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

a reply to: GoShredAK

Oh dear. This one has been done to death. The extended passage mentions a number of animals living peacefully together:



This is what you remember from Sunday School, right?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: GoShredAK

Oh dear. This one has been done to death. The extended passage mentions a number of animals living peacefully together:

This is what you remember from Sunday School, right?

It is. Where is the wolf? Since the first line of the passage is the wolf dwells with the lamb. It doesn't mention a lion until later Shouldn't that first line be the lion and the lamb?

Why are there no pictures of a wolf with the lamb then?

a reply to: GoShredAK

You've obviously never read the bible. You just own a copy of it.

a reply to: raymundoko
Well that's just not true.


I don't read it often, and I definitely don't study it or anything, I'm not even Christian.

I have read all of Mathew and all of revelation though. Also large portions of other books.

So there....and really that has nothing to do with the changes. This is not coming from me, I am just reporting it.

I am not convinced.

Stuff? That doesn't seem weird to you guys?
Many people feel "stuff" does not belong but apparently it has been this way in every KJV this entire time...

Seems odd....

This seems to go against his teachings...take from the have not's and give to the haves?

a reply to: GoShredAK

That's exactly what he teaches. That's one of his famous parables. Do you even understand what he is referring to? The parable is in reference to spiritual riches, and sharing those riches. That's why most Christians share their faith so often. To have the knowledge and not share it is like the one who hid his talent and didn't make anything off it, and just gave the single talent back to the master. He didn't appreciate what he had been given.

You should just stop it with the bible. You are thoroughly confused on the message it sends.

a reply to: GoShredAK

Just read this: Source

People have been misquoting that verse for DECADES.

a reply to: GoShredAK

How does it seem odd? Stuff was a common word when the King James Version was translated and printed. It is used in context perfectly. Who cares about the stuff in your house (the furnishings which fill it) when your life is in danger. it's just stuff.

a reply to: raymundoko


In fact, I am through with the bible.....that was just a small phase, I've got it outta my system..... I am not a full blown ME person...

You and others have succeeded, I have no way to prove whether I'm right or wrong here. Until something very obvious MEs, I'm kind of disinterested.

Try changing the minds of the people who are still loosing their minds

a reply to: GoShredAK

The only way those people can get help is to look in the mirror and repeat this:

"My memory is not perfect. It can trick me. Even when I think I am right, I can be wrong. I should never trust my memory over physical evidence, that would make me a CRAZY person."

a reply to: raymundoko
Or make you Hillary Clinton.

Lately the theory world became a scam itself. Where the Muppets went... Who is going go repair of that brain damage, people? Few years more and they will start to claim that the Earth is flat!

a reply to: alienDNA

That could be the case except for multiple people sharing the same memory. For instance, I had recently pointed one of the biblical discrepancies to my mom, the lambs shall lay down with the lion.

Then she found another one on her own. Debtors versus trespassers in the lord's prayer.

We both distinctly remember me asking her about it about 25 years ago because in our church, we had always repeated it as debts, debtors, yet in our KJV bibles that we owned, it showed trespasses, trespassers.

When I was 15, I was reading the bible beginning to end and when I came across it, I had asked her why in our church we read it as debts debtors when the bible says trespasses, trespassers.

we BOTH distinctly have this memory of interacting with each other in regards to this.

Now, I'm all for believing that implanted memories can be an explanation, but instances of this type make that exponentially more difficult to accept.

Jaden

a reply to: noonebutme

no during that time frame, I would get off of work and watch ONE of the three films when I got home, every night, or close to it. I would occasionally not, but most nights I would.

Jaden

a reply to: DJW001

Except that those things CANNOT explain the phenomena easily...It just more easily allows you to dismiss it.LOL

Jaden

a reply to: raymundoko
Please produce ANY of this source material...

This has been discussed on the reddit mandela thread... If these mass incorrect memories were caused by correct memories of erroneous physical objects. I.e., maps that are simply incorrect, those maps should still exist and would be physical evidence that support your claim that it was bad learning.

However, if it is some other explanation, i.e. altered memory, altered reality, then there would be no physical evidence. Your theory is provably incorrect, where as the other theories are inherently unprovably incorrect.

Your argument is then, since the theory cannot be proven incorrect, it is a less valid theory, but that flies in the face of logic. A theory that is improvably correct, is just that improvably correct. Where as a theory that SHOULD have evidence but doesn't, is demonstrably evidentially false.

Jaden

www.technologyreview.com...

instein’s phrase “spooky action at a distance” has become synonymous with one of the most famous episodes in the history of physics—his battle with Bohr in the 1930s over the completeness of quantum mechanics.

Einstein’s weapons in this battle were thought experiments that he designed to highlight what he believed were the inadequacies of the new theory. The most famous of these is the EPR paradox, announced in 1935 and named after its inventors Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen.

It involves a pair of particles linked by the strange quantum property of entanglement (a word coined much later). Entanglement occurs when two particles are so deeply linked that they share the same existence. In the language of quantum mechanics, they are described by the same mathematical relation known as a wavefunction.

Entanglement arises naturally when two particles are created at the same point and instant in space, for example. Entangled particles can become widely separated in space. But even so, the mathematics implies that a measurement on one immediately influences the other, regardless of the distance between them.

Einstein and co pointed out that according to special relativity, this was impossible and therefore, quantum mechanics must be wrong, or at least incomplete. Einstein famously called it spooky action at a distance. The EPR paradox stumped Bohr and was not resolved until 1964, long after Einstein’s death.

CERN physicist John Bell resolved it by thinking of entanglement as an an entirely new kind of phenomenon, which he termed “nonlocal.” The basic idea here is to think about the transfer of information. Entanglement allows one particle to instantaneously influence another but not in a way that allows classical information to travel faster than light. This resolved the paradox with special relativity but left much of the mystery intact.

These days, the curious nature of entanglement is the subject of intense focus in labs around the world. But that doesn’t tell the full story, says Hrvoje Nikoli at the Rudjer Boskovic Institute in Croatia. Today, he reveals that although history first records this paradox in 1935, Einstein unknowingly stumbled across it much earlier, in 1930. At this time, he was working on another paradox, which he presented at the 6th Solvay Conference in Brussels in 1930.

This problem focused on the Heisenberg uncertainty relation between energy and time, which states that you cannot measure both with high accuracy. To challenge this, Einstein came up with the following thought experiment. Imagine a box that can be opened and closed quickly and which contains an ensemble of photons. When open, the box emits a single photon. The time of emission can be measured with arbitrary precision–it’s just the length of time for which the box was open.

According to quantum mechanics, this limits the resolution with which you can measure the photon’s energy. But Einstein pointed out that this too can be measured with arbitrary precision, not by measuring the photon but by measuring the change of energy of the box when the photon is emitted, which must be equal to the energy of the photon. Therefore, quantum mechanics is inconsistent, he said. Einstein’s great rival, Bohr, puzzled long and hard over this but eventually came up with the following argument.

He said that Einstein’s own theory of general relativity provided the answer. Since the measurement of time takes place in a gravitational field, the lapse in time during which the box is open must also depend on the box’s position. The uncertainty in position is an additional factor that Einstein had not taken into account, and this, according to Bohr, resolved the paradox. Einstein was sent packing.

Of course, this is not a very satisfactory answer to the modern eye. It implies, for one thing, that quantum mechanics requires general relativity to be consistent, an idea that modern physicists would roundly reject. Nikoli says this problem has never been satisfactorily analyzed from a modern perspective. Until now.

He says the proper resolution is to think of the total energy of the system, which is the energy of the box and the energy of the photon. The total energy is constant and governed by a single mathematical entity, even after the photon is emitted. So the box and the photon must be entangled.

This immediately raises the problem that Einstein later hit on in the EPR paradox. A measurement on the box immediately influences the photon and vice versa–spooky action at a distance. For this reason, the photon paradox is equivalent to the EPR paradox, says Nikoli. Had Einstein noticed it, he could have stopped Bohr in his tracks.

That’s an interesting historical footnote. Bohr’s triumph over Einstein on this occasion is widely thought to have been his greatest. But now it’s easy to see that things could have been significantly different if Einstein had reformulated his argument in terms of entanglement. Thus is history forged!

Quantum entanglement, spooky action at a distance, superposition, parallel universes.........mandela effect.

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: DJW001

Except that those things CANNOT explain the phenomena easily...It just more easily allows you to dismiss it.LOL

Jaden

On the contrary, I am able to predict things based on my theory; no other theory has tried to do so.

a reply to: alienDNA

you're making the assumption that this is and CAN ONLY be a psy op...lol

Jaden