Very weird theory that I found on the Internet

I do sort of buy into universal consciousness and have posted as such in this thread. I'm also a big fan of DNA memories. I linked a peer reviewed paper earlier about how instincts are just memory patterns imprinted in our DNA.

a reply to: Speculation

a reply to: raymundoko

Though I am done with my rants, replies to good thoughts will be an exception.

(Theoretically Speaking) None if this is currently accepted or proven subject matter, just thoughts and opinions.

Universal Consciousness (If proven to exist) is the "good explanation" that makes it easier to sleep at night. Would make sense and fully explain this phenomenon. Could also explain remote viewing, shared dreams and several other fringe subjects that I have read about.

DNA memories (If proven to exist) are something I always considered to be a rational explanation for some "deja vu" and "past life" memories people claim to have. Since most of my "false memories" that other people seem to have, are events that occurred well after my birth, I find it hard to use this to explain Mandela Effect, IMO.

The Mandela Effect is still new enough that it may already have scientist, psychologist, physicist or other fields of researchers looking into. So far I have not found any legitimate studies to read.

All theories I find are on forums like this, and all forums link to the standard psychology answers for memory problems as the best "rational explanation".
I am willing to accept those answers for individual cases or people that have been in contact with each other in some measurable degree. Makes sense.

For now, more studies are needed to answer the question of the amount of people remembering the same false memories, IMO. I admit to considering all the possible strange and bizarre theories people have been posting all over, still I wait for science.

"The squeaky wheel gets the grease." There are so many people making noise about this now all over the net that it will surely get some serious studies going soon, if not already.

a reply to: Speculation

So just to be clear: Fringe thoughts are ones you will reply to, but scientifically studied explanations are not good thoughts and will not be replied to? I understand.

Do you all not see the flaws in your logic? Or the gross double standard? Obviously I have discussed fringe ideas in this thread so am more than willing to potentially accept one as a possible explanation. (Merging universes is not one of them as no scientific data supports this, and all functional theories on it dictate that merging universes must destroy each other)

So the difference is I am willing to discuss fringe topics if they are reasonable, but 98% of the steiners refuse to accept any scientific studies that show why or how they have been wrong this whole time. Gut feelings>reproducible science.

a reply to: raymundoko

Some people think alternative explanations are "cool", so they are more likely to want to believe them. Alternative explanations are "sexy".

Scientific or prosaic explanations for a phenomenon are too mundane for some people, so they are less likely to want to believe them, even when those scientific or prosaic explanations are sound.

For example, if on old house creaks, and I say it is probably the wind making it creak, people say "ho-hum". However, if I spin some yarn about a ghost of an old soldier coming back to his home looking for his long-lost love, then everyone's ears perk up and the pay more attention to that story.

a reply to: raymundoko

I would reply to mundane questions, answers and currently acceptable scientific explanations if I had anything new to add. Having read them all and seeing that most of the subject matter is well addressed in threads such as this, I do not see a point in beating a dead horse.

I have issues with some aspects of all theories I have read, seen posted and a few of my own. The point of my posting here was, seeing if anyone was spotting other “changes” that other people would remember.

Seeing that my post were beating a dead horse and nothing new will probably be added I do not see a point in ranting about the subject further.

I responded to a reply to my post, in context. Actually, I have issues with all current theories and believe there is more than likely a completely mundane reason for people having the same false memories.

So what is your question on which scientific study, theory, article or.......?

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Actually all the alternate explanations are quite disturbing if you actually read them and put any thought to them. If a house creeks... it is settling, humidity causing expansion and contraction, weather conditions and water pipes making some noise or all of the above. Goes back to "The simplest answer is usually the best...and right".

a reply to: raymundoko

If you are trying to make a point, that this subject is “pointless”, you are absolutely correct.

Discussing this subject was the last stop for me on this crazy train. People are not sharing any new information or “false memories”, so, it is indeed pointless to pursue this further.

I have been reading whatever I can find since 2005 on anything even remotely related to Mandela Effect subject matter. Takes a while to go through my internet bookmarks as well as my books when I need to link or quote.

One theory I found several years ago, based on scientific studies is interesting, if anyone is still looking into this.

Science hopes to change events that have already occurred.
www.sfgate.com...-4

Another retrocausality link (more recent) with a few additions:

______beforeitsnews/science-and-technology/2012/06/are-time-travelers-changing-the-past-2254745.html

Edit: getting a glitch with the above link, copy and paste to a google search.

And for those who like wiki:

en.wikipedia.org...

Link below has links to many more reports, articles......

faculty.washington.edu...

My post in this thread were intended to see if there were common links people with Mandela Effect "false memories" and to see if those people noticed events not mentioned previously on this or other forums..(Seems pointless now, but wanted to try).

Many theories have been posted and discussed in this thread and many others.

When people reply to my post, usually two possibilities arise, either an honest question/thought or they are trying to be a troll and bait the thread for a response. Giving people the benefit of the doubt, I replied to the honest thoughts and questions possibility. Most of the "sexy" theories/explanations leave more questions than they could ever answer...IMO.

Retrocausality is actually the theory I like the most at present, all others, from all fields leave far to many holes. Looking to have a little fun at my expense? Feel free to read over the subject and the research.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People


Scientific or prosaic explanations for a phenomenon are too mundane for some people, so they are less likely to want to believe them, even when those scientific or prosaic explanations are sound.

that's human nature. mundane is well, just "mundane". its boooring.

Oh pfffft! to science.
Half of what they know started as a theory.

Many things have happened in my life that cannot be explained by science.
There is more to this world, than we know. I can accept that.

I happen to like theories....I'm a theory enthusiast. Makes me think.
You know, things that make you go "Hmmmm....".

In this thread, we have been trying to think 'out of the box'.
Anyone who doesn't want to play "what if" can find another sandbox, yes?
Me? I'm still building silly sand castles, and wondering about parallel universes.
I don't think I'm hurting anyone by doing that.

Been too busy to do any research, but I'm still interested.
jacy

originally posted by: Speculation
Another retrocausality link (more recent) with a few additions:

______beforeitsnews/science-and-technology/2012/06/are-time-travelers-changing-the-past-2254745.html

Edit: getting a glitch with the above link, copy and paste to a google search.

okay, this one should do the trick.

eta: no it does not. linking to that particular website is impossible no matter if you put the www prefix or not, sorry

originally posted by: jamsession

originally posted by: Speculation
Another retrocausality link (more recent) with a few additions:

______beforeitsnews/science-and-technology/2012/06/are-time-travelers-changing-the-past-2254745.html

Edit: getting a glitch with the above link, copy and paste to a google search.

okay, this one should do the trick.

eta: no it does not. linking to that particular website is impossible no matter if you put the www prefix or not, sorry

Beforeitsnews has been banned from being used as a source on ATS because of chronic hoaxing.

ATS has blocked the ability to link to it.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

whoops... fair enough = ))
thx for the info.

i remember it as berenstein bears as well. i pronounce it "bear n steen" not "bear n stain"
im in my mid 20s and remember the books and shows fondly as a child.

really neat blog post

originally posted by: Tavg0911
i remember it as berenstein bears as well. i pronounce it "bear n steen" not "bear n stain"
im in my mid 20s and remember the books and shows fondly as a child.

really neat blog post

At first I thought it was just us older folk, like 50 and over. Then I see it is younger people as well. Intriguing.

Has a timeline been established on the years the steiners remember and the stainers?

originally posted by: raymundoko
I do sort of buy into universal consciousness and have posted as such in this thread. I'm also a big fan of DNA memories. I linked a peer reviewed paper earlier about how instincts are just memory patterns imprinted in our DNA.

a reply to: Speculation

I had a dog. She didn't need anybody to tell her what a rattle snake was. She saved me from a potential strike. She knew it was something bad close to the guy with the food. It was about a 5 footer. I cooked it up and shared with the dog.

originally posted by: Night Star

originally posted by: Tavg0911
i remember it as berenstein bears as well. i pronounce it "bear n steen" not "bear n stain"
im in my mid 20s and remember the books and shows fondly as a child.

really neat blog post

At first I thought it was just us older folk, like 50 and over. Then I see it is younger people as well. Intriguing.

Has a timeline been established on the years the steiners remember and the stainers?

I've noticed it was more the older folks as well, but there does appear to be a few more younger people popping up here and there. I'm still looking for misprints. I think I may be looking until I am too old to remember what I was looking for.

Keep looking Reux!!!!!