A study done on the phenomena called Mandela effect

originally posted by: Op3nM1nd3d
a reply to: AndyMayhew

The problem is that our memories are not that falliable. But it is not entirely infalliable.

Exactly, the way some people talk about it, one would think that our memories are completely falliable

So when we do get it wrong, we assume it must be for some reason other than memory falliabilty

This study shows just why the "Mandela Effect" exists!

It works both ways, I see you have figured that out. Only problem is that here we are talking about mass synchronous memory failure. Is that even possible? What are the odds? How about, in contrast, the odds that 95% of people remember something correctly?

Also, usualy when one`s memory fails, this person does not remember anything at all or is not one bit confident about the answer. I do, however, understand that there are people out there who 'know' everything at any single moment and are willing to bet their lives on it, as well as people who 'know' because somebody else told them...but I was not talking about such people.


a reply to: sputniksteve

Thanks for joining and for your support. Yeah, one can figure out very quickly how things function on here when talking about such subjects. I also agree with you and understand why people rather keep their mouth shut.

Regarding topic, I agree and have made a thread a while ago about us living in a simulation. When you are long enough in programming business, you are able to understand why it is not only possible but more like plausible. I think we, as a society, will talk more and more about this theory in the near future. It would also explain ME quite well actually.

Oh and don`t worry about hijacking my thread. I`m only in for an open discussion, nothing else

Spot on dude. I personally like Simulation Theory just partly because it just makes all the little unknown phenomenon fit into place snugly. I also think that the more the hypothesis grows in popularity and probability the more ME will be an acceptable and non fringe topic.

I am positive we are just way ahead of the curve.

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
a reply to: Op3nM1nd3d
Also study narcissism because people who refuse to understand the reasons and refuse the fact they are fallible display narcissistic behavior.

No one has refused the fact they are fallible.
Just because someone disagrees with the blanket explanation of faulty memory doesn't mean they are making a statement that their memory is infallible. That is a misguided conclusion on your part.

a reply to: Op3nM1nd3d

You will never ever ever be able to convince people who don't have these memories that this is an actual phenomena. It's like trying to explain to someone who is colour blind what red looks like. Except we're colour blind. The current reality favours them.


I've had an idea of a sort of study that will at least cement this as an actual phenomena that deserves some sort of serious discussion. Trivia masters!


Let's face it, just about every instance of the Mandela effect is totally trivial in nature. The exception is the JFK assassination video. If you really want to blow your mind (Ha!!!) do a search into where exactly his head wound was, especially after the new and improved video. That famous picture of the JFK autopsy doesn't make sense anymore. Check the wound in relation to his ear.


So what we need is a wide range of trivia masters rattling off the old memories and the new and lead it with their previous success rate.


It still won't matter because certain folks will just say their memories are crap, but it's a start.

That "Interview With A/The Vampire" switcheroo is very easily explained.

The 'A Vampire' proponents are relying on videotaped audio of someone reading the name out.

What's happening in that audio is that the -"th" sound at the end of the word "with" is being slurred into the following word "the".

Both sounds are thetas ("th" sound) and since they are smooth sounds they run into each other almost naturally. Try it yourself.

So "With the" becomes "withh-uh", which sounds quite like "with a".

But it's not. The novel was called "with the", and the film was called "with the".

a reply to: Op3nM1nd3d

This "study" is preposterous. It lacks adequate controls and is not falsifiable. Here is what a falsifiable theory of the "Mandela Effect" looks like:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: TheAiIsLying

Yeah, it has crossed my mind already but none are willing to risk their credibility by making such a research and those who are, are not 'qulaified' so to speak. We would need some major change that will won`t be so easily ignored. JFK is certainly one but it is a sensitive topic to dig in even without the ME.

a reply to: audubon

I understand what you are saying, but listen to it again. It`s an A not thA.

a reply to: DJW001

It is not perfect, I`ve already said that. But what you are proposing proves nothing either. It just assumes that our memories or perception has to be falliable based on the same set of questions which makes it a study. It makes sense, of course, since the answer from your memory is different from what is written, but it doesn`t prove anything.

I have said that already in my previous posts. I understand the skepticism here but our memories are not that falliable. If it were, then we would remember everything differently. The fact that 95% of people can remember something correctly as it was and has always been shows that our memories work just fine.

a reply to: Op3nM1nd3d

I understand what you are saying, but listen to it again. It`s an A not thA.

It really, really isn't 'A'. But we'll have to agree to differ. To me this a very simple case of the spoken word having an ambiguity that the written word does not.

a reply to: Op3nM1nd3d

I understand the skepticism here but our memories are not that falliable.

If you read my link, you would know that it is not just memory.

a reply to: DJW001

If you read my reply you would see that I mentioned perception as well. I have read your thread back when it was posted and I do remember what it says

As for over-generalization, um no I disagree. How do you generalize something that you`ve seen over and over again? Surely someone would have noticed your erroneous and remind you about it, before the mass of people suddenly experience the same discrepancy, no?

a reply to: audubon

I have just double checked it in audacity and he clearly says A. You could be right about ambiguity though but I`m not sure if that was the case in this interview.

originally posted by: sputniksteve

It is my opinion that the people who have not experienced it first hand will always refuse to give it any kind of serious thought, or even usually be polite enough to just excuse themselves.

I agree, as someone who has experienced it first hand I have it given it a lot of serious thought.

In every case what is remembered is easier to process. And in every case what is remembered incorrectly is superfluous information.

Tom Cruise remembering Interview with A vampire, and James Earl Jones remembering "Luke" doesn't prove anything except their brains work the same as everyone else.

When people all remember Interview with a werewolf there may be something to it.
Until then we just have to wait for the narrative to be built around the Mandela Effect so the religion can start.

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

It doesn`t does it? However, at least to me, it raises suspicion. After all they were there filming it and have answered thousands of questions on the subject. So how come they misremember it and no one corrected them in the very beginning.

Yeah, a major change that no one will be able to ignore is needed before this can go any further. But you know what they say, the devil is always in the details. I wonder why

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

It is my opinion that the people who have not experienced it first hand will always refuse to give it any kind of serious thought, or even usually be polite enough to just excuse themselves.

I've experienced two 'Mandela Effect' incidents that stick in my mind, mainly because I know I was not the only one who experienced them at the time.

The first is that after the original release of "The Empire Strikes Back", it emerged that the third film in the trilogy would be called 'Revenge of the Jedi'. Star Wars being a hugely popular topic of conversation, this was the default assumption for years among everyone I knew, and I would swear on a stack of Bibles that this was the name used in the media... and then of course, the film came out and it was called something slightly different. For many years, I had to correct myself when going to say the name of the film as the version I learned first.

I've no idea what caused this. Was "Revenge" a working name, later changed by George Lucas? (It's curious to me that a later SW film was called 'Revenge of the Sith', but that could just be a coincidence).

The other instance is still a topic of controversy on a national scale in Britain. The biggest crisp manufacturer ('Potato chips' for US readers) is called Walkers. Two of their flavours are 'salt and vinegar' and 'cheese and onion'. The former comes in a green packet and the latter in a blue one.

Ho w e v e r ... the overwhelming majority of Britons think the colour/flavour pairs used to be the other way round. This still causes arguments in pubs up and down the land, and it is a common mistake to accidentally buy cheese and onion when you wanted salt and vinegar, due to the colour-association, and then have a weird surprise when you start eating them.

This one is so widespread and causes so much perplexity that it is actually addressed in the company's FAQ (see the 'Brands and Flavours' section) where they assert that the colour/flavour pairs have never been switched and have always been the way they are now.

What causes all these? I have no idea. But I do know that people believe many daft things without checking, and sometimes these misconceptions are widespread. It's another tile in the mosaic of oddities we call life.

originally posted by: Op3nM1nd3d
a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

So how come they misremember it and no one corrected them in the very beginning.

Because it's not that big of a difference to really notice. Which is why it only seems to apply to superfluous info.

If you believe the Mandela Effect is real then let's look into some real questions.
Why doesn't Mr Berenstain remember it being Berenstein, and why don't South Africans remember Mandela dying in jail?

When the information isn't superfluous it isn't remembered incorrectly.

a reply to: audubon

This may be of assistance on the Jedi side of matters...
R evenge of the Jedi

As for the crisps, as far as I can remember [pun intended] Cheese & Onion was always green and Salt & Vinegar was always blue with Walkers crisps. Golden Wonder crisps, however, are the opposite way around...
Crisp Packet Fiasco

Hope this helps.

I put it all down to Mandolia.

By looking at the patterns I found a new ME, Dominoes Pizza is actually Domino's Pizza.
I still remember it incorrectly when I picture the box, however what I remember makes more sense. I'm not sure if anyone else thinks it's Dominoes also however that's something I found using my theory.

And that weak bit of evidence is far more than I've seen any other theory produce.

But people don't want answers, they want to be told they are special. With people meeting to discuss how special they are the only real question for those believing in ME's is when they can accept donations and not pay tax.

originally posted by: audubon

The first is that after the original release of "The Empire Strikes Back", it emerged that the third film in the trilogy would be called 'Revenge of the Jedi'. Star Wars being a hugely popular topic of conversation, this was the default assumption for years among everyone I knew, and I would swear on a stack of Bibles that this was the name used in the media... and then of course, the film came out and it was called something slightly different. For many years, I had to correct myself when going to say the name of the film as the version I learned first.

Solved the Star Wars one for you. I won't speculate as to why a bunch of drunks are confused about the color of the bags their potato chips come in.

The original teaser trailer for the film carried the name Revenge of the Jedi.[29] In December 1982, Lucas decided that "Revenge" was not appropriate as Jedi should not seek revenge and returned to his original title. By that time thousands of "Revenge" teaser posters (with artwork by Drew Struzan) had been printed and distributed. Lucasfilm stopped the shipping of the posters and sold the remaining stock of 6,800 posters to Star Wars fan club members for $9.50.

Wikipedia.

a reply to: DelMarvel

Ha! Brilliant. Thanks so much. As I say, it bothered me, but not enough that I actually made any effort to check. So yet another mystery bites the dust.

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar

originally posted by: sputniksteve

It is my opinion that the people who have not experienced it first hand will always refuse to give it any kind of serious thought, or even usually be polite enough to just excuse themselves.

I agree, as someone who has experienced it first hand I have it given it a lot of serious thought.

In every case what is remembered is easier to process. And in every case what is remembered incorrectly is superfluous information.

Tom Cruise remembering Interview with A vampire, and James Earl Jones remembering "Luke" doesn't prove anything except their brains work the same as everyone else.

When people all remember Interview with a werewolf there may be something to it.
Until then we just have to wait for the narrative to be built around the Mandela Effect so the religion can start.

You and I have had a pretty full discussion. I know your stance, what confuses me is your desire to always really drive the point home. It's not like your perspective is unique, you share it with most people. I am a lot less concerned with what other people remember, as I am with what I remember. I can't verify other peoples memories, but I can more or less be certain about mine.

I am sorry you can't, but I think it is unfair for you to assume that everyone else has a memory similar to yours, or that we can't be confident in ourselves. I find the entire phenomenon fascinating, and see it for more than just memories about Bears and Vampires. Just because you are limiting your scope of vision about what is possible in reality does not mean the the scope of vision of whats possible in reality is limited.

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

Because it's not that big of a difference to really notice. Which is why it only seems to apply to superfluous info.

Hmm, don`t know about that but when you are trying to promote your brand you don`t make mistakes intentionally.

When the information isn't superfluous it isn't remembered incorrectly.

That`s fun. How about superfluous info not being remembered at all? Does it always have to be incorrectly? I know I know some people just 'know' everything at any given moment.

Regarding Berenstein, how about Bernstein. It`s actually more common surname to either erein or erain. Who knows if he does or does not remember how it was spelled. Unfortunately none of them can tell us now.

As for Mandela, I`m not sure myself about him dying in prison, so cannot comment. Why people in South Africa can`t remember him dying in prison? Who said they aren`t? It would make you look stupid though, if you said that a president of your country died before he became a president. So it`s natural that people either comply or keep their mouth shut, wouldn`t you?