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

originally posted by: chelsdh
I've not invested much into this phenomena, always found it intriguing, but since it's not "provable" and can easily be written off as "faulty memories", it just seemed like a dark hole that goes on and on.

I have conflicted memories of the Berenstein books. I remember always being confused about how to say the name. However, what has me here commenting is another issue. I grew up listening to Paul Simon, mostly his Graceland album. My mother was a huge fan, and we heard the tape a lot. I have since exposed my children to him, and we listen to that album a few times a week. Last week I noticed that one of the songs sounds different. Notably different, and I have heard the song for over 30 years. Now every time I play Graceland, it sounds "off".

Not saying it's proof, just my only experience with something changing, that I can't just brush off as "I'm not remembering correctly".

Do you remember exactly what has changed in the song?

originally posted by: antayat
a reply to: TheKestrel04

Whooops I deleted too much of the html. Sorry man the fisrt part was your quote.

No problem and if it was a precise copy why even bother to replace our doppelgangers with the original us?

originally posted by: chelsdh
I've not invested much into this phenomena, always found it intriguing, but since it's not "provable" and can easily be written off as "faulty memories", it just seemed like a dark hole that goes on and on.

I have conflicted memories of the Berenstein books. I remember always being confused about how to say the name. However, what has me here commenting is another issue. I grew up listening to Paul Simon, mostly his Graceland album. My mother was a huge fan, and we heard the tape a lot. I have since exposed my children to him, and we listen to that album a few times a week. Last week I noticed that one of the songs sounds different. Notably different, and I have heard the song for over 30 years. Now every time I play Graceland, it sounds "off".

Not saying it's proof, just my only experience with something changing, that I can't just brush off as "I'm not remembering correctly".

I just went tnrough the album. The song Under African Skies I remember the lyric 'give her the wings to fly in harmony and she wont bother you no more' as 'give him the wings to fly in harmony and he wont bother you no more' Is this what your referring too?

originally posted by: antayat

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: antayat

originally posted

So ... no room in your discussion for counter-evidence? Or for a rational approach?

Which is more reasonable? The failure of human memory and perception, which we know to be a fact, or time-travel, which at this point is still, quite frankly, science fiction for the most part.

Why does trying to look at the evidence rationally make one a "shill"?

(By the by, it's against ATS T&C to call other members "shills.")

If it's time travel does it have to be present humans using the technology? Or maybe say people from ten thousands years from now.

Generally speaking, as we do not have this kind of "time travel" at the moment ... it would have to used by someone from another time or perhaps dimension ... logically.

What's your point?

Well your original reply was to ask me what is more likely faulty memory or science fiction space travel. From that comment its clear you think the mandella effect is false and that time travel is science fiction. Just because we dont have a technology, at least to our knowledge, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Especially when concerning time travel. Hence people from the future apposed to it being science fiction. Also why are you so adament to demean the mandela effect?

Did I "demean" the Mandala Effect? Quote me.

Further, how does one "demean" facts ... they're either true, or they're not.

Provable or not.

Your argument about time travel, not surprisingly, is paradoxical. Of course, neither you nor I can say what will be created/invented in the future, but what we can say is that given the possibility that 1) humans have faulty memories (known fact) or 2) time-travellers are randomly (not to mention trivially) changing the spelling of names, words and the titles of books (wild speculation) ... tell me, what is the most reasonable?

What requires the least things to be true?

Counter Question: Why do you want the so-called "Mandala Effect" to be true? Why is time-travel more reasonable than human error to explain the phenomena?

a reply to: TombEscaper

I submit that you're taking yourself and your beliefs far too seriously. You don't get to tell others what they're interested in nor why they're interested in it.

You're displaying a pretty wide "victim" complex if you're aggrandizing other ATS members who disagree with wild postulations as "men in black" or any other professional disinformation agent.

Please. Why would any level of any government care to point out simple logic?

Bullies? Who? Bullies because someone points out that human perception and memory have been shown to be demonstrably flawed?

You can make "educated guesses" about why people disagree with you? Sure. This entire thread is really about "educated guesses" isn't it, if you're honest.

Posts disagreeing with belief-based nonsense by focusing on known facts and resources are not "bullying" but are rather what this site was founded on.

I know that doesn't feed into any apparent "us versus them" scenario, but those are the facts.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: antayat

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: antayat

originally posted

So ... no room in your discussion for counter-evidence? Or for a rational approach?

Which is more reasonable? The failure of human memory and perception, which we know to be a fact, or time-travel, which at this point is still, quite frankly, science fiction for the most part.

Why does trying to look at the evidence rationally make one a "shill"?

(By the by, it's against ATS T&C to call other members "shills.")

If it's time travel does it have to be present humans using the technology? Or maybe say people from ten thousands years from now.

Generally speaking, as we do not have this kind of "time travel" at the moment ... it would have to used by someone from another time or perhaps dimension ... logically.

What's your point?

Well your original reply was to ask me what is more likely faulty memory or science fiction space travel. From that comment its clear you think the mandella effect is false and that time travel is science fiction. Just because we dont have a technology, at least to our knowledge, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Especially when concerning time travel. Hence people from the future apposed to it being science fiction. Also why are you so adament to demean the mandela effect?

Did I "demean" the Mandala Effect? Quote me.

Further, how does one "demean" facts ... they're either true, or they're not.

Provable or not.

Your argument about time travel, not surprisingly, is paradoxical. Of course, neither you nor I can say what will be created/invented in the future, but what we can say is that given the possibility that 1) humans have faulty memories (known fact) or 2) time-travellers are randomly (not to mention trivially) changing the spelling of names, words and the titles of books (wild speculation) ... tell me, what is the most reasonable?

What requires the least things to be true?

Counter Question: Why do you want the so-called "Mandala Effect" to be true? Why is time-travel more reasonable than human error to explain the phenomena?

For someone that doesn't believe in the mandela effect you definitely are putting a lot of energy disproving it. Repeating ad nausem that its faulty memories to anyone that would share their experience. Additionally stating that your argument is fact and sound rational reasoning. I dont claim to know how its happening. I can only hypothosize like everyone else. I'm sure while on my journey of discovery I'll continue to find eveidence that supports one reason over another. Ideas will change as more evidence appears. I know with every inch of my being that these changes are real. I dont care if you dont believe me. I am curious as to why its so darn important to you to proove me wrong or proove that I have a faulty memory. I guess when I say deaming the mandela effect i refer to your relentless pouncing on anyone in this thread that would support the idea. Again for the third time. Why is it so important to you to shun people wanting to discuss this topic?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: TombEscaper

I submit that you're taking yourself and your beliefs far too seriously. You don't get to tell others what they're interested in nor why they're interested in it.

You're displaying a pretty wide "victim" complex if you're aggrandizing other ATS members who disagree with wild postulations as "men in black" or any other professional disinformation agent.

Please. Why would any level of any government care to point out simple logic?

Bullies? Who? Bullies because someone points out that human perception and memory have been shown to be demonstrably flawed?

You can make "educated guesses" about why people disagree with you? Sure. This entire thread is really about "educated guesses" isn't it, if you're honest.

Posts disagreeing with belief-based nonsense by focusing on known facts and resources are not "bullying" but are rather what this site was founded on.

I know that doesn't feed into any apparent "us versus them" scenario, but those are the facts.

That eye in the pyramid of yours must have selectively read my post with blinders on. Where did I say that any and all who disagree with the notion of the ME are bullies or MIB's? I encourage dialogue between the believers and nonbelievers. Iron sharpens iron.

I was referring to those who seek out and persecute people on a personal level, telling them that their memory is wrong and they don't really remember what they think they are remembering. These types have not shown any willingness to acknowledge demonstrably valid evidence that something is amiss. They will say "what is more likely-the possibility of different realities integrating, or the possibility that your memory has failed you?" And then, when proposed with the same hypothesis in a different way, they avoid the pertinent matters being proposed.

a reply to: antayat

There's nothing to "disprove" ... the Mandela Effect is a cultural phenomenon in which people given the greater power of the internet to communicate on such things amplify the small mistakes that we all make every day in perception and the sometimes significant mistakes that our memories offer us into "a thing" ... which then requires the wildest explanations to justify when, really, there is a simple, straightforward explanation for every single event that gets catalogued (and reinforced) by discussions like this one.

I suggest that if reading my post is nauseating to you, don't read. Because I will certainly continue to suggest that given two explanations of observed events, the one requiring the least number of assumptions is probably the correct one.

Why does my position (and other similar positions) in some way "threaten" or disturb your "journey of discovery"?

If you're looking for the truth, and not just another internet-generated cultural meme ... why does pointing out simple facts and basic logic disturb you so?

I have not "shunned" anyone. I haven't insulted anyone. I haven't even tried to convince any "true believer" that whatever version of the fantasy explanation they currently accept is nonsense.

You've stated, quite clearly, this is not a factual discussion for you ... you're going on your belief and your feelings. That's fine. Do so.

But don't claim that your beliefs and feelings are facts that should be accepted by anyone else, because they aren't.

"The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence"- Tesla. Some folks can't dismount the "fact" horse to talk an occasional walk. When bizarre things happen at least we'll have theories to try them with rather than "it's impossibruh can't happen".

This great video came out

a reply to: TombEscaper

Ah ... so now it's to be basic ad hominem based on my little avatar? LOL. That's pretty desperate.

If anyone is being "persecuted" or "harrassed" or chased around ... you should advise the Mods via the ALERT! button; that's against T&C.

Memories are flawed particularly regarding fine details. You're merely creating "Straw MIB Agents" who are out to torture those who prefer belief to evidence ... not to mention the straw arguments that you say are happening that aren't.

Believe what you wish. I know what I know. Feel free to ignore what you don't' like.

At the same time one should not discount the mundane explanation aswell

originally posted by: TheKestrel04
"The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence"- Tesla. Some folks can't dismount the "fact" horse to talk an occasional walk. When bizarre things happen at least we'll have theories to try them with rather than "it's impossibruh can't happen".

The irony of this comment...the device you used to send it, was invented because science actually does that.

People just get upset, and completely ignore that science does this, when science finds no evidence to back their specific claim.

The basis of this is to make people doubt their own memories. Accept only what you see now, forget the past you thought you remembered (and the freedoms that went with it). More NWO crap being force fed on the population courtesy of Gaggle.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: antayat

There's nothing to "disprove" ... the Mandela Effect is a cultural phenomenon in which people given the greater power of the internet to communicate on such things amplify the small mistakes that we all make every day in perception and the sometimes significant mistakes that our memories offer us into "a thing" ... which then requires the wildest explanations to justify when, really, there is a simple, straightforward explanation for every single event that gets catalogued (and reinforced) by discussions like this one.

I suggest that if reading my post is nauseating to you, don't read. Because I will certainly continue to suggest that given two explanations of observed events, the one requiring the least number of assumptions is probably the correct one.

Why does my position (and other similar positions) in some way "threaten" or disturb your "journey of discovery"?

If you're looking for the truth, and not just another internet-generated cultural meme ... why does pointing out simple facts and basic logic disturb you so?

I have not "shunned" anyone. I haven't insulted anyone. I haven't even tried to convince any "true believer" that whatever version of the fantasy explanation they currently accept is nonsense.

You've stated, quite clearly, this is not a factual discussion for you ... you're going on your belief and your feelings. That's fine. Do so.

But don't claim that your beliefs and feelings are facts that should be accepted by anyone else, because they aren't.

Fair enough. Like Jodi Foster in the movie Contact. I will concede that you have a valid point. Can I proove the mandella effect. No, it's impossiple to proove it with the scientific method. I know with every fiber of my being that this is happening.

a reply to: antayat

Okay. Fair enough.

Now expand on the "this" that you know is happening ... what is it ... in your gutmost feelings ...

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
The basis of this is to make people doubt their own memories. Accept only what you see now, forget the past you thought you remembered (and the freedoms that went with it). More NWO crap being force fed on the population courtesy of Gaggle.

So, the fact that we have known since the beginning of science and jurisprudence that perceptions (and memories) are suspect bringing this fact into discussions such as this is mere "NWO crap"?

Sounds like you could replace "NWO" with "Infidel" or "Heretic" there and have the same effect.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: TombEscaper

Ah ... so now it's to be basic ad hominem based on my little avatar? LOL. That's pretty desperate.

If anyone is being "persecuted" or "harrassed" or chased around ... you should advise the Mods via the ALERT! button; that's against T&C.

Memories are flawed particularly regarding fine details. You're merely creating "Straw MIB Agents" who are out to torture those who prefer belief to evidence ... not to mention the straw arguments that you say are happening that aren't.

Believe what you wish. I know what I know. Feel free to ignore what you don't' like.

Actually, it was just something funny to say.

Interesting wording that you use. You are in the position of having to say memories are flawed to maintain your argument, when the correct assessment is that memories can be flawed. But if you would say that, it would leave open the possibility that the memories may not be flawed.

After researching this for nearly a year and a half, I have yet to come across a skeptic who has honestly and logically confronted the CoasterBuzz messageboard Berenstein discussion from 2001. This is the "one that got away" from whomever decided to do this tampering. 11 different posters use the term Berenstein in the discussion, with no mention of Berenstain by anyone; no one correcting the name, no one saying "I always thought it was -stain," etc. For us who remember who the Bears are in another reality, this is the holy grail of proof that there is a universe in which it is the BerenSTAIN Bears who never existed.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
The basis of this is to make people doubt their own memories. Accept only what you see now, forget the past you thought you remembered (and the freedoms that went with it). More NWO crap being force fed on the population courtesy of Gaggle.

Precisely. An attempt to enslave individual consciousness on a mass scale, with an air of Artificial Intelligence-dependence.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
The basis of this is to make people doubt their own memories. Accept only what you see now, forget the past you thought you remembered (and the freedoms that went with it). More NWO crap being force fed on the population courtesy of Gaggle.

Imagine the senior citizens..every year they keep changing things.

My mother (bless) believes that the pilgrims, lead by christopher colombus, discovered america..and they changed it all now.
Wait for a few years when people forget that Obama is only half black due to it being forever said he is just black..in 40 years, people will be demanding they changed it and the nwo added in a white mother for..white privilege or some such.

The brain is a mushy mess that is resistant to change and will remember shorthand and already learned traits instead of taking more complicated paths of memory.