I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is set up to disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug azprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see azprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is set up to disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug azprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see azprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is to guarantee that we will disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug azprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see azprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is to guarantee that we will disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug azprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see azprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is to guarantee that we will disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug Asprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see Asprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is to guarantee that we will disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug Asprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see Asprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
James Randi is such a fraud. Never trust a gay skeptical old man who makes money by making an example of someone in a controlled environment where they're made to look stupid. I'm not saying this device is real or not, but I'm saying this James Rani character I can see right through his BS
@General4474 He makes no money from this. The JREF is a non-profit organization. Frankly, the applicants themselves make themselves look stupid since they cannot do what they claim they can.
@General4474 what on earth has Randi's age or other traits got to do with anything? He uses purely scientific method and shows these clowns up for what they are. Disillusioned frauds.
These folks make themselves look stupid because they never took the time to examine their own claims critically. 10/10 for Randi.
this makes me so sad, because now that he is disproving so many things that once made me feel excitement and wonder and awe, I dont know how to find that spark in life, its like, the more I learn about the world the less enjoyable it seems...
@betthisonesfree You're not looking in the right places. If you want to be amazed and awed, there is PLENTY in science in nature that will do just that - the origins of the universe, how stars form and die, exoplanets, the theoretical possibilities of extra-terrestrial life, neutron stars, evolutionary biology, how a living cell functions, the complexity of the human brain, psychology, future technologies, etc. We don't need crazy, unjustified beliefs like ESP to fill us with wonder.
@betthisonesfree watch the docu 'ants, natures secret power' truly amazing, BBC's human planet. Frozen planet and planet earth also show what you could be excited about. maybe you could find excitement in drugs, gardening, music or sports. be happy you'll be less gulible and more critical in the future. no good things come from blind faith wether in government, companies, religion, in me are James frkn Randy. have faith in the scientific method which requires 'evidence' !.
@Capeau ...You are aware the man claiming all these crazy things is British, yes? In fact, the only American on set is the skeptic rightly debunking this bullshit. I guess it just goes to show that old bigots like you don't use their brains very often.
@vladbcom Did you ever play a game at sleepovers called "Light as a feather, stiff as a board"? One person lies down, and then all the other kids place their fingers underneath them and lift them up with minimal effort. It's a basic law of physics that when you distribute work among several different doers, each doer only needs to exert a fraction of the energy needed to do it themselves. The table thing is exactly that: of COURSE it can move with all of them barely touching it.
I know what's inside of that machine. It's nothing more than a very sensitive multimeter (well volt meter since it's missing the other typical functions). You can learn how to crank the voltage in your body. This bizarre phenomenon is only a distraction from the fact the results would be the same if the guy was just pressing a button or raising a hand when he gets "the vibes"- it's a classic magician trick to have everyone fixated on the device rather than the actual experiment itself.
How utterly juvenile of you to detract entirely from the purpose of the video to make such a fuss over an entirely natural function of the human body. If it did occur, it was clearly accidental and not "rude", merely human. For someone that is watching videos that have a basis in skepticism, you're seemingly far from being logical.
Listen on surround sound one of them clearly Bottom Burped! You can distinctly hear it, I got distracted then about what happened with all the psychic stuff and started looking closely at who was the culprit for the foul deed, doing a rude smell on public TV even if accidental is totally uncalled for. I looked at facial expressions when the bottom burp is heard, it is hard to pin down the culprit but I think either Randi or Norman did it but tried to look inoccent whilst doing it.
Wow, this box can indicate one microvolt full scale on the meter! This thing is probably just measuring galvanic skin resistance. What crock of BS! Good work Randi!!!
I certainly would not! by golly if I were to open it up I would be found out as a fake, and we all know I make money telling lies, so that question is ridiculous, now if you do mind me, I have to send thoughts to my wife for almost ruining my career.
( You stupid...bitch....your gonna get ass raped tonight and you will NOT enjoy it)
You know what really cracks me up?? That these people are, for some reason, so confident that they can trick him by saying stuff like, "He's producing one Microvolt." and " But I have to set it first, to his metabolism." Like he's a drunk dude that got pulled over, and is trying to prove to the cop he's not drunk, by over talking.
there is a very widely known and used method of thought transference that has been used for tens of thousands of years, its known as "talking" or "language"
Why in the sam hill are you guys still arguing about this rot? Some of the population (wrongly) believes that we use 10 percent or so, and the rest of us disagree, and NOTHING is ever going to change that. I gave up trying to convince people when I saw its futility. It is like telling a homeopath that he is full of crap, it just gets nowhere.
If you fool other people James Randi takes you to hell (after the test of course) I love his work Anyone can invent a lie, but can they confirm it in a legitimate test
@LiamXaoh I imagine that James holds it in until he gets back to his dressing room, at which point he laughs so hard he has to be taken to the hospital for hyperventilation.
I see many brain percentage comments so I thought I would add that the Mythbusters did tests for that by using a cat scan to detect brain activity while resting and while doing small puzzles and quizs. The maximum use was 37% While It is true that all you brain is working your brain isn't using it's full potential in every aspect all the time. But who knows, science is getting ever closer to unlocking the secrets to our brain. Which by the way is considered the most complex thing in the universe
@Sindrasos It was NOT a catscan machine, it was a FMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) using a superconducting electromagnet. And I believe they used another piece of equipment as well, but certainly not a catscan, which uses X-Rays.
And any one here who knows anything about brain functioning, should indeed know, you don't operate a FMRI without a lot of funding.
@wgfcrafty Sorry a mistake on my part, but my point still stands true though. Humans won't become telepathic and have super powers but we could become more intelligent :P
I love how all these uneducated pricks, sit back on their computers. They've made me an open celebrity on this simple topic. Like I proclaim with my last post. I'm not going to make the effort to read and logically assort every nonsensical comment you have to make. If you believe that humans are only capable of using 7% to 10% of their normal cerebral cortex to creates joules. Then you have a long way to go. Stop relying on your Google search engines for information. Find a legit source...
Psychic abilities have been searched for and researched for almost as long as humans could think. Nothing in all of that time has indicated any such thing exists. All "proofs" that show that they do have been proven to be hoaxes.
Would you PLEASE stop propagating the myth that humans only use 10% of their brains. That's an old saw from the 1970s long since debunked, and clarified. IT'S AS UNTRUE AS PSYCHIC ABILITY!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I do not have time to reply to every individual. Who are so close minded, they mix up fictionalized cartoons with inhuman abilities. I never claimed what this guy is doing is real. I stated that this is in the realm of possibly. If you think humans only and will always use 10% of their brain for every bodily function. Then you must be the one's who cannot use the other undiscovered fraction of your cerebrum. You think that I'm impressed because you can correctly spell arrogant or egotistical? Ha
@UncleFeedle I'm going to hitch on to this comment to ask: How in the heck could you also think everyone only uses 10% of their brain? That's nonsense. We can use up to 35% of our brain at once, approx. And we use 100% of our brain in total for each function.
@UncleFeedle Well its possible, we just dont have the tools yet. The human brain runs on nutrients and electricity. Most likely electrical data is transferred within itself, if you could find a way to extract that electrical data or tap into it, then you would be able to control its data. Think of mind control, its been done (Norway)
@junglemage666 While I don't know what you mean by 'electrical data transferred within itself', we can already monitor electrical brain activity through the use of an EEG. However, if someone wanted to investigate the possibility of transferring information from one brain to another, we can design a very simple test for this which does not require the use of any such devices.
@UncleFeedle It should, theoretically, be possible though, right? The brain is simply an information processor, something like a computer. It may not work in binary, or exclusively on electricity, but it's the same kind of machine. The big problem with thought transference is wether we can build a machine that can observe brain activity in great detail, and then copy those processes in a computer or another brain.
@jursle I'm not sure whether comparing the brain to a computer is a fair comparison. True, the brain processes information, but it does a great many other things which no computer can even come close to. Yet in other ways, it is extremely lacking. There is still a huge amount we do not even understand about it. We can speculate on how thought transference might work, but until someone can provide some evidence that such a thing is even possible, it doesn't really deserve serious consideration.
@UncleFeedle Hey, I'm a philosopher, not a scientist. It's my job to make up nonsense about nonsense ;)
But I do understand that it would be difficult, as even the electrical processes aren't in binary for brains, and they have hormones and all that playing into it as well. I hope it'll happen someday soon though, I want my robot body already.
@UncleFeedle There are many cases of thought transference. A youtube search for psychic dog experiment can show you that. A Jane Goodall documentary tested a parrot that could read the mind of its owner. There are cases of twins where one will suddenly develop a pain or condition and the other will feel it. People have had psychic dreams where they've been put into the mind of another person, etc. The problem is, no human seems to be good at producing the ability at will, so tests fail.
@Elhardt "no human seems to be good at producing the ability at will" - exactly. So since apparently no-one can do it at will (miraculously exempting it from testing), how do we differentiate it from purely random chance or other natural explanation? Mere anecdotes do not constitute evidence.
@Elhardt "There are cases of twins where one will suddenly develop a pain or condition and the other will feel it." Yes, that's called sympathy pains or psychosomatic pains. There's also males feeling pregnancy symptoms when their partners is pregnant (Couvade syndrome) and folie à deux, which is a shared psychosis usually between close family members.I feel other's pain too, even if I see it on TV. It's not thought transference, its psychology and the foolishness of the human mind.
@jursle The brain is alot more than a fancy cpu. The computer doesn't do anything if not given logical instructions created by a human. What a Cpu does is it simply executes the instructions after it has been translated and compiled by an interpreter. Thus, all computer logic is human logic. Besides, humans can already transfer thought through visual and acoustic signals, so to have a thought transfer device seems pointless.
@eeg10 Well, the big difference is that a brain creates its own input as well. It gets input from outside, through the eyes and such, like a computer gets input from a keyboard, but a human brain is capable of creating abstractions, and think about those deeply without any input at all. Computer, at least at the moment, are incapable of doing that, or at least not meant to be doing that.
@jursle Well, computers can handle high-level abstractions, but it needs to be fed instructions(programs) that will actually allow it to do so. Also, computers don't have to take input from a keyboard, they can take input from any number of devices and sensors. Furthermore, you can easily write a program that takes 0 input other than a command to compile and run and return something. What computers really lack, is real logic, problem solving capabilities, and emotions.
@eeg10 But what is "real logic"? Logic they made up themselves? In that case, most people don't have real logic either, it was taught to them as children.
I don't know about problem solving capabilities, but a computer did recently teach itself to interpret a strategy guide for a video game, boosting it's success rate by a lot.
Emotions I don't know, since we don't really have a definition of what an emotion is.
@jursle Real logic is something not defined simply by and, or, not etc, Something not represented as a logic gate and not simple booleans. The computer doesn't actually teach itself strategy, the computer was given commands that allows it to teach itself commands. However, these commands are commands that follow a strict algorithm as designated by the programmer, so it isn't free thinking. Also, computers have finite data handling, which is another minus.
@eeg10 Well, the human brain's logic is also simply defined by the actions of neurons. I'm not sure if they can be defined as and/or/not, but a longer set of symbols could quite well describe human logic. In fact, in philosophical logic, all human logic can be represented by variables (X/Y/Z) and transformatives (and/or/+/-).
The big difference is that human brains weren't designed by anyone, but in practice, this doesn't matter.
Also, humans cannot store infinite information either.
@jursle No, but humans can represent infinite as a higher order concept whereas computers are regulated to data types ("float, array, int, double, boolean..."). Also, you said so yourself that we don't understand emotions fully so that automatically contradicts your statement that all human logic can be represented as variables and transformatives.
@eeg10 I don't think so. The human brain is not really capable of grasping what infinity is, we just have a word for it, and know it means: "Really big". Of course, the brain doesn't work exactly like our computer do, but the principles behind it are the same, lots of tiny switches that can work together. Also, I said that human statements can be represented as logic. For instance: If it rains, I get wet. It rains. I get wet. P: It rains Q: I get wet. P -> Q P Q That's formal logic.
@jursle Well, you're example also wasn't that good either. The computer has no concept of 'wet'. Sure you can have a sensor that detects if there's water, but if there is a tiny sprinkle of water, the computer will interpret it automatically as 'wet'. Formal human logic is not computer logic. If you were to ask a computer to take the limit as x approaches infinite of f(x), it would crash. If you asked a human to do the same, he could easily do it provided there is a limit.
@jursle You've never taken calculus? So for instance (non-calc), if I asked you to to find the sum of the infinite series 3(1/10)^n from n = 1, you will see that it approaches 1/3. But if you were to ask a computer that, it will never actually see that the value equals 1/3. Sure you can program it such that it comes very close, but it never actually computes the actual value.
@jursle Also, think about that condition "If it rains". A computer has no concept of 'rain' either. If you were to create a class rain, than you need to somehow differentiate 'rain' from 'shower' or anything that exerts water. The computer has no real symbolic understanding, it won't associate 'rain' with a memory or anything. Human memory is often associated with a picture or simulation in the mind. Computer memory is composed of base 2 numbers.
@eeg10 True, but human memory is also composed of electrical signals and chemistry. One could most certainly teach a computer what "rain" means, if it had a way to get that input, for instance through a camera. If it recognizes water falling in front of it, it's raining. Obviously, it's complicated, since someone might be standing over the camera with a hose, but additional requirements could be added.
My point is not that computers right now can match the brain, just that they are similar.
@jursle [Human memory is also composed of electrical signals and chemistry]. Well, if you are using that as ur argument, u might as well say a computer is also like a radio, because both use transistors and use chemistry -.-. Although a computer can perform like a radio, a radio can only do one task so they are completely different.
@jursle You can't ask a computer: "How is the weather today" and have the computer respond "great!". First you have to parse the input into something intelligible to a computer. Then you have to have to use a boolean such as "if (temperature > 25 C, weather != cloudy etc. ) system.out.print("great!"); else system.out.print("not good!")". And even then, you only get 2 different outputs that don't really tell how a computer 'feels', just if those conditions of the 'if' were satisfied or not.
@eeg10 yes, but what do you think happens in the human brain? The question is converted to data through the ear, goes to the language center, is interpreted, the eyes give info on what kind of weather it is, combined with a database somewhere that associates certain temperatures and conditions with good, and you respond.
It's just that you don't "feel" like that is predetermined, but it most certainly is. You just can't view the source code.
@junglemage666 Walking on water is possible we just don't have the tools yet. The human body is buoyant, if you could find a way to negate the difference between laying in water and standing on top of water, then you would be able to walk on water. Think of hydroplanes.
That argument just doesn't really work. You can substitute walking on water with flying, or whatever.
@HydrolicXL It is a complete fallacy that human beings only use a small percent of their brains. We simply have a great deal yet to understand about the functionality of the brain and how it interacts with the rest of the body. To suggest our ignorance about the brain is a clear indication of the possibility of psychic ability is lunacy. The world has yet to see or hear of a psychic or healer who could not be debunked. These people are grifters who have always prayed on the weak-minded.
@HydrolicXL we use all of our brains the 10% thing was actually a misquote by some one we arent unlocking a chest were improving on it. hey that was pretty good any ways you get what i mean were alot more smart then people give themselfs credit for but we cant levitate objects or reads some ones mind this is not in the scope of reality well not exactly maybe we will make telekineses and levitation helmets we dont have power because we dont need them, we have smarts
LOL! What a retard. I love when people site urban legends in their reasoning. In fact, 100% of the brain is used. The incorrect understanding by dumb people that resulted in the urban legend was scientists saying that only 10% of the brain is used AT ANY ONE TIME. Every region has been mapped out, so enough of this low IQ dribble please.
@HydrolicXL That is demonstrably wrong. That 10% figure has been thoroughly debunked - you might only use 10% at one time, but all regions of the brain are in fact used, as can be clearly observed when they perform the related functions. All types of emotion and cognition can be observed as activity in the brain, so your hypothesis fails automatically.
Obviously you know so little about neurology, that to see you try and make an assertion about the brain is fraudulent quackery.
@HydrolicXL Derren Brown does it better. It's not supernatural, it's psychological.
Furthermore, humans don't only use 10% of their brain, most of it is being used, but in an ancillary way or at different times and for different reasons. I suggest looking at a mathematical / computer science branch called Neural Networks to truly understand the functions that occur in the human brain, so you don't see it as a huge "black box" that defies explanation.
@HydrolicXL We use all of our brain. The 10% thing is a myth. We may use a certain percentage for thought but the other percentage is responsible for such things as movement, speech, and etc.
@HydrolicXL Haha, and you're a fascist. Saw your post on the Landser video. A fascist who uses 100% of his brain capacity? Dream on, you don't even use 1% of it, if you have a brain at all which i doubt.
@HydrolicXL and for someone who claims that he uses 100% of his brain, using sentences like "...have tamed INTO the other..." makes you look even more retarded. By the way i'm not a native english speaker and even i pick up on your douchebaggery. fuck you.
the human body would die at the use of any thing higher than about 18-20% of our brains full ability the brains wave lengths will kill you, It is also known that black mamba venom has properties of unlocking the human brain how ever you die from 2 things 1 the venom it's self and 2 the brain over loads the body.
You have to admit, it is understandable how people can believe this thing. It SEEMED like it was working except for that very very awkward one where he signaled immediately. If it is just changing pitch randomly like that, it is very easy to think that you see some correlation because your mind rejects when it is getting higher when he has not yet signaled and then really focuses on every moment that it rises after he has signaled. Our brain is wired to see these connections, despite being wrong
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
see that eye on the background? on a pyramid? long before we had powers, the illuminati stilll know how to access them. you may not believe me it's just a theory, since we only use 10 percent of our brains, there must be a way to unlock the rest 90 percent.
@juantor16 Yes, and Elvis shot JFK before emigrating to Planet X on a flying saucer flown by the aliens who built the pyramids using their psychokinesis.
@juantor16 Dude, seriously don't tell me you are one of those people.
The only way you wouldn't use 100% of your brain is if you are lobotomized, and even then you would still use 100% of whatever is left. Different areas of the brain control different functions. Everyone uses their entire brain in order to function not 10%. You don't need to be a doctor to know that.
@Tsresponds Nu-uh! It's totally true! If a bullet passes through a person's skull, 90% of the time it hits useless stuff and no significant harm is done. It's the same reason that mental diseases, strokes, and brain surgery are so completely safe!
@juantor16 We don't use only 10% of our brain. That is lie. A fabricated myth. Ask any neurosurgeon or psychologist. They will tell you. We use functionally ALL of our brain. It isn't all designed for thought you know, parts of our brain do other tasks besides thinking and percentage of brain is required to do these tasks.
@Blahrg Indeed. Of course not all of our brain is used at the same time but in fact way more than 10% is active even when resting and not exactly focusing on anything..
@Blahrg actually it holds a form of the truth.. we use about 10 to 15% of our brain for our skills, talents etc.. the other parts are used for memory, movement, instinct, emotions etc etc.. So in a way, the myth is (as always) based on something thats remotely true
@880330145789 It's wrong. If we didn't use all of our brains we would be brain dead. Psychic charlatans started that rumor decades ago, and it's sunk so deep into the public psyche that no amount of debunking has yet dispelled it. It's bogus.
Your troll kiddo, stop trolling. It's not myth you illiterate obese rape child. It is proven fact we only use 7% of cerebral functions, for basic skills and muscle memory as well genesync. Stop trolling you tool..
@HydrolicXL You're clearly misinformed about how the human brain works, all that "humans use only 7% blah blah blah" is taken out of context and misinterpreted, please, get your facts right before talking.
Next time, think before you say something stupid, and if you can't help to be an idiot, don't go showing it off on youtube
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is set up to disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug azprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see azprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
General4474 1 day ago
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is set up to disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug azprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see azprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
General4474 1 day ago
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is to guarantee that we will disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug azprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see azprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
General4474 1 day ago
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is to guarantee that we will disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug azprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see azprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
General4474 1 day ago
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is to guarantee that we will disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug Asprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see Asprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies
General4474 1 day ago
I'm not saying there's not fraudsters out there. We already know they are. But to put someone one a bias TV show which is to guarantee that we will disprove a finding is ludicrous. It's rigged, proves nothing Say we didn't know anything about the drug Asprin. We put it on there. Guy has a headache. They take the pill and find out they still have the headache. Then mr clown Randi on national TV could say, see Asprin is a fraud! What you need months of research, double blind, and unbiased studies.
General4474 1 day ago
I would love Randi to get ahold of scientology.
mossbergmaniac1947 1 day ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
James Randi is such a fraud. Never trust a gay skeptical old man who makes money by making an example of someone in a controlled environment where they're made to look stupid. I'm not saying this device is real or not, but I'm saying this James Rani character I can see right through his BS
General4474 1 day ago
@General4474 He makes no money from this. The JREF is a non-profit organization. Frankly, the applicants themselves make themselves look stupid since they cannot do what they claim they can.
UncleFeedle 1 day ago 3
@General4474 You are a fucking moron.
Xylogeist 1 day ago
@General4474 He makes so profit from this at all. He simply shows the world; liars, thieves, and frauds.
deth349 1 day ago
@General4474 what on earth has Randi's age or other traits got to do with anything? He uses purely scientific method and shows these clowns up for what they are. Disillusioned frauds.
These folks make themselves look stupid because they never took the time to examine their own claims critically. 10/10 for Randi.
LiamXaoh 1 day ago
this makes me so sad, because now that he is disproving so many things that once made me feel excitement and wonder and awe, I dont know how to find that spark in life, its like, the more I learn about the world the less enjoyable it seems...
betthisonesfree 2 days ago
@betthisonesfree You're not looking in the right places. If you want to be amazed and awed, there is PLENTY in science in nature that will do just that - the origins of the universe, how stars form and die, exoplanets, the theoretical possibilities of extra-terrestrial life, neutron stars, evolutionary biology, how a living cell functions, the complexity of the human brain, psychology, future technologies, etc. We don't need crazy, unjustified beliefs like ESP to fill us with wonder.
UncleFeedle 2 days ago 3
@betthisonesfree watch the docu 'ants, natures secret power' truly amazing, BBC's human planet. Frozen planet and planet earth also show what you could be excited about. maybe you could find excitement in drugs, gardening, music or sports. be happy you'll be less gulible and more critical in the future. no good things come from blind faith wether in government, companies, religion, in me are James frkn Randy. have faith in the scientific method which requires 'evidence' !.
Dailydose13 2 days ago
More like a bullshit detector.
MrNympholover 1 week ago 2
BUSTED
IMA60SKID 1 week ago
0:42
"Hey Karen, what did you do this weekend?"
"Me and my friends went to a country retreat and pushed a circular table around a room...it was wild"
alanthe2 2 weeks ago 3
What show was this called?
Monkies97 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Capeau ...You are aware the man claiming all these crazy things is British, yes? In fact, the only American on set is the skeptic rightly debunking this bullshit. I guess it just goes to show that old bigots like you don't use their brains very often.
iruparatso 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
iruparatso 4 weeks ago
Things always sound cool when you use the word "Metabolism"
siamesemojo 4 weeks ago 2
And what was exactly the point of "levitating" that fucking table anyway??.. lol
vladbcom 1 month ago
Comment removed
iruparatso 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@vladbcom Did you ever play a game at sleepovers called "Light as a feather, stiff as a board"? One person lies down, and then all the other kids place their fingers underneath them and lift them up with minimal effort. It's a basic law of physics that when you distribute work among several different doers, each doer only needs to exert a fraction of the energy needed to do it themselves. The table thing is exactly that: of COURSE it can move with all of them barely touching it.
iruparatso 4 weeks ago
@vladbcom Basically it's just to trick his guests into thinking they have psychic powers.
iruparatso 4 weeks ago
5:08 Deluded lady: "I can't stop it!"
Quite true. It is to be expected when you have NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!
lardhat 1 month ago 3
lmao
mrninjap00p 1 month ago
This looks like the same gizmo the Scientologists call their E Meter. Utter bunkum.
MacNutz2 1 month ago
I do love how Randi is making fun of them but in a polite manner.
blackZ34all 1 month ago 7
Comment removed
TheRogueMonk 1 month ago
I know what's inside of that machine. It's nothing more than a very sensitive multimeter (well volt meter since it's missing the other typical functions). You can learn how to crank the voltage in your body. This bizarre phenomenon is only a distraction from the fact the results would be the same if the guy was just pressing a button or raising a hand when he gets "the vibes"- it's a classic magician trick to have everyone fixated on the device rather than the actual experiment itself.
WolfCoder 1 month ago
How utterly juvenile of you to detract entirely from the purpose of the video to make such a fuss over an entirely natural function of the human body. If it did occur, it was clearly accidental and not "rude", merely human. For someone that is watching videos that have a basis in skepticism, you're seemingly far from being logical.
genevieveseverine 2 months ago
Listen on surround sound one of them clearly Bottom Burped! You can distinctly hear it, I got distracted then about what happened with all the psychic stuff and started looking closely at who was the culprit for the foul deed, doing a rude smell on public TV even if accidental is totally uncalled for. I looked at facial expressions when the bottom burp is heard, it is hard to pin down the culprit but I think either Randi or Norman did it but tried to look inoccent whilst doing it.
CloudsBeyond 2 months ago
@CloudsBeyond ...And this matters why?
iruparatso 4 weeks ago
Another bunch of morons busted.... next...
skywize 2 months ago
James Randi - Making people look stupid since he began growing his beard.
real3121 2 months ago 7
so embarrassing
RasnaZaMan 2 months ago
Wow, this box can indicate one microvolt full scale on the meter! This thing is probably just measuring galvanic skin resistance. What crock of BS! Good work Randi!!!
analogdesigner 2 months ago
That sound is so annoying.
liliodine 2 months ago
these people are jokes
krazyfeetburger 2 months ago 2
"can I re-adjust?" XD
daylightdisk 2 months ago
he wants to get it paitented fuist
htiberian 2 months ago
I don't understand really, surely if he starts thinking about well...anything it will set the machine off..
BetterThanMeOfCourse 2 months ago
Isnt that the same thing as the scientologist use? Did James Randi just got audited?
XxtreborobertxX 2 months ago 3
Those 3 jokers got owned and they know it. The truth is in their eyes.
mythicalhell 2 months ago 2
I certainly would not! by golly if I were to open it up I would be found out as a fake, and we all know I make money telling lies, so that question is ridiculous, now if you do mind me, I have to send thoughts to my wife for almost ruining my career.
( You stupid...bitch....your gonna get ass raped tonight and you will NOT enjoy it)
GenX52 2 months ago
I wouldn't bother patenting it.
chrisgrainger 2 months ago
English fruitcakes.
TrollingAccount 2 months ago
You know what really cracks me up?? That these people are, for some reason, so confident that they can trick him by saying stuff like, "He's producing one Microvolt." and " But I have to set it first, to his metabolism." Like he's a drunk dude that got pulled over, and is trying to prove to the cop he's not drunk, by over talking.
BobBX542 3 months ago
"Norman, would you allow an electrical engineer to take a look inside the box?"
"Most certainly not! Then people would know I'm a complete fraud!"
TheMuseFly 3 months ago 57
How the hell can you receive pleasant thoughts with an annoying sound like that?
SmileysRevenge100 3 months ago
and also there will be a rise in my pants
diedie5 3 months ago
Even if the random geberator works, what guy in his right mind would want to be bothered by his wife's thoughts?
anaximander24 3 months ago
wonder if he ever got it patented?
DanJCunningham 3 months ago
Bollocks.
BigJohnWoody 3 months ago
0:50. hmmm, like when there is no carpet on the floor?
MrThanasis55 3 months ago
HAHAHAH, he didn't let James' engineers take a look inside the box xD
QUATR00 3 months ago
@QUATR00 Though i think that's because 1. he's a fraud .2. he wouldn't want someone to take his idea.
Probably a fraud though.
ApostateOfTheDamned 3 months ago
@ApostateOfTheDamned it's probably just some random signal generator in there :D
QUATR00 3 months ago
Screw that dude, I would be sending thoughts just to see if it was legit.. Obviously isn't though..
MrAveryGarrett 3 months ago
there is a very widely known and used method of thought transference that has been used for tens of thousands of years, its known as "talking" or "language"
tyjalbean 3 months ago 87
@tyjalbean :0) good one.
pildskadden 3 months ago
@tyjalbean HA!! Brilliant!!
BobBX542 3 months ago
@tyjalbean Blasphemy!
AleksHM 3 weeks ago
@tyjalbean which is only a niche in the vast idea of "communication".
jimgrude 3 weeks ago
is that box like the fucking Inception briefcase...?
SHiTJuFro743 4 months ago
we can transmit our thoughts invisibly from one to another. It is called Speech.
FattyMcFox 4 months ago 5
Is it tuned alright there Norman?....LOL What a crock of shit.
chiroduk 4 months ago 2
90% of the people ostensibly commenting about this video are only using 10% of their brains.
ZakzTube 4 months ago
He accidently had the meter on the B.S. setting.
mytube373 4 months ago 4
Why in the sam hill are you guys still arguing about this rot? Some of the population (wrongly) believes that we use 10 percent or so, and the rest of us disagree, and NOTHING is ever going to change that. I gave up trying to convince people when I saw its futility. It is like telling a homeopath that he is full of crap, it just gets nowhere.
aggrooveride 4 months ago
Id like to fart in that machine and send the scent into his nose with a radio active smell
cheeesefunnel 4 months ago
If you fool other people James Randi takes you to hell (after the test of course) I love his work Anyone can invent a lie, but can they confirm it in a legitimate test
AnimaxRex 5 months ago
That mans a gimp
carndrifter 5 months ago
How James Randi keeps a straight face is beyond me. Listening to this waffle by these ill-informed folks is so funny.
LiamXaoh 5 months ago
@LiamXaoh I imagine that James holds it in until he gets back to his dressing room, at which point he laughs so hard he has to be taken to the hospital for hyperventilation.
iruparatso 4 weeks ago
I see many brain percentage comments so I thought I would add that the Mythbusters did tests for that by using a cat scan to detect brain activity while resting and while doing small puzzles and quizs. The maximum use was 37% While It is true that all you brain is working your brain isn't using it's full potential in every aspect all the time. But who knows, science is getting ever closer to unlocking the secrets to our brain. Which by the way is considered the most complex thing in the universe
Sindrasos 5 months ago
@Sindrasos It was NOT a catscan machine, it was a FMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) using a superconducting electromagnet. And I believe they used another piece of equipment as well, but certainly not a catscan, which uses X-Rays.
And any one here who knows anything about brain functioning, should indeed know, you don't operate a FMRI without a lot of funding.
wgfcrafty 5 months ago
@wgfcrafty Sorry a mistake on my part, but my point still stands true though. Humans won't become telepathic and have super powers but we could become more intelligent :P
Sindrasos 5 months ago
@Sindrasos I don't disagree, I was just correcting for the MythBusters :)
As Einstein said:
"The only things boundless are space and human stupidity, and I'm not so sure about space."
Or at least to that effect.
wgfcrafty 5 months ago
ok audience, stop thinking!
WTF?
Sidnelsom 5 months ago
THAT TABLE WAS ON WHEELS
Keinlicht 5 months ago
After a while they became known as the Church of Scientology.
Fapsamup 5 months ago
Halarious!
MsCrystalBeautiful 5 months ago
I love how all these uneducated pricks, sit back on their computers. They've made me an open celebrity on this simple topic. Like I proclaim with my last post. I'm not going to make the effort to read and logically assort every nonsensical comment you have to make. If you believe that humans are only capable of using 7% to 10% of their normal cerebral cortex to creates joules. Then you have a long way to go. Stop relying on your Google search engines for information. Find a legit source...
HydrolicXL 6 months ago
Psychic abilities have been searched for and researched for almost as long as humans could think. Nothing in all of that time has indicated any such thing exists. All "proofs" that show that they do have been proven to be hoaxes.
Give it the hell up.
SecondMarlowe 6 months ago
Would you PLEASE stop propagating the myth that humans only use 10% of their brains. That's an old saw from the 1970s long since debunked, and clarified. IT'S AS UNTRUE AS PSYCHIC ABILITY!
SecondMarlowe 6 months ago
well that was dumb... thought tranference.... yikes.
imuawarriors 6 months ago
thought transference= pure bullshit
Uprising771 6 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I do not have time to reply to every individual. Who are so close minded, they mix up fictionalized cartoons with inhuman abilities. I never claimed what this guy is doing is real. I stated that this is in the realm of possibly. If you think humans only and will always use 10% of their brain for every bodily function. Then you must be the one's who cannot use the other undiscovered fraction of your cerebrum. You think that I'm impressed because you can correctly spell arrogant or egotistical? Ha
HydrolicXL 6 months ago
@HydrolicXL Please explain why you think thought transference may be possible.
UncleFeedle 6 months ago 13
@UncleFeedle I'm going to hitch on to this comment to ask: How in the heck could you also think everyone only uses 10% of their brain? That's nonsense. We can use up to 35% of our brain at once, approx. And we use 100% of our brain in total for each function.
TheMightyShell 6 months ago
@UncleFeedle Well its possible, we just dont have the tools yet. The human brain runs on nutrients and electricity. Most likely electrical data is transferred within itself, if you could find a way to extract that electrical data or tap into it, then you would be able to control its data. Think of mind control, its been done (Norway)
junglemage666 5 months ago
@junglemage666 While I don't know what you mean by 'electrical data transferred within itself', we can already monitor electrical brain activity through the use of an EEG. However, if someone wanted to investigate the possibility of transferring information from one brain to another, we can design a very simple test for this which does not require the use of any such devices.
UncleFeedle 5 months ago 2
@UncleFeedle It should, theoretically, be possible though, right? The brain is simply an information processor, something like a computer. It may not work in binary, or exclusively on electricity, but it's the same kind of machine. The big problem with thought transference is wether we can build a machine that can observe brain activity in great detail, and then copy those processes in a computer or another brain.
jursle 4 months ago
@jursle I'm not sure whether comparing the brain to a computer is a fair comparison. True, the brain processes information, but it does a great many other things which no computer can even come close to. Yet in other ways, it is extremely lacking. There is still a huge amount we do not even understand about it. We can speculate on how thought transference might work, but until someone can provide some evidence that such a thing is even possible, it doesn't really deserve serious consideration.
UncleFeedle 4 months ago 3
@UncleFeedle Hey, I'm a philosopher, not a scientist. It's my job to make up nonsense about nonsense ;)
But I do understand that it would be difficult, as even the electrical processes aren't in binary for brains, and they have hormones and all that playing into it as well. I hope it'll happen someday soon though, I want my robot body already.
jursle 4 months ago
@UncleFeedle There are many cases of thought transference. A youtube search for psychic dog experiment can show you that. A Jane Goodall documentary tested a parrot that could read the mind of its owner. There are cases of twins where one will suddenly develop a pain or condition and the other will feel it. People have had psychic dreams where they've been put into the mind of another person, etc. The problem is, no human seems to be good at producing the ability at will, so tests fail.
Elhardt 3 months ago
@Elhardt "no human seems to be good at producing the ability at will" - exactly. So since apparently no-one can do it at will (miraculously exempting it from testing), how do we differentiate it from purely random chance or other natural explanation? Mere anecdotes do not constitute evidence.
UncleFeedle 3 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@Elhardt "There are cases of twins where one will suddenly develop a pain or condition and the other will feel it." Yes, that's called sympathy pains or psychosomatic pains. There's also males feeling pregnancy symptoms when their partners is pregnant (Couvade syndrome) and folie à deux, which is a shared psychosis usually between close family members.I feel other's pain too, even if I see it on TV. It's not thought transference, its psychology and the foolishness of the human mind.
EudaemonicGirl 1 week ago
@jursle The brain is alot more than a fancy cpu. The computer doesn't do anything if not given logical instructions created by a human. What a Cpu does is it simply executes the instructions after it has been translated and compiled by an interpreter. Thus, all computer logic is human logic. Besides, humans can already transfer thought through visual and acoustic signals, so to have a thought transfer device seems pointless.
eeg10 4 months ago
@eeg10 Well, the big difference is that a brain creates its own input as well. It gets input from outside, through the eyes and such, like a computer gets input from a keyboard, but a human brain is capable of creating abstractions, and think about those deeply without any input at all. Computer, at least at the moment, are incapable of doing that, or at least not meant to be doing that.
jursle 4 months ago
@jursle Well, computers can handle high-level abstractions, but it needs to be fed instructions(programs) that will actually allow it to do so. Also, computers don't have to take input from a keyboard, they can take input from any number of devices and sensors. Furthermore, you can easily write a program that takes 0 input other than a command to compile and run and return something. What computers really lack, is real logic, problem solving capabilities, and emotions.
eeg10 4 months ago
@eeg10 But what is "real logic"? Logic they made up themselves? In that case, most people don't have real logic either, it was taught to them as children.
I don't know about problem solving capabilities, but a computer did recently teach itself to interpret a strategy guide for a video game, boosting it's success rate by a lot.
Emotions I don't know, since we don't really have a definition of what an emotion is.
jursle 4 months ago
@jursle Real logic is something not defined simply by and, or, not etc, Something not represented as a logic gate and not simple booleans. The computer doesn't actually teach itself strategy, the computer was given commands that allows it to teach itself commands. However, these commands are commands that follow a strict algorithm as designated by the programmer, so it isn't free thinking. Also, computers have finite data handling, which is another minus.
eeg10 4 months ago
@eeg10 Well, the human brain's logic is also simply defined by the actions of neurons. I'm not sure if they can be defined as and/or/not, but a longer set of symbols could quite well describe human logic. In fact, in philosophical logic, all human logic can be represented by variables (X/Y/Z) and transformatives (and/or/+/-).
The big difference is that human brains weren't designed by anyone, but in practice, this doesn't matter.
Also, humans cannot store infinite information either.
jursle 4 months ago
@jursle No, but humans can represent infinite as a higher order concept whereas computers are regulated to data types ("float, array, int, double, boolean..."). Also, you said so yourself that we don't understand emotions fully so that automatically contradicts your statement that all human logic can be represented as variables and transformatives.
eeg10 4 months ago
jursle 4 months ago
@jursle Well, you're example also wasn't that good either. The computer has no concept of 'wet'. Sure you can have a sensor that detects if there's water, but if there is a tiny sprinkle of water, the computer will interpret it automatically as 'wet'. Formal human logic is not computer logic. If you were to ask a computer to take the limit as x approaches infinite of f(x), it would crash. If you asked a human to do the same, he could easily do it provided there is a limit.
eeg10 4 months ago
@eeg10 I really can't comment on that, since I have no idea what you're saying ^_^
jursle 4 months ago
@jursle You've never taken calculus? So for instance (non-calc), if I asked you to to find the sum of the infinite series 3(1/10)^n from n = 1, you will see that it approaches 1/3. But if you were to ask a computer that, it will never actually see that the value equals 1/3. Sure you can program it such that it comes very close, but it never actually computes the actual value.
eeg10 4 months ago
@jursle Also, think about that condition "If it rains". A computer has no concept of 'rain' either. If you were to create a class rain, than you need to somehow differentiate 'rain' from 'shower' or anything that exerts water. The computer has no real symbolic understanding, it won't associate 'rain' with a memory or anything. Human memory is often associated with a picture or simulation in the mind. Computer memory is composed of base 2 numbers.
eeg10 4 months ago
@eeg10 True, but human memory is also composed of electrical signals and chemistry. One could most certainly teach a computer what "rain" means, if it had a way to get that input, for instance through a camera. If it recognizes water falling in front of it, it's raining. Obviously, it's complicated, since someone might be standing over the camera with a hose, but additional requirements could be added.
My point is not that computers right now can match the brain, just that they are similar.
jursle 4 months ago
@jursle [Human memory is also composed of electrical signals and chemistry]. Well, if you are using that as ur argument, u might as well say a computer is also like a radio, because both use transistors and use chemistry -.-. Although a computer can perform like a radio, a radio can only do one task so they are completely different.
eeg10 4 months ago
@eeg10 Well, I shouldn't use the phrase 'completely', but they are very different.
eeg10 4 months ago
@jursle I didn't say humans can store infinite information. I said humans have infinite data handling capabilities.
eeg10 4 months ago
@jursle You can't ask a computer: "How is the weather today" and have the computer respond "great!". First you have to parse the input into something intelligible to a computer. Then you have to have to use a boolean such as "if (temperature > 25 C, weather != cloudy etc. ) system.out.print("great!"); else system.out.print("not good!")". And even then, you only get 2 different outputs that don't really tell how a computer 'feels', just if those conditions of the 'if' were satisfied or not.
eeg10 4 months ago
@eeg10 yes, but what do you think happens in the human brain? The question is converted to data through the ear, goes to the language center, is interpreted, the eyes give info on what kind of weather it is, combined with a database somewhere that associates certain temperatures and conditions with good, and you respond.
It's just that you don't "feel" like that is predetermined, but it most certainly is. You just can't view the source code.
jursle 4 months ago
@junglemage666 Walking on water is possible we just don't have the tools yet. The human body is buoyant, if you could find a way to negate the difference between laying in water and standing on top of water, then you would be able to walk on water. Think of hydroplanes.
That argument just doesn't really work. You can substitute walking on water with flying, or whatever.
punchdrunkatheist 4 months ago
@HydrolicXL there's no undiscovered fraction of your cerebrum, that 10% thing is a myth, so you are starting with the wrong premises.
BortolanAlexandre 6 months ago
@HydrolicXL "humans use 10% of their brain" is a MYTH.
Uprising771 6 months ago
@HydrolicXL It is a complete fallacy that human beings only use a small percent of their brains. We simply have a great deal yet to understand about the functionality of the brain and how it interacts with the rest of the body. To suggest our ignorance about the brain is a clear indication of the possibility of psychic ability is lunacy. The world has yet to see or hear of a psychic or healer who could not be debunked. These people are grifters who have always prayed on the weak-minded.
bboots100 6 months ago
@HydrolicXL Arrogant and egotistical must be words you hear a lot
iseezapie 6 months ago
@HydrolicXL we use all of our brains the 10% thing was actually a misquote by some one we arent unlocking a chest were improving on it. hey that was pretty good any ways you get what i mean were alot more smart then people give themselfs credit for but we cant levitate objects or reads some ones mind this is not in the scope of reality well not exactly maybe we will make telekineses and levitation helmets we dont have power because we dont need them, we have smarts
negasplenetic 6 months ago
@HydrolicXL
LOL! What a retard. I love when people site urban legends in their reasoning. In fact, 100% of the brain is used. The incorrect understanding by dumb people that resulted in the urban legend was scientists saying that only 10% of the brain is used AT ANY ONE TIME. Every region has been mapped out, so enough of this low IQ dribble please.
brendanmcwilliams 6 months ago
@HydrolicXL That is demonstrably wrong. That 10% figure has been thoroughly debunked - you might only use 10% at one time, but all regions of the brain are in fact used, as can be clearly observed when they perform the related functions. All types of emotion and cognition can be observed as activity in the brain, so your hypothesis fails automatically.
Obviously you know so little about neurology, that to see you try and make an assertion about the brain is fraudulent quackery.
Jotto999 6 months ago
@HydrolicXL Derren Brown does it better. It's not supernatural, it's psychological.
Furthermore, humans don't only use 10% of their brain, most of it is being used, but in an ancillary way or at different times and for different reasons. I suggest looking at a mathematical / computer science branch called Neural Networks to truly understand the functions that occur in the human brain, so you don't see it as a huge "black box" that defies explanation.
andrewxc1335 5 months ago
@HydrolicXL We use all of our brain. The 10% thing is a myth. We may use a certain percentage for thought but the other percentage is responsible for such things as movement, speech, and etc.
LambdaQuarks 5 months ago
@HydrolicXL: Also, it's worth pointing out that the old line about humans using 10% of their brain is simply false.
Only about 10% of our brain is neurons: the cells that do the thinking. The rest is glial cells: the life support system for the neurons.
kuroshashu 5 months ago
@HydrolicXL the "using 10% of our brain" myth has been disproven many many times. We in fact use ALL of our brain.
FunkyJunkDisco 4 months ago
@HydrolicXL You know what's funny? The 10% of brain thing is an urban myth.
kymykaly 4 months ago
@HydrolicXL Dude, the 10% of the brain is a really old myth...
blakscull 4 months ago
@HydrolicXL Haha, and you're a fascist. Saw your post on the Landser video. A fascist who uses 100% of his brain capacity? Dream on, you don't even use 1% of it, if you have a brain at all which i doubt.
GenocideApe 6 months ago
@HydrolicXL and for someone who claims that he uses 100% of his brain, using sentences like "...have tamed INTO the other..." makes you look even more retarded. By the way i'm not a native english speaker and even i pick up on your douchebaggery. fuck you.
GenocideApe 6 months ago
The fact that they had a plasma ball next to all of their supposed high tech equipment should be a dead give-away that they're totally full of shit.
Tsresponds 6 months ago
Damn maçonics!!!!!
Samoonspell 6 months ago
the human body would die at the use of any thing higher than about 18-20% of our brains full ability the brains wave lengths will kill you, It is also known that black mamba venom has properties of unlocking the human brain how ever you die from 2 things 1 the venom it's self and 2 the brain over loads the body.
Dl33tTrollololo1 6 months ago
@thatamazinggeek lol dude, go to a mental hospital , you need one
kingofdice66 6 months ago
I almost wish he'd found one, just to see if he could maintain his composure as well as he does introducing these loons.
IoEstasCedonta 6 months ago
You have to admit, it is understandable how people can believe this thing. It SEEMED like it was working except for that very very awkward one where he signaled immediately. If it is just changing pitch randomly like that, it is very easy to think that you see some correlation because your mind rejects when it is getting higher when he has not yet signaled and then really focuses on every moment that it rises after he has signaled. Our brain is wired to see these connections, despite being wrong
Cheespuffs45 7 months ago
OWNED
Trox118 7 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
see that eye on the background? on a pyramid? long before we had powers, the illuminati stilll know how to access them. you may not believe me it's just a theory, since we only use 10 percent of our brains, there must be a way to unlock the rest 90 percent.
juantor16 7 months ago
@juantor16 Yes, and Elvis shot JFK before emigrating to Planet X on a flying saucer flown by the aliens who built the pyramids using their psychokinesis.
UncleFeedle 7 months ago 51
@UncleFeedle Best comment I've ever seen.
Yaarrr 5 months ago
@juantor16 what is it with this bullshit about "we only use 10 percent of our brains" its a complete myth,
if we lost 20 percent not to mention 90 percent of our brain we would be dead in an instant, we use all of our brain.
TRISt20001 7 months ago
@TRISt20001 of course we would die, but the fact is true, that doesnt mean we dont use it all.
juantor16 7 months ago
@juantor16 Dude, seriously don't tell me you are one of those people.
The only way you wouldn't use 100% of your brain is if you are lobotomized, and even then you would still use 100% of whatever is left. Different areas of the brain control different functions. Everyone uses their entire brain in order to function not 10%. You don't need to be a doctor to know that.
scorpioncbr69 7 months ago
@juantor16 The 10% brain usage thing is a myth and complete bullshit. Look it up.
MrGogoZec 7 months ago
@juantor16 The idea that humans only use 10 of their brain is a perpetuated myth. Do some research to discover that it's simply not true.
Tsresponds 6 months ago
@Tsresponds Nu-uh! It's totally true! If a bullet passes through a person's skull, 90% of the time it hits useless stuff and no significant harm is done. It's the same reason that mental diseases, strokes, and brain surgery are so completely safe!
...That was sarcasm, if you couldn't tell
mellvarr 6 months ago
@juantor16 Mythbusters recently busted that 10% myth btw, turns out we use most of our brains anyway.
TheRealBanana 6 months ago
@juantor16 Not I. You may as well use just 10% of your brain, but don't put me in that category.
grandexandi 6 months ago
@juantor16 We use 100% of our brain, ask any neurologist.
theUSER101 5 months ago
@juantor16 You sir might be a schizophrenic. I strongly suggest you admit yourself into the clink.
RunfromtheHeathen 5 months ago
@juantor16 The "10% brain use" is a baseless myth. Try the Snopes article for a good overview of this persistent, but false, myth.
thobern 5 months ago 2
@juantor16 We don't use only 10% of our brain. That is lie. A fabricated myth. Ask any neurosurgeon or psychologist. They will tell you. We use functionally ALL of our brain. It isn't all designed for thought you know, parts of our brain do other tasks besides thinking and percentage of brain is required to do these tasks.
LambdaQuarks 5 months ago
@juantor16
We don't use 10% of our brain thats a myth....We use all of our brain.
Blahrg 4 months ago 65
@Blahrg Indeed. Of course not all of our brain is used at the same time but in fact way more than 10% is active even when resting and not exactly focusing on anything..
MuikuliWander 4 months ago
@Blahrg.... 76% of statistics are made up....
ogfunk187 4 months ago
@Blahrg Well, some people may only use 10% of their brain. Hell, I know people who use 0% of their brain!
syn010110 3 months ago
@Blahrg I think we can use 20%-30% of our brain at any one time though. However we do use all of our brain throughout the day
RelativelyHostile1 3 months ago
@Blahrg you misquoted it.
EdMajinLee199999 3 months ago
@Blahrg actually it holds a form of the truth.. we use about 10 to 15% of our brain for our skills, talents etc.. the other parts are used for memory, movement, instinct, emotions etc etc.. So in a way, the myth is (as always) based on something thats remotely true
BigMisterApple 2 months ago
@Blahrg i tot the saying was we only use 10% of our brains... im not sure please correct me if im wrong
880330145789 2 months ago
@880330145789 It's wrong. If we didn't use all of our brains we would be brain dead. Psychic charlatans started that rumor decades ago, and it's sunk so deep into the public psyche that no amount of debunking has yet dispelled it. It's bogus.
iruparatso 4 weeks ago 2
@juantor16 just by saying we only use 10% of our brain, i'm kind of taken that you are the only one on earth that uses only 10% of their brain.
feuchster 2 months ago
@feuchster I love when people stir up that common misconception. Makes them look like a fool for sure.
zackboomer 1 month ago
Cool! The idiotmoter effect at work!
berner 7 months ago
Your troll kiddo, stop trolling. It's not myth you illiterate obese rape child. It is proven fact we only use 7% of cerebral functions, for basic skills and muscle memory as well genesync. Stop trolling you tool..
HydrolicXL 7 months ago
@HydrolicXL You're clearly misinformed about how the human brain works, all that "humans use only 7% blah blah blah" is taken out of context and misinterpreted, please, get your facts right before talking.
Next time, think before you say something stupid, and if you can't help to be an idiot, don't go showing it off on youtube
tH3sUbL1m1nALn33d 7 months ago
@HydrolicXL Not proven
Cheespuffs45 7 months ago
@HydrolicXL
So....where are your studies proving this