If Darwin was correct

[Xin Yu]

If Darwin's evolution theory was correct, then we should have already used the full potential of our brains and bodies.

However there are theories saying that we only used 10% of our brains. Examples of people releasing brain and body power under emergency were not rare.

One of the two theories must be wrong.

I think darwin was wrong and we were created, what do you think?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think you really don't have a proper concept of evolution. I'll let one of the scientists explain it, but evolution doesn't mean we mutate with every generation. In fact, our species is quite young on this planet comparitively

[Admiral]

I do not understand how one can say that Darwin would believe that we've fully evolved at this point. I assume (being an egotist) that it is you that is wrong about Darwin, and not I. But, like Imran, I await the judgement of one more knowledgable than I.

[Xin Yu]

Perhaps you did not get my question. I mean, if we only evolute in responding to environment, then we should not have such a huge brain with 90% of it almost never used.

[techumseh]

Re: If Darwin was correct

Originally posted by Xin Yu
If Darwin's evolution theory was correct, then we should have already used the full potential of our brains and bodies.

Why?

However there are theories saying that we only used 10% of our brains. Examples of people releasing brain and body power under emergency were not rare.

Aside from adrenaline, what are the examples? And what is the basis for the 10% theories?

One of the two theories must be wrong.

Your interpretation of the theory of evolution is wrong, as well as the 10% theory, which is entirely wrong.

I think darwin was wrong and we were created, what do you think?

I think YOU are wrong.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Xin Yu
Perhaps you did not get my question. I mean, if we only evolute in responding to environment, then we should not have such a huge brain with 90% of it almost never used.

I'll take a stab and say that Darwin might suppose that the humans with the generally unused capacity that could be brought into use in an emergency stood a better chance of surviving the many threats and emergencies and therefore survived to procreate more often.

[Berzerker]

[notyoueither]

You're also supposing that science understands 90% of brain function. I'm not sure that's a safe bet.

[KrazyHorse]

Re: If Darwin was correct

Originally posted by Xin Yu
However there are theories saying that we only used 10% of our brains

Which theories? In which peer-reviewed journals?

[Berzerker]

if we only evolute in responding to environment, then we should not have such a huge brain with 90% of it almost never used.

Hmm...if we assume that number is inaccurate but still reflects a truth - that a large part of our brains aren't really being used (yes, a big assumption) - what would explain it? You can lose an appendix without much problem which suggests it's function is becoming more obsolete due to better prepared food, so does that mean our unsued brain matter is becoming obsolete? Brain matter we needed for better senses etc when we lacked the intelligence to avoid danger? The brain grew, we got smarter, and part of the brain was not as important, under used so to speak. Use it or lose it..

[DRoseDARs]

I'll take a stab at this as well Xin Yu, but I'm not a scientist either:
First of all, you're misinterpreting the 10% theory. It isn't "we only use 10% of our brains" it is "at any given time, about 10% of the brain's total capacity is used by the average person." It isn't that there's 90% of the brain that simply goes unused, it's that at any given moment 10% is active and that 10% shifts around throughout the brain as needed. There are probably lots of papers that refute the 10% amount, some stating higher, some stating lower, but now you should understand what is meant regardless of the number. Second of all, like Imran said, we're still a relatively young species. Evolution hasn't forced us to utilize a greater amount of our mental capacity. When Modern Humans first appeared, we probably used a little less then we now do, but not by much. Third of all, Evolution isn't an All-or-Nothing process. As I said in my second point, we simply haven't needed to have more active brains.

[KrazyHorse]

This is why I hate popular science...

This and the dozens of emails I get a month explaining "photon hypothesis disproven" and "a new view of gravitation" from hotmail accounts...

[Ted Striker]

Whoah!!!!!!!!!!!!

I haven't seen Xin Yu since 1998!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Urban Ranger]

Re: If Darwin was correct

Originally posted by Xin Yu
However there are theories saying that we only used 10% of our brains.

This is incorrect. MRI scans show that we use every part of our brain - just not all at once. Each part has specific functions and they will only become active at those times.

Edit: something like DRose said.

[notyoueither]

Except they haven't identified all of those functions, and they are baffled that male Alzheimers patients have massive areas affected, while women with small areas affected can be debilitated as much or more.