The Mandela Effect Can No Longer Be Denied: Berenstein Was The Tip of The Iceberg

originally posted by: tigertatzen

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: alienDNA
I dont understand how you guys can take someones subjective memory of say the bible as proof of anything.
I dont get it.
How is that proof?
And yet all youtube videos say proof, and some people in here seem to feel the same way.
This is exactly what I warned about in my first post in this thread many pages ago.
We've allready lost some people to the rabbit hole on this one, and there probably is no coming back for these people once they get lost there.
Once a person believes something its hard to get them to come back from it.
And since there is no proof anywhere, at all, for this.. well you can hopefully see the problem here.

a reply to: hidingthistime

What is good about this video? Its a man talking about how he remembers the bible different than it is now. He is of age and is probably getting a bit senile over the years.
Where is the proof? Yet you believe it hook line and sinker like its facts.
Why?

a reply to: Trippin420

So the more logical explanation for you, rather than that you remember it wrong - is that the world changed?
Really? I want you to really think about that one.

Given that Hawkins and others warned that Cern could mess with the fabric of reality and cause black holes, is it not a possibility?

The year 2008 is related in a couple of ways. Does anyone know if Cern did anything big around that time?
I'd look into but I don't have time right now. On a quick smoke break at work.

The Large Hadron Collider was first turned on in 2008. I looked it up to be sure.

Also found something else which may be (or maybe not) connected involving around that time.

In the United Kingdom, the digital switchover for terrestrial television signals started on 17 October 2007 and was completed on 24 October 2012. Each group of transmitters within each TV region had its analogue broadcasts switched off at a certain point between those dates.

originally posted by: LoneCloudHopper2
...this is still new to many of us and we are still trying to come to terms with it, wrap our minds around what has happened. If a group of scientists head out on an expedition to try to locate evidence of Atlantis, the science community would not automatically jump on them and call them liars, fools or lunatics. Why on earth would they? The team needs time to locate potential evidence, collect it, examine it and build a case for it. This takes time, perhaps years. Likewise, it would probably take years to build a serious case for the Mandela Effect in terms of compelling evidence to convince skeptics.

Which brings me to my final point: we are not scientists. If at some point a scientist or group of scientists wants to examine the Mandela Effect they may determine if there is evidence to build a case to convince their peers, they may try. Most of us go on logic and common sense.

But they are completely different, Atlantis is a myth and although very few (if any) scientists may believe it really exists, then it could be studied scientifically, by studying maps, Plato's writing, etc.

How can scientists investigate the Mandela effect?
We have shown evidence (old VHS tapes) that it's always been 'No, I am your father'. The evidence was discarded as 'not being form our timeline' (pls note I am not talking personally about you but about the believers in general).
We have shown evidence that the oldest adverts for Froot Loops show the cereal was always called Froot Loop. The evidence was discarded as explained above.
We have shown evidence anatomy has not changed and that the xrays of a person who believed to have different anatomy, showed a normal body. Was that taken into account? Nope, people still have claimed to remember organs and ribs to be different 'in their timeline'.
We have explained how maps differ from one another, hence the confusion regarding certain countries, but the believers simply ignored those comments.
And the same happened with 'Depend', spellings of names and movies, etc.

How can science study this phenomenon? Scientists would come up with the same kind of evidence us, skepticals, have presented. But everything has been rejected due to 'We come from a different reality where things were different'.

To be honest with you I could even accept multiple universes, even though I fail to see how a 'shift' between dimensions could happen. But what changed my stance completely is when some posters made the Mandela effect into a Christian argument and stated too many times how special they are. That day I came to my own personal conclusion that many (if not most) of the Mandela believers seem to have a strong need to be connected to something greater than themselves. Hence I have said it has become a religion. And from being a very intersting phenomenom, the Mandela effect has become another tool for the religious type. Which changed my opinion of all this immediately.

But thank you Lonecloud for being so nice and honest all the time, only a couple of believers have been as open and lovely as you are. Other believers should perhaps follow your example, instead of posting constant lies about themselves and protecting those lies behind the tiresome sentence 'You are all trolls, hence I am ignoring you'.

originally posted by: alienDNA
a reply to: DJW001

Theyre suffering simply because they SWEAR they remember it correctly.
They can NOT look themselves in the mirror and calmly say "youre just remembering wrong".
It doesnt work.
You should know that, youve been in the thread as long as me - logic, reasoning, scientific evidence - nothing reaches these people.

Which means to them - for all intents and purposes - their false memories are REAL.

That means they ARE indeed, suffering.

This is a grossly unfair statement.
I would normally ignore comments like this but I just have to speak up against you here.

Please take this on board and don't think I'm piping up here just to start an unnecessary argument or get one up on you or anything like that. I'm speaking here with all due respect.

I can only really speak for myself but I'm sure this applies to everyone else who feels this is something more that a "remembering things wrong" (RTW from here on in) thing.
I am very capable of recognising when I am wrong. I'm the kind of person who has no problem admitting when I've made a mistake and will always humbly apologise when I do so. At work or in personal relationships I always take responsibility for my screw up and will not pass the buck or shift blame.

I have been SO wrong about SO many things in my life and I am completely comfortable with claiming the responsibility. I have recently realised mistakes I made earlier on in my life, where I went wrong, what I should have done instead of what I did concerning things like getting on the property ladder, career.
I'm a terrible father to my kids compared to the father I could be, a not so great partner to my wonderful missus who deserves more than I do for her.
I'm responsible for all of this. I don't blame anything or anyone else. It's my fault.
I am not infallible.

And neither is my memory. In fact I'll be the first to admit I have a pretty awful memory. I will totally forget things my missus tells me, birthdays, sometimes I have to think for a second when I'm asked my age, I get my kids names mixed up.
And I can admit that, no problem.

I remember getting Interview with the Vampire wrong way back, must have been around 98, 99.
I was with my ex at the time and I called it Interview with A Vampire, she corrected me and I was absolutely sure I was right. We had a little friendly argument which ended up with me going to get my video off the shelf to prove her wrong.
Turns out she was right and I was wrong. I was a pretty surprised cos I was sure it was A Vampire, but put it down to me just being plain wrong. Which I still think I was.

However.
South America, Australia. I can't put these down to RTW.
When I normally RTW and am set straight about them, I go "Oh yeah" and it's all good.

Example: I get my missus' birthday wrong and she said "No it's the 16th not the 19th, you bloody idiot."
And I go "Oh yeah, course it is"
Because my memory is set straight the 16th feels right because that's what it is.

With South America and Australia they still look wrong, totally out of whack.
And yes, confabulation keeps being offered up, as does Internet influence.
But logically I can't fully accept these either because everyone I have spoken to personally, face to face, people I know all remember these land masses being in different places to where they are now too. Not just that but remember them in the exact same places I do. These are people who have never heard of the Mandela Effect.
Unless I buy into other unproven theories such as collective un/conscious, shared confabulation/group hallucination, randomly remembering things wrong the same way as totally independent others and the like I can only assume something else is going on.

That is not thinking illogically, unreasonably or thinking myself as infallible.
It is not ignoring scientific evidence.
Nor is it suffering.

a reply to: Ruiner1978

Okay, good that ure not suffering from your ME experience.

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: LoneCloudHopper2
...this is still new to many of us and we are still trying to come to terms with it, wrap our minds around what has happened. If a group of scientists head out on an expedition to try to locate evidence of Atlantis, the science community would not automatically jump on them and call them liars, fools or lunatics. Why on earth would they? The team needs time to locate potential evidence, collect it, examine it and build a case for it. This takes time, perhaps years. Likewise, it would probably take years to build a serious case for the Mandela Effect in terms of compelling evidence to convince skeptics.

Which brings me to my final point: we are not scientists. If at some point a scientist or group of scientists wants to examine the Mandela Effect they may determine if there is evidence to build a case to convince their peers, they may try. Most of us go on logic and common sense.

We have explained how maps differ from one another, hence the confusion regarding certain countries, but the believers simply ignored those comments.

I didn't ignore them.
I've explained numerous times why that particular explanation was unsatisfactory to me.
My reasoning was mostly ignored. One skeptic commented saying what I said was interesting and seemed to take it on board.
I will find and copy and paste if requested.

I've noticed being selective and ignoring certain things isn't one sided here.

a reply to: Ruiner1978

South America, Australia. I can't put these down to RTW.

Once again, it is not just "remembering things wrong." It can also be remembering the wrong things accurately. Do you know why they speak Portugeuse in Brazil but not Mexico? If you look into it, you will understand why South America has always been where it is.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Ruiner1978

South America, Australia. I can't put these down to RTW.

Once again, it is not just "remembering things wrong." It can also be remembering the wrong things accurately. Do you know why they speak Portugeuse in Brazil but not Mexico? If you look into it, you will understand why South America has always been where it is.

I'm not arguing that South America is no longer where it used to be. Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming anything's moved.
My point is that the explanations offered concerning this in particular aren't logically satisfactory to me (although logical and reasonable in themselves) due to 100% of people I've spoken to about this, in person, outside of the Internet, remember the landmasses in the same place as I remember, not where they appear on maps or globes now. Not one person face to face has said that they don't look out of place.
I suppose it is possible we're all coincidentally misremembering the exact same misrememberance. Although I find that massively unlikely.
Also it's possible I influenced there recall by asking the question, but I purposely tried to keep any influence down by letting them tell me what seems out of place, not vice versa. IMO, influence is far more likely than random same misremembering, although I find both unsatisfactory.


You'll have to forgive me, I'm having trouble getting my head around the difference between "remembering things wrong" and "remembering the wrong things accurately".
Care to explain the difference and how it's more relevant than the words I used and why it invalidates what I said if that's the case?

I'm not following how your reply is relative to the point I was making.
Genuinely after your constructive input on this, not one-upmanship or wanting to be right about anything.
I simply feel, with respect of course, any explanations that have been offered, from both sides, don't cut it for reasons given.
I don't care about how something is or isn't spelt or people getting lines or not getting lines wrong in this film or that film.

I talking specifically about my family, friends and work colleagues memories not matching up with what appears to be now and and always has been in the exact same way independently.

originally posted by: incoserv

originally posted by: tinker9917

originally posted by: incoserv
Ministry of Truth? Priming of the memory hole?

HHmmm... thats a whole new thread if I'm understanding correctly what you are saying.... and quite a thread that would be.

What if George Orwell was right about this (as he has been proven to have been about many other things) and we are seeing society programmed and primed to let reality slip down the memory hole as history is slowly rewritten.

Start with small, insignificant things like there name of a popular children's book or the name of a moderately successful singer. As the masses become accustomed to allowing their collective memory to be altered, it becomes ever easier to dump bigger and bigger pieces of the collective history down the memory hole.

That's scarier than any quantum shift. And also more plausible - in some ways, at least...

I believe this is the truth of it.

I think we are being conditioned to doubt ourselves so that history can be made questionable and ultimately, "irrelevant". Rapidly changing technology makes what is "old" no longer fascinating but "obsolete". Everything that is new, young, youthful and modern is given a higher status.

Years ago I noticed that it was getting harder to find the date on some websites so I couldn't tell whether the article was recent or not. I realised that the future is having no date at all on anything but only "updates". Something is new and updated and therefore useful and relevant or else it is to be discarded.

It's frightening to imagine a world where you can't be sure what happened a few years ago. Even worse to think that people won't care.

a reply to: rottensociety

I understand what you've written. I agree.

A completely malleable, hive-mind consciousness inputted by Google AI according to someone's agenda of what's what has been on the menu for some time.

June 4, 2016

I didn't want to start a thread to ask this question, because it may be no big deal...

But I don't recall TV shows being broadcast in such low visible quality as what we see when they're re-broadcast on TV today. When ESPN shows games from the 1970's and 1980's, they look horrible. The same goes for all 70's/80's file footage shown by the news networks.

When watching these, I'm thinking, "No Way! Did we really sit around the TV and watch those fuzzy images back then?"

I'm remembering TV shows as being much clearer in the 70's and 80's. Does anyone else have this same recollection??

-cwm

The problem with this thread is that anyone trying to come up with an explanation for the Mandela Effect is making assumptions. That includes myself. The Mandela Effect has led me to start studying the multiverse theory. I had no idea what a mess physics is. No one seems to have any idea what reality is. I knew that was the case before but I had no idea how bad the problem is. I highly recommend the video below. I'm planning on retiring from this thread because I can't believe in any theory that requires an assumption. We can't even talk about any of this without making assumptions. It's a stalemate.


www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: DJW001
What is your point? If someone comes in every day spouting contra-factuals, they are clearly delusive.

Apparently you're referring to "delusional memories" (please see the definition directly below)? Delusional memory is not the same as faulty memory. That means that your insistence on the "faulty memory" theory just went out the window and you're arguing something else now. In this thread I've seen you argue that the Mandela Effect was caused by "faulty memory" or by "delusional memory." But, for some reason it always has to be one of those and never a combination. The theories you purport never involve any scientific testing to see if you're right. Your method seems to be to make a conclusion and stick it with until you have to change to another conclusion. But, it's just one conclusion at a time, it seems you can't consider more than one possibility at a time. All of your theorizing is based on unfounded assumptions.

delusional memory - where a delusional belief is based upon the recall of memory or false memory for a past experience. For example, a man recalls seeing a woman laughing at the bus stop several weeks ago and now realises that this person was laughing because the man has animals living inside him.
Delusion

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
a reply to: Profusion

You've made up a new modified definition of fate to fit your theory.

I'm not quite sure what your problem is. I thought we were here to discuss, think & create new ideas..? My theory is by no means fixed, never was - I even said at the first offering that it was loosely thrown together from some thoughts I had. Why does my theory have to be a fixed entity, and why are you claiming that I'm 'making stuff up'..? I'm speculating, and I'm perfectly happy to adjust my theory as time goes by, as new questions are asked, and new ideas come to mind. You have a serious attitude problem - you've selected me from among all the participants who hold that the ME is real, and only me, for the attacks on my character? What about me, or my theory, is so disturbing that you're trying to assassinate my character, despite us being technically on the same side of the debate? Seriously pissed off with your conduct.

One of the reasons I spent a lot of time discussing your theories is because you kept giving your "logic challenge" for several pages, don't you remember? I don't see a correlation between saying that you've made up a new definition of "fate" and trying to "assassinate [your] character"? I can't understand where you're coming from so I'll try to stay out of your way from now on.

originally posted by: alienDNA
I am open to the possibility that David Icke is correct about the moon being something more than just a moon.

There is not one shred of evidence for David Icke's "Moon Matrix Theory." Do you realize how many assumptions you have to make to consider that theory? You don't seem to mind making unfounded assumptions as long as the assumptions aren't about the possibility that some of us have shifted realities/timelines. You're just arbitrarily deciding what you'll consider based on nothing but your own subjective opinion?

a reply to: rottensociety

Im glad more and more people are now catching on to what is happening.

a reply to: Profusion

Both yes and no.
Yes that it is just my opinion, and no that I do not just arbitrarily assume any old thing just to fit my opinion.
The moon was just an idea though that fits into the nazis succeeding in building a base there.
Also I said that Icke could probably be right in the moon not being just a moon. I do not necessarily agree with it being a construct all together.

a reply to: Profusion

Apparently you're referring to "delusional memories" (please see the definition directly below)? Delusional memory is not the same as faulty memory. That means that your insistence on the "faulty memory" theory just went out the window and you're arguing something else now. In this thread I've seen you argue that the Mandela Effect was caused by "faulty memory" or by "delusional memory." But, for some reason it always has to be one of those and never a combination. The theories you purport never involve any scientific testing to see if you're right. Your method seems to be to make a conclusion and stick it with until you have to change to another conclusion. But, it's just one conclusion at a time, it seems you can't consider more than one possibility at a time. All of your theorizing is based on unfounded assumptions.

This statement actually demonstrates how the "Mandela Effect" happens. I have never claimed that all examples of the "Mandela Effect"are due to "faulty memory;" that is just a strawman that people who are trying to convince you that something supernatural is going on use. Just one post above on this very page, I point out that "it is not just remembering things wrong, it is remembering the wrong things accurately."

Nowhere do I use the phrase "delusional memory." When a member tried to argue that the nature of reality is somehow democratic, and that if someone came in to a psychologist's office a thousand days in a row claiming that specific things have changed... I pointed out that believing contra-factuals was delusive, not evidence of alternative realities, mind control, or hostile demonic forces.

Unlike the theories that can be characterized as supernatural: parallel universes, mind control machines, demonic forces, etc, my theory, that the phenomenon is based on a combination of mis-perception, inattentiveness, poor education, fallible memory and outright hoaxing, is actually falsifiable. In fact, just a few posts ago I made a few predictions of Mandela Effect "changes" that will be reported in the future, and explained why they would happen. It is this predictive ability that proves that my theory is correct, whereas the supernatural theories only produce random post hoc explanations:

The most dramatic "ME"s have obvious explanations: misrepresentation in popular culture. The heart is frequently portrayed in cartoons in a completely unrealistic way. Anyone who has taken classes in First Aid and CPR, as I have, can tell you that the heart has always been just under the sternum, and the diaphragm just under that.

As a test of my theory, I will make a prediction: at some point, someone will claim that the Panama Canal has "changed." Instead of going East to West, connecting the Atlantic Ocean with the Pacific Ocean, it now runs North-South. It has always run North-South, due to local geography, although our habit of thinking of the Atlantic being in the east and the Pacific in the west makes us assume that the canal runs that way.

Another prediction: someone will claim that Japanese Americans were interred in Alcatraz during the Second World War. In fact, they were interred on Angel Island, another island in San Francisco Bay.

Speaking of San Francisco, someone is bound to remember that the Golden Gate Bridge was destroyed in the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989. It was the Bay Bridge that was damaged. They may even claim that they remember seeing a video of it.

It was the Tacoma Narrows bridge.

ETA: Here are some more predictive "Mandela" events. Muhammed Ali 1) has had the spelling of his first name changed and 2) he has already been dead for over a year. The first prediction is based on the number of variations in the transliteration of Arabic names. The second prediction will generate a third prediction:

When a celebrity nears the end of their life, they tend to withdraw from public exposure. They are no longer as sharp, witty or charming, they are no longer so pretty or handsome, and they are often in ill health. Naturally, they prefer to be remembered "in their prime," not as an old man or woman in ill health. Often, when the paparazzi snap their photographs, these pictures are printed in the tabloids with shocking headlines like: "So-and-so's struggle with cancer" or "Such-and-such's final days," creating the impression that these celebrities are on the verge of death. If there are no further appearance for a few months, it is reasonable that they have passed away. This is what happened with Vincent Price:



How's that for a "Mandela Effect?"

I predict that when Sir Sean Connery passes away-- and I hope he has many years ahead of him-- everyone will "remember" that he died of throat cancer a couple of years ago.

Now, I challenge everyone else on this thread to use their theories to make a falsifiable, ie, testable, prediction.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

some will claim the mandela effect is really called mandala effect. and mandela wasnt called mandela but he was always called mandala and a mandala was always a mandela ... etc.

ME is not JUST about the false memory - its about the intense feeling of discomfort that accompanies the "change".
Strikes you at your very core.

thats why so many people are scared, and suffer from it.

originally posted by: Ruiner1978
I didn't ignore them.
I've explained numerous times why that particular explanation was unsatisfactory to me.
My reasoning was mostly ignored. One skeptic commented saying what I said was interesting and seemed to take it on board.
I will find and copy and paste if requested.

Please do copy and paste here so I can read it as I can't remember what it is you said.

a reply to: Agartha

Depictions of Australia in isolation:




--> Inability to locate the island relative to Asia

I can easily and reasonably dismiss this suggestion as I've never seen that picture before. My memories of where I remember Australia in relation to Asia come from being fascinated with my older brother's globe of the earth when I was younger.
It's the same reason I dismiss the "globe to flat map projection" explanation.
If you then suggest that I am not remembering the position properly in the exact same way everyone I have spoken to about it mis-remembers too, coincidentally, because that's the most logical and reasonable explanation, in your mind, I will dismiss that too, because that many people randomly all mis-remembering the exact same specifics is far from logical.

Interesting. Have you tried looking at Australia's current position on a globe, instead of a map?

Yes and Australia is much closer to Asia (also south America far too Eastward) whether on flat map, globe or Google earth than what myself, family and friends remember.
I also dismiss "group confabulation" for the same reason I find the idea of group hallucinations an unreasonable explanation for multiple sightings of something strange.

a reply to: Ruiner1978

Have you considered that perhaps the globe was not correct? I bought globes for my children when they were young, and countries/ continents were the wrong shape, size and in incorrect locations. They were made in a fun but simple format just to make it interesting to kids.