older ones forwards, making the nail appear to lengthen from the tip. Death puts a stop to the supply of glucose, and therefore to fingernail growth."
"A similar process occurs for hair. Each hair sits within a follicle that drives its growth. At the base of the follicle is the hair matrix, a group of cells that divide to produce the new cells that make hair strands longer. These cells divide very rapidly, but only when supplied with energy. This comes from the burning of glucose, which requires the presence of oxygen. Once the heart stops pumping oxygen round the body in the blood, the energy supply dries up, and so does the cell division that drives hair growth."
www.bbc.com/future/story/20130526-do-your-nails-grow-after-death
***** Right, I gotcha. Did you know, it's also possible to recall information you never consciously learned after taking brain damage? There are rare cases of people who suffer head trauma and suddenly, their subconscious mind randomly brings dormant data to the surface without their knowledge.
Our brains constantly process and log information, even when we're not paying attention. You could randomly walk by someone on the street speaking Russian on their cell phone. Get into an accident that hits the right parts of the brain, and you may end up speaking that same Russian in the hospital.
Some experts also theorize that this would explain cases of supposed demonic possession, in which victims started speaking in languages they were proven to never have taken lessons in. The brain truly is an amazing organ :)
In the U.S. they tied strings to the body that would ring a bell above ground if the person woke up. It's where the common saying "dead ringer"( used to describe someone who looks just like someone else) comes from.
Also the term "saved by the bell"
@@CrystalWilliamsBrownArt The expression 'dead ringer' comes from American horse racing and originated at the end of the 19th century, when a horse that would be raced under a false name and pedigree was called a ringer. The word 'dead' in this expression refers not to lifelessness, but to “precise” or “exact.”
You're right, people using 10% of their brains is definitely wrong. I've dealt with people before. It's much, much lower than that.
So cops DON'T have to admit being a cop when directly confronted (kudos to the Fast and the Furious for not joining in that lie) but entrapment is still a thing. If an undercover cop encourages or enables a crime to be committed, the case against the actual criminals will completely fall in a hole because it becomes a reasonable point that the only reason the crime happened is because the cop wanted it to. As a banal example: this is why officers in unmarked police cars don't just try and drag race every driver in a slightly sporty car - they'd never get an convictions from it because it could be argued that the only reason the defendant was driving dangerously or speeding was because he or she was goaded into that action by an officer.
+rickee I'm not sure if this is everywhere, but you can always demand their name and badge number. You can justifiably argue that people do pose as cops and be completely difficult until he/she gives it up. After all, if it is cooperation they want, that is a two way street.
If they identify themselves as a cop you can ask to see their name and badge, but they don't have to say they're a cop until they try to arrest you or shoot you.
Yep, though police can legally entrap people in some circumstances (Sting operations). Eg. they can offer to buy drugs - if someone is selling, it's assumed they would sell it to anyone.
+Jago Sevetar true but if the seller asks if they're a cop they have to admit or not commit the buy
It pisses me off to no end how many cases of entrapment don't get prosecuted.
Another myth... if your fuse or detonator doesn't work, you can just shoot high explosives with a gun to set them off.
If you're looking for a good time, scroll through the comments and read all the ignorant theories about the first fact.
yup I'm doing that right now
+Bergzore It's just a premise for a movie but even the detractors aren't getting it right.
they should have done you can't file a missing person report for 24 hours. it's quoted more often than these but less common knowledge that it isn't true.
And more harmful given the urgency. It feels like propaganda from the kidnapping industry.
If Lucy really was using 100% at once of her brain she'd just be having a seizure
What??! Even when Morgan Freeman says it it's not true that's just bullshit
Morgan Freeman is God of course everything he says is true
Marceline206 At least in Bruce Almighty.
Kieran Matzky Its not that we only use 10% of our brain but that we only use 10% of what we are capable of as in the power we have.
Datrebor J Nope, you are incorrect.
duel4ever2012 Nope I'm not. When looked up it talks about using 10% of our brain power then goes to using only 10% of our brains. We use 100% of the brain but only 10% is synapses the other 90% supports the 10%. There are people that can control more of their brain and withstand extreme pain, calculate large numbers in their mind, remember huge amount of items, and observe people or places and detect more info than others.
it's not 10 percent of the PARTS of the brain. it's 10 percent of what it can DO.
if you have a car that can drive up to !)) KPH, and you drive it at 10 KPH, you're not using 10% of the car. you're using 100% of the car to do 10% of what it's capable of.
Are you just sort of repeating what you've heard or do you actually have a source you can cite?
That's even more full of shit than the other version.
are you guys under the impression that all people have the same mental capacity? or are you under the impression that people with low IQs use less of their brain than people with high IQs or people who can't play piano simply aren't using the piano-playing lobe? everyone uses !))% of their brain. but there are a lot of factors that determine how much they can DO with their brains.
the statement that the "myth" is completely wrong is based on a complete misunderstanding of what it means.
neomp5 the brain (expecially the cognitive parts) are like a muscle. Its has much potential but must be worked out and trained in order to increase it stregth. You actually grow more brain matter in parts of your brain associated with the activities you engage in. For some its reading books for others its watching cracked videos.
exactly my point. but like a muscle, it can also be artificially enhanced to perform tasks it never could naturally.
that's all these movies are talking about. that we only use a fraction of the potential of the brain, and hat that potential can be unlocked and even enhanced
That Lucy scene looked like a shitty version of elfen lied
HaywoodYaBlowMe Fitting, as it's basically a shitty version of Akira. And Elfen Lied. Possibly bits of Guyver.
I can't believe, I spent my money and wasted my time, going to theater to watch it!
Yeah, Hollywood has a way with guns... they make marksmen protagonists impossibly perfect and guns have unlimited rounds (until a convenient safe place appears).
Mors Coronam unless it’s a plot point yes usually they never run out of ammo in a movie
Don’t forget the random spray and pray
What really pisses me off is how no-one ever cocks a handgun before firing after putting in a fresh clip...
Yeah, movies keep pushing the "10% of your brain" BS, but Lucy gets a pass. Luc Besson has said he knew that when he wrote the script - he wrote it as a "Yeah, but what if that were true?"
So complaining about Lucy using the "what if we could use more of our brain?" would be like calling out Superman for repeating the BS fact "what if men from other planets could fly?"
Oh, and "entrapment" is definitely a thing. It just doesn't mean "cops have to tell you if they're a cop." It means a female cop can't pick you up in a bar, take you to a motel, have sex with you, and demand money to make her go away before charging you with paying for sex. (Yeah, it's really that hard to win an entrapment defense)
+Philo Janus Yep...basically entrapment states that "the defendant had no prior intent to commit said crime in the first place, and was coerced by a law enforcement official into committing the crime," ie, when I was a teenager and was following a Florida state trooper three car lengths behind and he pulled over. waited for me to pass, then pulled behind me to light me up citing that he was exceeding the speed limit and I was matching his speed so therefore I was guilty of speeding...we fought the charge and it was all dismissed and called entrapment by the judge. Fun fact, a few years later I happened to have a friend that was a trooper and asked if he knew the guy, and he informed me that he had been transferred to the panhandle (4 hrs away) for messing with some girl and was now serving time for stalking after being discovered in her bushes around 3 am shortly after!
How do you know supermen from other planets can't fly?
Lucy doesn't get a pass. None of Luc Besson's movies get a pass, except Léon.
For being dismissive of "The Fifth Element" you have automatically invalidated your opinion.
Neener.
Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang is amazing and everyone should watch it.
Entrapment IS a thing, but it has nothing to do with magic codes of honor that cops are forced to abide by. A cop can sit there and do coke right in front of you to convince you that he's a legitimate drug dealer/customer and not a cop. However, if you get caught committing a crime you wouldn't normally commit under normal circumstances, like if you were persuaded or coerced into it, that is entrapment.
lightsoul007 like when an autistic kid in california with no friends bought marijuana because his new friend kept on insisting that he did, his new friend was a cop and the autistic kid with no friends got charged with a felony.
JUSTICE
Dudeguyforeverlulz Exactamundo. That's some world class BS right there! FFFUUck that cop
lightsoul007 Fuck that cop!
It's also not illegal in the states because courts tend to favor the demonstration of intent argument. we are the only western nation that does that.
+lightsoul007 KKBB truly is a great movie that does not get enough credit
#5 Animals don't kill animals of the same species.
Pretty much every species does that.
That and "They only kill to eat" or "They kill cleanly without cruelty/enjoyment." I like animals myself, but come on people...
Entrapment actually is a thing...It just has nothing to do with whether a cop tells you they're a cop or not.
Why isn't there a movie where someone uses 100% of their brain at the same time, then has random spasms and dies in minutes.
because it can't happen
Why can't it happen?
+Pete Detrick
Your brain has different brain patterns for reading, writing, hearing, seeing, speaking, singing, listening to music, listening to someone talk, feeling a piece of cloth with a finger, feeling a piece of plastic with the bottom of your foot, feeling something in your bellybutton, controlling the movement of your eyes, dreaming, being on drugs, being on a different TYPE of drug, thinking about flowers, thinking about punching someone in the face, thinking about someone you love, eating chili, eating ice cream, drinking a soda, walking, running, smelling hairspray, doing math, so on and so forth.
You couldn't possibly use all of your brain functions at the same time because there's no possible way to stimulate EVERYTHING at once.
ae3qe27u3 Exactly, so if you managed to. the person would activate every muscle, and die violently.
Pretty sure that's a black mirror episode
The you have to ask if their a cop thing is actually a really good rumor, for cops at least.
+Aaron Treno (paratrooperfury)
Legally it's true. But of course there are many loopholes to every law in existence, and with the right prosecutors they can easily exploit those loopholes.
+Lil' Poot no legally it's not true. it's a complete myth. not sure where you're getting your fact from. An undercover cop is under no obligation to trek you they are a cop. Maybe you're thinking of patrolman in uniform. I believe they might get in trouble if they somehow denied they were a cop while on duty.
Lucian Warren
You sir, are completely wrong.
www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-645-entrapment-elements
Just because someone you trust/believe told you it was a myth, doesn't actually automatically make it a myth.
www.erowid.org/freedom/police/police_info6.shtml
It's actually the opposite. All I've ever been told is that it wasn't a myth. But logic dictates that can't be true. Going undercover is inherently a lie to begin with. It would make no sense. Then I researched to confirm. Please quote the article you posted where it says an undercover detective must say they're a cop if asked.
Scott Pilgrim is a parody, it shouldn't count.
The 10% use of the brain misconception is definitely number 1 in the top 4 list of things people like to quote in fact-debunking videos :p
To be fair, though, it is also pretty high up on the list of common misconceptions it is hard to believe that anyone could ever genuinely think was true.
John Smith Well it couldn't have gotten in the most common misconceptions if no one believed it to be true.
Djorgal Precisely
It hurts to hear Morgan Freeman say it :(
And it's ridiculous. It is obviously true, it became true the moment Morgan Freeman read those lines.
Pretty sure guns have gone off before when dropped. I'm sure it doesn't happen very often. But I bet you can find cases where it has.
+Shrap Nelface
Old guns. This doesnt happen with modern pistols, but it does long guns.
+Lil' Poot Now lets mix things up a bit...if someone passes the bong to you and you drop it, should you get shot in the face as punishment ? That is a high end legal question right there...no pun intended. One for the ages.
Of course. Human life is pretty valueless to me, by the way. Thought you should know that.
Lil' Poot No worries, at least you are honest about it. I hate to think what you would do if somebody dropped your priceless Ming vase...or scratched your car!
+Shrap Nelface Drop-testing became the industry standard because hunters were dropping their old-timey shotguns on their hammers, which broke off and fired the gun. Modern firearms can't have an exposed firing pin - instead they have a "transfer bar" that only works when the trigger is pulled. It's actually less dangerous to let a dropped gun hit the floor because it means you won't accidentally grab the trigger when you snatch it.
The scene in True Lies is actually a fair representation of the MAC-10/11, which are open bolt and about as reliable as Bill Cosby's regard for consent. Wish that was mentioned.
OPCD is the best show on cracked besides after hours. Go Daniel
About the part with the self firing guns. It is most definitely possible for a fire arm to fire if dropped, providing it has a hammer mechanism. If the hammer is pulled back and the weapon takes an impact the hammer can 'drop' back and fire a chambered round.
It has happened before.
Firing pin blocks, hammer blocks, and transfer bars will prevent this and are common safety features.
***** Ever heard of a run a way gun? The Mk.19 is known to continually fire without input from the user. You have to let it run out of ammo or hope it stops firing while keeping control of the weapon.
Marty Borton Are you kidding me? We are talking about hand held firearms here that are dropped. This has nothing to do with runaway belt fed crew served weapons. If you are carrying a Mk. 19 around it is going to be unloaded and separated from its tripod, because that sucker is heavy. I know because I have done it.
I know the fucker is heavy, it was my part of MOS for 6 years. I was just describing an instance of when a weapon can keep firing, but here is a link describing what happens. I don't know about you, but I would never want to drop or throw a loaded weapon on the ground especially if the safety is off.
***** Not every weapon is a modern weapon. Revolvers and double barrel shotguns are very common.
The 10% of your brain thing is one of my biggest pet peeves...ever! I could not believe that people actually tried to make entire movies based off of such a stupid notion. That is like making a movie called "Women are good at Basketball" ...who the hell would watch this stuff.
Could you please, in the future, cite the names of the movies you show snippets of? Pretty please? Some of those movies I have not seen, and I would like to.
lady crimes are a huge issue we need to get to the top of
"a couple of guys throwing guns at eachother"
That gives "gunslinger" a whole new meaning XD
Yea Thanx for pointing out that 10% thing. I have been waiting for someone to call bullshit on that! I have had too many long arguments with people who were SURE that that was true... so much so that they would argue about it. All because they saw it in a movie.. and what you see in movies is ALWAYS true.
actually its is true but they say it wrong. humans use only 10% of their brain at any one time but they use all of their brain. the movies make it out that humans only use 10% of their brain all the time, thats wrong its 10% at any one given time.
Soraking007
That is actually also bullshit! If you used only 10% at a time you would only be operating maybe one part of your brain at a time. so the fact that i can FUCKING think, breath, walk, feel pain, and commit that all to memory at the same goddamn time should be an indication that what you just said is utter BULLSHIT. But people still believe it (maybe because they can actually only use 10% at a time?)
Soraking007 Funny thing is, the Mythbusters covered this about 6 years ago.
Phillip Hawks you know how much 10% actually is right? cause you don seem to understand just how much that actually is your thinking in parts it seems and most actions arent one side or the other they are more using both sides(youd probably for normal life use 5% one side 5 the other.)
Kyzrath i never trust the mythbusters a whole lot. someof the stuff is not proveable and yet they "prove it right or wrong"
I knew the 10% thing wasn't true, but still so disappointing we're not going to be X-Men.
weeelll... basically most humans are mutants, with the making a roll out of your tongue shit and stuff like that. woohoo mutations (warning. may not be as cool as X-Men)
theMRsome12 HAHAHA! No, tongue rolling doesn't compare. Plus, I can't do it, so I'm still without superpowers. Lol!
Well there is a mutation called Hypertrichosis that happens to some people. (also called 'the werewolf syndrome' ) It makes you super hairy. (like Beast from x-men)
Dwelling even further, evolution is small genetic mutations in DNA.
So is cancer.
Mutants everywhere!
Midnight Navigator Well, I don't consider an overabundance of hair or cancer as superpowers. So, no thank you, please! Lol
Midnight Navigator
technically that isnt a mutation, the hair thing. because the not having hair is actually the mutation, we used to have hair everywhere in out previous evolutions.
03:30 That part about guns going off when they are dropped is actually true on some weapons. Its also possible to have weapons fire none stop if they are open bolt types. Which the "True Lies" MAC10 or similar has. If you have a chambered round with a cocked triggering pin on a hunting rifle. Slamming the butt stock into the ground might have the weapon go off. If you have some kind of sniper rifle were you can alter the trigger pressure needed to fire you can actually have it such that firing it, if its semi, can trigger another bullet being fired. You can also have similar issues on pistols were a "trimmed" weapon can fire two bullets unintentional, even from the user setting such stupid settings, via one press of the trigger. The latter has actually killed a kid at a firing range because the first bullet gives kickback so that the angle of the next unintended bullet went higher and over that firing range and like a miracle of misfortune changed directions when hitting the underside roof of the next firing line, altering direction downwards again and hitting the kid in the head. Yes, he did die. As for the manufactory etc... I have seen police being given "test weapons", as in test these and buy a shit ton of one of them... Which the default settings on the sniper semi sniper rifle being such that it caused a double shot. Moral of the story? Guns are not toys.
MORGAN FREMAN LIED TO ME!!! I'M HAVING AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS!!!
One of my favourite episodes of Community and a clip of Hot Fuzz right next to each other. Never seen that combo before.
And a clip from Scott Pilgrim! It's all the best things in one place!
And I only use 10% of my semen. The other 90% gets blown into my Dad's dress socks.
The premise of Lucy (from what I remember) is that she was able to start accessing the parts of the brain that we dont access. The myth isnt that we only use 10% of our brain and the rest is just 'unused potential' in the off position waiting to be turned on, its that, like you said, we dont have access to the autopilot parts unless you train yourself to do something about it. For example, easy ones to take control of is breathing or swallowing, its usually on autopilot until you think about it. Some harder ones are higher control of your heart beat, hormone secretion, or even your metabolism. What Lucy was doing was taking control of all those systems and had full awareness and control of her body's functions.
The telekinesis and such is just based on the random theory that people may have the potential to not only control yourself with your mind but potentially, things around you.
Maybe I just read into it in different manners than what people think of at first. The other way is more of what Limitless did. Again, its not about 10% of your brain in terms of surface area, but more of capacity. Compare it to driving a car at 10mph when you can easily be able to push it to 100mph. Learning is just making new neurons, then remembering/using that knowledge is going over those same pathways, but most people are limited in how many things they can do at once or how much they remember or how fast they can think. If limitless didnt explain is as 'now I have access to more of my brain' but rather 'I can push my brain much harder', it would be more plausible.
This post is as erroneous and painful as the 10% crap.
Why dont you explain yourself then. Its easy to tell someone they are wrong and not back up your claim.
Actually, I don't have to. This is how logic works: you make a claim, then you provide the evidence. Rejecting a claim does not require one shoulder the burden of proof.
You care so little about the accuracy of your beliefs that you didn't even try to cite evidence for your declarations, because you've pulled them all out of your ass, and you've done so in a manner that is absolutely transparent to anyone that knows jack shit about neuroscience, psychology, or enough about logic to comprehend a notion as simple as the burden of proof. I'm not even going to get into how intentionally vague you're being.
Shadow Games If I can make a less rude rejection of your claims: the brain uses different percentages at a time for different functions, and in a given day up to and easily over 90 percent of your brain will have been used to read, write, listen to music, talk, wash out your eyes, apply soap to knives, throw soy at hobos, etc. You're right in the potential explanation of 'I can push my brain harder' being correct, but at no point are there actual caps on either capacity or processing power.
1:48 I love that whoever did Dan's graphics put the "Not Fart" process in the prefrontal cortex, where all of a person's higher thought, abstract thinking, and intangible planning happens.
The only thing I got from this video was… DAMN, I WOULD HAVE F**KED JAMIE LEE CURTIS IN "True Lies"!!!
I'm going to guess, before watching this video, that "10% of your brain" is going to make this list. Because that's total nonsense.
Ha! 50 seconds in.
What? Scarlett Johannsen?
+Caleb F It's from the film "Lucy" which not only is one of the most boring films I've ever seen, it's also really dumb. Seriously, the film thinks that with 100 % brain power you can see energy flowing through plants...
I'm fucking serious.
I’m done with news, I’m tired of hearing about Prez Dump, ima just watch stuff like this from
Now on. This makes
Me happy and not afraid of the future .
Welcome to the dark side my son🕶️🕶️🕷️
1:07 You don't just call Scarlett Johansson "Scarlet", you call her by her full name like you called Bradley Cooper by his.
who the fuck is bradley cooper?
theMRsome12 the hangover guy
eligirl100
ah okay so not important.
MehmetOezil she's good enough for a poke, am I right?
AHH O NO ITS SEXIST AAAA
This guy didn't tell me to like or subscribe... am I still allowed to? I guess I will anyways and see if I get in trouble :P
Gun's don't randomly go off when you drop them? I'm guessing you've never heard of the type 94 Nambu...
yeah the 94 nambu existed long before required gun safety testing
Oh hey, they got something about firearms right! How refreshing after that God awful vid about firearms I watched earlier today.
To be fair to James Cameron, True Lies was meant to be an action comedy. Hahaha, that bouncing Mac 10 was pretty funny.
but I love community
Yes Lucy is built around a purely fictional, non-scientific myth.
Still, it is a great movie. Just keep in mind it's fictional
The "Not Fart" part of my brain doesn't seem to work. If I take drugs can I access it?
The significance of Lucy was in its attack of hyper rationalism at the end, where its like saying how mathematics and science are abstract and attempt to divide and categorise what is not divided in the material world. That was interesting, to see such a subversive idea expressed through Hollywood.
***** I agree. There was also the somewhat buddhist notion that emotions are an arbitrary mental construct and only get in the way of human efficiency. Before the film, I had an awfully messy room, but the moment the film ended I felt inspired to tidy it and the whole thing, I did with this strange efficiency, no worries, no emotions, just moving and rearranging things at the fastest possible pace I could afford to myself.
Johansson's films are always about the same ideas nowdays. Post-humanism, machine consciousness, Buddhist non attachment/fluid identity.
Under The Skin, Her and Lucy are all philosophically consistent with eachother.
***** Don't worry about it haha. I think we come from very similar philosophical positions in love for metaphysical questions but disgust for the kind of house wife enlightenment that you could buy for 9.99 in the 80's.
I think you'd get on with people on the philosophy chat room on healthfulchat.com. I certainly do. We're always talking this stuff. My nick is 'The'.
If not, all the best, peace and love and kudos for asking the big questions.
''The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.''
Friedrich Nietzsche
+MC Infliction I know this comment is a bit old but... I don't think emotions hold humans back. Empathy and compassion help aid in selflessness and working together, and anger/frustration can lead to great motivation to change a system for the better. Fear leads to heightened senses that could be life saving. I could go on.
Emotion doesn't get in the way of rationality, bad logic gets in the way of rationality, and bad logic has used emotion as its scapegoat.
I thought that was extremely basic and unimpressive, to be honest.
@Thomas Baddeley It's so painful to read crap like this that hardly continues a thought to the very end. Efficient would be to kill the elderly, the sick and dumb. If you really think so Stalin must be your idol.
this is so accurate. i spend all 10% just trying not to fart
Actually, in Lucy, they change the context of the 10% trope. They say that the human mind only uses 10% of it's capacity, which is different that saying 10% of the total brain. Think of it this way, you have a bucket and you fill it 1/10th of the way full. You are utilizing 100% of the bucket, but only 10% of it's capacity. Just something to think about on that....
"You're supposed to laugh because they look and sound different and we don't understand them"
You missed the joke, sir.
You missed the joke, sir.
Unfortunately, you are wrong about firearms. It is quite possible for an accidental discharge when dropped, even with the safety on. It is more accurate to add; possible, but unlikely! In MCT (Marine Combat Training) and likely SOI (School of Infantry); in the field, we were required at all times to have a Condition 1 weapon (look up the meaning) by having a blank round chambered with BFA (Blank Firing Apparatus; because blanks can still kill up to 20 yards) attached. Ask any Marine, there was always one unfortunate bastard who dropped their weapon and it had an involuntary discharge! Lending to the Marine saying, "You drop your weapon to the ground, you better follow it."
No, the NFA WAS NOT A "Gun Safety Act"!!!
Speaking of guns, Dirty Harry shooting a .44 magnum, one handed, with zero recoil is the biggest bunch of BS ever perpetrated on film. You also rarely die instantly after being shot, even if you're shot in the head. And finally, shooting a gun with a silencer isn't a little 'pew-pew' like the movies show you. It's a lot louder than they show it to be.
Oh this is unfortunate...
"Real guns don't go off when dropped"
2018: "Off-duty FBI officer drops gun while dancing and doing a back-flip which then goes off, into a crowd, injuring one."
You can use 100% of your brain at once. It's called a seizure. Personally, I think putting that in movies would make some of them way better.
I'm a janitor in a food processing plant.
sorry, they used to give it away, but then the warehouse workers caused too much product damage, so the managers cut everyone off. so now when something is still good but miss marked or not marked at all, it goes right in the trash. no dumpster diving. :(
they were donating it to YWCA, I'm not sure why they stopped. Could be that the stuff was "disappeared" before it reached the YWCA..
Entrapment is a real thing.
I don’t think the specific instance you referenced of Jacky and Leo was him asking in that way. He was asking if he was still a cop, because it was readily available knowledge that he was at one point. He didn’t think he’d have to tell him if he was, just that if he hurt him enough he’d maybe crack if he was one still? 🤷♂️
There are a few I know of: one director pushed that it can be so cold that a person’s breath may not be visible but that would actually be the point where you are almost dead and unable to do anything.
2: Zip lines are like blades and if you try and climb on one, you are going to be cut. No zip lines are just metal rope.
3: you can use almost any my object as handlebars when going down a zip line when you put it over. A. too much friction for that and B. not even actual zip line set ups will function that great all the time.
4: Propane tanks can explode if shot. You would need a heavier riffle and a flame because most of the time a dent is just made or a leak of gas and you just get a lot of fire and then it’s done.
*Ahem* Yes - a gun CAN fire if dropped. Take a revolver for example: when the hammer is cocked and the gun dropped - said hammer CAN discharge and fire a live round if the gun is loaded. Same is true with any firearm that can be charged manually.
All the manufacturer can really do, is sticking some barrier between the firing pin and the round , call it safety switch and pray no moron finds a way around it.
+Lorien vArden ....and guns can go off without being dropped or having anything mechanical go wrong with them. In rare cases, rounds can "cook off" through thermal ignition (though this mostly occurs only with machine guns, close-bolt assault rifles, and weapons firing caseless ammunition). There are also degrees of drop safety. Just like not every car that passes a crash test will do well in every accident, not every gun that passes a drop test is immune to every possible drop.
+Lorien vArden but not when nothing is actually even touching the trigger, like the clip shown
Deadly wrong. Working the trigger is only relevant IF the gun has a two-stage trigger in which the first stage releases a mechanical safety or the gun is charged by the first stage. If the hammer or firing pin is charged and has an unobstructed way to the primer of a round - the gun can fire. The rest is simply a matter of mechanical faults or defects.
Most modern fire arms are designed not to accidentally discharge under any circumstances. Most handguns are equipped with multiple safety features as well, such as my Springfield Armory XD with the grip safety combined with the USA action trigger make it pretty impossible to discharge a round without purposely pulling the trigger. Even with a round in the chamber and the hammer back it wouldn't allow a round to fire, the same can be said for most revolvers. Theoretically I suppose it might be possible, but it's almost impossible.
SandBox H3ro
Now add wear and tear, physical abuse and plain human stupidity and you come from "almost impssible" to "unlikely". Guns left next to campfires, on heaters, safeties purposefully removed - I have seen WAY too much human stupidity.
you must be fun at the movies...
to be true most shotguns are not drop safe
Hollywood gets pretty much everything wrong about guns, not just that bit about dropping them. There's also how silencers sound, the fact that you can't fire a gun underwater, the way people go flying backwards after taking a bullet, etc
The scene from "true lies" with Jaime Lee is legit. Its a MAC 10 that fires from an open bolt and old ones have a habit of running away. The crew said it took one take, they literally loaded it, cocked it...and chucked it down the stairs.
One thing that has always bothered me, that no one ever seems to bring up in videos like these, is when they in sci-fi flicks talk about some alien technology and say "you can't even find it on the periodic table". WELL, THEN IT'S EITHER A MOLECULAR OR IONIC COMPOUND, no wonder you can't find it on a table consisting of literally the only possibly existing elements in the universe!
ACTUALLY, new elements are being discovered from time to time, there were 4 new ones back in 2016. The "periodic table" is only a table of the elements that we've discovered.
I don't think the "you use only 10% of your brain" thing is entirely fake. You use all of your brain at different times but given any one moment you only use a fraction of your brain (I've also heard it's more like 30%). Lucy's crap is just complete bs. But Inception and Limitless show a very realistic idea of this. In Inception they talk about how parts of our brains work more when we're asleep, which is proven to be true. And the drug in Limitless doesn't really let you access all of your brain (which everyone already does without the drug); it is just an intelligence enhancement. It just makes things run much more efficiently. Limitless is actually very realistic in portraying this, as everything you remember, for example, is always there. It's just a matter of remembering it, which is what the drug helps with. It's much, much more realistic that a person who takes that drug would become Sherlock Holmes rather than be able to control crap with your mind like in Lucy. Man, Lucy was stupid.
Edit: For some reason RUclips won't let me reply to TheVandolizm, who asked for studies that show our increased brain activity while sleeping. Here's one that I found after 5 seconds: www.brainfacts.org/sensing-thinking-behaving/sleep/articles/2012/brain-activity-during-sleep And here's another one: faculty.washington.edu/chudler/sleep.html
Pick up a book.
+thebagelbomb You use 100% just sleeping. The human brain uses 20% of the total energy your body needs. If any of it was not constantly used, it would be the first thing to atrophy during times of malnourishment.
+Hermella kebede Oh because you can't read? Here, I'll read a book to you: Once upon a time, there was a perfectly reasonable RUclips comment that was backed up by scientific proof and was written by someone with better-than-average intelligence. Then, someone else decided to post a reply with a snide comment which showed absolutely no actual thoughts against the position posed by the original comment. The poster of the original comment won the brief argument that followed. The end.
Edit: For some reason RUclips won't let me reply to TheVandolizm, who asked for studies that show our increased brain activity while sleeping. Here's one that I found after 5 seconds: www.brainfacts.org/sensing-thinking-behaving/sleep/articles/2012/brain-activity-during-sleep And here's another one: faculty.washington.edu/chudler/sleep.html
***** I'll respond to your comment line by line:
>Oh because you can't read.
>>Obviously I can read, else I wouldn't even comment.
>Once upon a time.
>>You are implicitly saying:
1.) this is B.S, as the phrase once upon a time in literature is used to paint the illusion that an event in folk lore actually occurred.
2.) Outdated information, once upon a time quintessentially means some time in the past.
>There was a perfectly reasonable youtube comment that was backed by scientific proof
>>I'm just going to presume that we have the same definition of reasonable. In terms of context we can call it reasonable, it is a response to the video. However unless you can get actual scientists--as in people who don't profit off hoaxes or aren't a blockbuster prop--then I still think you should read a book before pretending to know cognitive sciences.
>...with better-than-average intelligence.
>>First of all you can have a high I.Q and still be ignorant, an I.Q test again, having taken one before cannot quantify knowledge, rather predict one's capability to grasp concepts.
>Then, someone else decided to post a reply with a snide comment which showed absolutely no actual thoughts against the position posed by the original comment.
>>I was simply questioning the validity of your statement, in the simplest way possible. Simplicity within expression requires just as much thought.
>The poster of the original comment won the brief argument that followed
>>This is the sort of narrow thought that deters someone from further exploring, and spiral further in their ignorance. There is no such thing as win or lose in an argument, rather it is relative to opinions, winning could be defined as whose argument is more agreeable. The validity of a statement could be based on the amount of evidence support a claim. You CLAIM that it is backed up by scientific proof, rather than bringing any valid studies.
>The end.
>>Finally!!
+Hermella kebede Wow. You really put a lot of thought into that. Respect. I take back my snide comment.
I will probably get flamed, but am I the only one who gets annoyed when people constantly yell about the 10% of the brain myth? Honestly, the smartest people in the world know shockingly little about the brain in the grand scheme of things. People who post this probably just read that fact on some website designed to get views. Talking about the potential of the brain, I think there is a good possibility that it can be improved.. Otherwise why do some people have photographic memories while most don't? I don't pretend to know for sure but it irks me when people presume to know a factoid about something so incredibly complex -end rant
I think its like when you think about muscle contraction and the law of recruitment. you don't use 100% of your muscle capability all the time because its unnecessary and you don't need 100% to pick up a pencil without snapping it in half every time. the same with the brain, it doesn't take 100% of it to think or talk or remember stuff. also, the brain uses different parts to do different things. using all of you're brain isn't going to help you have perfect memory because only one part of that brain actually does that. that's how I see it anyway.
john gun agreed but don't you think that brain "muscle" capability and brain potential might be two different things? how would you explain people randomly having photographic memories? (not trying to be a jerk, just curious what you think)
swish007 No it's cool dude I didn't take the comment offensively. I looked up photographic memory though and most sites are saying it's not a real thing but instead just people with really good memory because the parts of the brain that hold information is bigger on average than other people. Even then the picture in their head isn't perfect(you only see what your brain tells you it saw) and the memory will change in their heads after a while.
For the 10% thing, parts of the brain intentionally keep other areas quiet to stop too many neurons from firing because it would just give us a seizure.However, the brain does activate in different areas at the same time just not as strongly as the main part being used at the time.That's why damage to even a small part of the brain can really mess people up. Also the brain works on the "use it or lose it" system where if we didn't actually use the other 90% then we just wouldn't have it. If someone doesn't use their vision ever from birth but had the ability to begin with, they'd go blind anyway because when the brain develops, synapses are formed then are either strengthened or eliminated depending on if the person used those connections.
That's what I got from google anyway lol I honestly thought photographic memory was real too though. Then again I may have gone to those buzz websites but I couldn't find any others that said otherwise.
The problem with the 10% myth is that we know where it originates from, and just like believing people thought the earth was flat before the 1400s, it is a common radicated misconception. A man, wrote in a book, (I'm not telling you who, if you care enough, you'll look for it, I'm not being lazy) the proverbial 10% phrase, and scientists got convinced it was real because a worker got impaled in the brain through the nose and survived with 10% of his brain intact. Later, in the 2000s we tested it, and using a machine that detects brain activity we, and i quote, "had difficulty finding this mythical not working 90%" so it was busted. It is false, and saying "we don't know much", doesn't disqualify what we know for sure. Also, i don't know who you are talking about when you say "the smartest people in the world know shockingly little" because i, could talk FOR FUCKING HOURS straight about how the brain works. Let alone the people who make a living out of observing the brain.
+LUCA SILVETTI I actually know the guy you're talking about.. Phineas gage. I think it's a bit arrogant to presume we don't know very little about the human brain (with regards to consciousness and intelligence). For example, there are some psychiatric disorders we can treat but surprisingly little we can fix (I.e. Schizophrenia, dementia, Alzheimer's, etc.) the brain is responsible for all of these things. I'm sure when doctors were giving people lobotomies they thought they knew most everything to know about the brain, too. What causes addiction? What's the root cause of autism? Why do we have savants who seem to be able to do incredible things. Why do taking drugs like dmt seem to make you see evil lizards? At best, we have lots of different opinions but little solid knowledge. The human brain (like the rest of the body, and like the rest of the universe for that matter) is incredibly complex and anyone who doesn't believe that hasn't really studied it much.
Yes, because no one has EVER been harmed by a gun discharging accidentally. And please forgive me for not believing that people responsible for developing and improving upon devices designed to kill have my safety as their first priority. After all, if a gun discharges when dropped and kills or maims someone, it performed its intended function.
thank you for the 10% of the brain bullshit. exactly what I hoped for based on the title of the video. O'Brien makes me feel better about my social skills and bad about my pop culture knowledge
What Jamie Lee Curtis movie is that? LOL I need it in my life.
+WhiteRaven696 True Lies. She is really hot in that movie.
+acetate909 Correct!
+WhiteRaven696 Jamie Lee Curtis was one of the original "Scream Queens". You should look up her roles in the Halloween franchise, after her multiple nude scenes she was touted as having the most spectacular natural tits to ever grace a movie screen. There's also a brief shot of them in the Eddie Murphy/Dan Akroyd movie Trading Places.
Sincerely,
A 25+ year Jamie Lee Curtis fan.
Young Frankenstein I actually hate horror with a passion, but I do love her in "Freaky Friday". I would definitely watch more of her comedic roles for sure.
WhiteRaven696 Definitely go with Trading Places, then. Brilliant comedy, plenty of Jamie skin. Oh, and the human versions of those guys who used to sit up in the box heckling the Muppets (if you're old enough to remember that).
"The gun industry is trying to not kill people accidentally" The irony :D
+Steel Dom
Most gun deaths are suicides. About 60%.
About a third of gun deaths are homicides.
2% are self defense, and 2% are accidents.
+carultch Source of these statistics.
Mike Baker opieoneers.wordpress.com/2014/05/28/some-pie-charts-on-gun-deaths/
Where's the irony?
undercover police legally do not have to tell you that they are police if you ask them
I thought you were gonna point out how most movies with guns have limitless ammo, maybe the guns are using more than 10% of their brains, it would explain why they're always going on when dropped, they're just scared and want to be held.
I love Luc Besson films cuz the guy knows how to entertain, but having seen all of his movies I am fairly sure he knows very little about real life. Maybe thats a requirement for good filmmakers.
This was interesting, but you guys need definitely a different host...
This guy is not very funny and tries way to hard
+James Santoy It's funny for some people.
I love him
+James Santoy Honestly he's awesome because the show is Obsessive Pop Culture Disorder. That's the whole point, him trying really hard and being awkward, like your stereotypical OCD person with a dose of social awkwardness.
Don't watch it if you don't like it
exactly.
If a gun could fire as soon as it hits the ground. Then the whole army staff would be rushing to get it decomitioned or to fix the reliability problem. Not too practical during war time if u shoot an ally by accident
Entrapment is a thing, its just misrepresented in movies. It does not mean a cop saying "I'm not a cop", but rather a cop convincing someone to commit a crime that they otherwise would not have committed.
I think 10% is the number of neurons firing at any one time. It is possible for some people to have more than 10% of their neurons firing at once, those people are epileptics having a seizure.
The gun dropping one is true for pistols as they mostly have a drop safety but old shotguns have quite a bad reputation for going off when being dropped 😂
Guns can in fact slamfire. Slamfires are most common in military firearms that have a free-floating firing pin. IE Mosin Nagant.
You use only 10-30% of your fingers while typing doesn't mean using all of them is practical
1:48 Wow, there's a part of your brain that makes you not fart all the time?/ I must have brain damage.
Overlooking periodic maintenance to a firearm may result in jamming, and in some cases unintended discharge.
It's very possible to use (close to) 100% of the brain at once. It's called a seizure.
Shotguns are very prone to drop firing if they don't have a safety specifically guarding against it.
Have u ev owned or used guns? Many guns have been known to go off...a few witnessed by myself js