Mandela Effect - Brainstorm Green Needle Laurel Yanni - Pacifiers, Practice And Metaphysical Aches

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Nope, it's a science fact. One filter, one way.

It's in the OP, or you can look it up yourself.

Either way, it stays a fact.

originally posted by: Pearj
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Nope, it's a science fact. One filter, one way.

It's in the OP, or you can look it up yourself.

Either way, it stays a fact.

So for the spinning dancer video I posted, you can't make your brain perceive the dancer spin the other direction just by "willing it" to do so?

I suppose you can argue that "willing my brain" to see the dancer spin the other direction is equal to "looking at it through another filter" (so to speak), but that just seems to show that these so-called filters are so incredibly complex, and the mechanisms behind perception are so equally complex, that the end result still remains that our brains can perceive the same input different ways on different occasions without us even consciously realizing that the brain is perceiving that input differently each time.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Nope.

Again...

Look it up if you don't believe me.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Pearj
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Nope, it's a science fact. One filter, one way.

It's in the OP, or you can look it up yourself.

Either way, it stays a fact.

So for the spinning dancer video I posted, you can't make your brain perceive the dancer spin the other direction just by "willing it" to do so?

I suppose you can argue that "willing my brain" to see the dancer spin the other direction is equal to "looking at it through another filter" (so to speak), but that just seems to show that these so-called filters are so incredibly complex, and the mechanisms behind perception are so equally complex, that the end result still remains that our brains can perceive the same input different ways on different occasions without us even consciously realizing that the brain is perceiving that input differently each time.

I wouldn't waste my time arguing with Pearj. He will never admit that he could be wrong about anything and as you can see, it doesn't have to be even ME-related. He just doesn't have any flaws like that

There's no use explaining or presenting facts (see for example Airliner Engines thread).

It also seems pretty clear that he has found a meaning to his adult life with this whole Mandela Effect thing and he has started to act more and more like a mentor - or even a messiah - for the ME people, so we are far beyond the point where he would admit that there is a possibility that he could be wrong. Well, to each his own

Subjective reality. All the lazy minded dull spirited pseudo hippies and spiritual posers embrace it "everyone has their own truth"

Generation Blue Ribbons is upon us. Everyone's a winner! That hamburger meat that turns to slime when the package is open, that imploded formaldehyde watermelon? There's nothing wrong with them its just not your preference!

a reply to: TISTBOTE

Each thread presents facts - facts aren't disputed.

Would you like to find an ME thread where an Effected person disputes facts?

...didn't think so.


It's ok to misunderstand the Mandela Effect - assuming I don't understand is on you.. Maybe that's an actual flaw - a flaw you have - to assume so much, then base decisions on it.


Go check out the Airliner thread - you'll see exactly what I mean.


...and we can go on and on - same things, different day. You'll either get bored telling people how they feel, like a few of the others have - or you'll find a more active 'debate partner'.

It's like trying to explain a complicated subject to a teenager that already knows it all. You're not going to hear me, so when you speak you're treated as such.


Understand the concept or not; ME is not going away - though your participation might.

a reply to: Prene

You're simply wrong. More assuming - more misguided statements.


The Mandela Effect isn't going away folks...


That's reality.

originally posted by: Prene
Subjective reality. All the lazy minded dull spirited pseudo hippies and spiritual posers embrace it "everyone has their own truth"...

I will say that, in a way, everyone does have their own truth. What I mean is that every person's brain perceives things slightly differently...and your own brain might not even perceive the same situation the same way twice.

However, that is a result of how our brains work, not the result of alternate realities or alternate timelines. Memory and perception is a really weird thing, and is affected by other experiences....

...That is to say, an experience I had 5 years ago may affect the recall of a memory from, say 10 years ago. Th recall of that 10 year old memory 10 years ago might be different than the recall of that 10-year old memory today, due to all of the other experiences I gave had since then.

The same goes for perception of a given event. I may perceive the same input from the same event twice -- once five year ago and once today. However, since my brain has had five additional years of experience between then and now, how my brain perceives that input will be different now compared to then.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

In reflection, I traced my train of thought back to this thread.

Not sure, however for me the seeing the dancer makes me pause and think.

I confess that it's often challenging trying to bring together and/or split the difference between 2 halfs. I sometimes catch myself saying "What's right for me, isn't the same as what's right for you." I have a challenging time with overthinking the basics, so I feel like sharing more.

I came back here, and watched the videos you posted once again.

Like the topic of the op, I get the impression the data is the same, however the interpretation is in the eyes of the beholder. I listened to Pearj's op, and it was consistently "green needle". Puzzled, I tried of different headphones and other kinds of speakers inside my house.

I can be more deaf then I like to admit, though the consistency of what I heard encourages me to explore deeper. Interestingly, I noticed when I went outside I heard, "brainstorm".

I chalked that up to some of the hearing damage I have experienced. I work in a noisy environment. No matter, I checked out your post some more afterwards.

Once again, I watched the video of the spinning ballerina. I find it encouraging to see how she could switch directions, or look still depending on what side of someone's brain was doing the looking. In my quest to develope better balance and flexibility, this reminder helps me to practice focusing on the unity of all things.

Peace

Application: Bright/Broad Light pronounced one word. As a name for dual slit wave particle phenom.

Most dont understand the language less they here it. its harder to pick up from text.

God/t the holy spirit?

They shall speak in newtons as a sign of belief.

Shine/sign/sound bright/bite like a diamond.

Understand the Gizmo?

im a quantum/quotem rocket/warkid scientist/soundtest dealing with quantum flux words. these apply to every language. I am the inventor. Easy one that everyone gets is fish and chips/fashion tips.

Where is PearJ?

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

I am so unbelievably triggered by the fact that the roman numerals are now IIII instead of IV as I remember it. wtF?

What are you talking about? Is this one of those 'made you look'-attempts? It's definitely IV and has never been IIII.

Also, that's just ONE numeral, for the number four (4). No need to use a plural when talking abotu a singular. Also, 'WTF' is an acronym, so you should capitalize all letters, not just the last one. Do you somehow want to elevate the F-word above the others or what?

When it comes to the whole 'Yanni'-thing, you can manipulate the audio until you hear the other clearer, then manipulate it to hear the first one better. I forgot if it was a pitch thing or what, but I managed to hear both by doing this manipulation, and after the manipulation, my ears were sort of 'trained' to hear both. It's a clever thing, but not particularly impressive, once you know how they did it.

What does this have to do with Mandela Effect anyway?

I've been told I'm a "strong empath", an old soul

AH.

Say no more.

Please, say no more - any time someone pats themselves in the back like that, but yet tries to avoid responsibility of doing so (a double crime), it's over. Thanks for playing, I guess.

Did you ever notice how the self-proclaimed empaths have the least empathy towards fellow man? The label is more important than reality for this type of egos..

Old soul? Compared to whom, exactly? How does this change anything, what does this mean in practical reality? That you can play the violin?

originally posted by: Shoujikina
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

I am so unbelievably triggered by the fact that the roman numerals are now IIII instead of IV as I remember it. wtF?

What are you talking about? Is this one of those 'made you look'-attempts? It's definitely IV and has never been IIII.

This person may be talking about a watch or clock. Most watches and clocks that use roman numerals use IIII instead of IV (with some exceptions, such as Big Ben).

This has been true for several 100 years, and has been well documented (i.e., it is not a new "surprise" to the world that clocks use IIII for 4). The exact reason for this are lost to time (no pun intended), but there are theories:

Why Do Clocks and Watches Use the Roman Numeral IIII instead of IV?

a reply to: L33d4

"Im a quantum/quotem rocket/warkid scientist/soundtest dealing with quantum flux words. these apply to every language. I am the inventor. Easy one that everyone gets is fish and chips/fashion tips."


OK. Put the pipe down.....

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: L33d4

"Im a quantum/quotem rocket/warkid scientist/soundtest dealing with quantum flux words. these apply to every language. I am the inventor. Easy one that everyone gets is fish and chips/fashion tips."


OK. Put the pipe down.....

well i mean if u dont understand.