It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Human anatomy, ribs, have change in this reality, mandela effect

page: 34
13
<< 31  32  33    35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2016 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
a reply to: hellobruce

It is just a theory you are trying to push. No proof that this is what causes the same memories among some people.


You mean apart from all the scientific studies that proves confabulation exists?

Where's all the scientific studies into ME being caused by an alternate timeline?

Sorry but Confabulation isn't a satisfactory explaination for me.
See page 2 of Mandela Effect Theory thread if you're interested in a logical reason why it should be dismissed.

Btw confabulation has been thrown around a lot lately.
I guess a few people learnt a new word this week...


Just tell me the explanation in here. If anything, it should add to the thread.

ETA: I just checked the thread you referred to. So you dismiss confabulation for no reason? There wasn't any logical reason, just you saying you dismiss it.
edit on 1852016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 18 2016 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Unfortunately, the very notion that alternate timelines exist, despite being tangentially supported by quantum physics, is at present unfalsifiable, ergo more akin to science-fiction than actual science.

That's okay. I love science fiction. And I'm all for exploring the possibilities therein--how else would science-fiction ever become science if not for the curiosity of those willing to test it?

However, testing requires falsifiability.

In its absence, Occam's Razor is much more likely to be correct than untestable flights of fancy.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
a reply to: hellobruce

It is just a theory you are trying to push. No proof that this is what causes the same memories among some people.


You mean apart from all the scientific studies that proves confabulation exists?

Where's all the scientific studies into ME being caused by an alternate timeline?

Sorry but Confabulation isn't a satisfactory explaination for me.
See page 2 of Mandela Effect Theory thread if you're interested in a logical reason why it should be dismissed.

Btw confabulation has been thrown around a lot lately.
I guess a few people learnt a new word this week...


Just tell me the explanation in here. If anything, it should add to the thread.

Lol nah. It's over a couple of posts, includes answers to other post. It's a bit more involved than a quick one liner.
Quicker and easier to pop to the sweet shop instead of bringing the sweetshop to you. Y'know?



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   

edit on 18 5 1616 by Ruiner1978 because: (no reason given)


(post by Ruiner1978 removed for a manners violation)

posted on May, 18 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ruiner1978
POST REMOVED BY STAFF


You said you don't accept confabulation for the same reasons you don't accept mass hallucinations.

So, what's your reasons for not accepting the scientifically studied answer, but accept one that has zero proof?
edit on Wed May 18 2016 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

I already gave you my MILK/MERLK example. This new confabulation theory, just seems like a nice new blanket to throw over things and end discussion on these matters.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: hidingthistime
a reply to: Greggers

I already gave you my MILK/MERLK example. This new confabulation theory, just seems like a nice new blanket to throw over things and end discussion on these matters.


Confabulation is hardly new. It dates back just over 500 years.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 07:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: hidingthistime
a reply to: Greggers

I already gave you my MILK/MERLK example. This new confabulation theory, just seems like a nice new blanket to throw over things and end discussion on these matters.


Yep. And I already responded to it. Plus, until this post, I had not used the word confabulation at all, so I'm not sure why you've directed this at me.
edit on 18-5-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)


(post by Ruiner1978 removed for a manners violation)

posted on May, 18 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
a reply to: hellobruce

It is just a theory you are trying to push. No proof that this is what causes the same memories among some people.


You mean apart from all the scientific studies that proves confabulation exists?

Where's all the scientific studies into ME being caused by an alternate timeline?

Sorry but Confabulation isn't a satisfactory explaination for me.
See page 2 of Mandela Effect Theory thread if you're interested in a logical reason why it should be dismissed.

Btw confabulation has been thrown around a lot lately.
I guess a few people learnt a new word this week...


Just tell me the explanation in here. If anything, it should add to the thread.

ETA: I just checked the thread you referred to. So you dismiss confabulation for no reason? There wasn't any logical reason, just you saying you dismiss it.


Then frankly, you need to learn to read....


You said you don't accept confabulation for the same reasons you don't accept mass hallucinations.

So, what's your reasons for not accepting the scientifically studied answer, but accept one that has zero proof?

No see, you need to learn to read...
That is not what I wrote at all.
I didn't say I don't accept confabulation.
I said I dismiss your explanation of confabulation.
As I'm taking about independent experiences of multiple people of the same thing, "group confabulation" is a cop out of an explanation in the same way "group hallucination" explanations are for strange sightings.
And now I'm having to write it out again because you can't read properly...

Do. You. Understand. Now?
What is the reason you object to it? So far a I see is "I reject it because it means I could be wrong".



And please tell me... Just what is this answer you have the sheer arrogance to claim I have accepted??
Arrogance? No. You claim that memory problems is it so it only leaves a couple of options that have no proof.


If you took the time to learn to read and actually read what I write properly you would know that I haven't subscribed to any explanation.
Yet you dismiss the scientifically studied answer for no reason.


You display ignorance to the highest degree...
As opposed to ignoring evidence of what it could be?

All a can suggest to you is try to read what I have already written and what I write in future a little bit slower and a bit more carefully. I'll not be responding to you until I can see you're able to read properly and respond to me reasonably.

So you've avoided answering my questions as to why you dismiss confabulation, twice. You also gave no reason in the other thread.

I guess is you want the supernatural answer, you have to dismiss the natural answer.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   
I believe you're right about the Mandela Effect.
There used to be a lot smarter people in the world before.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
a reply to: hellobruce

It is just a theory you are trying to push. No proof that this is what causes the same memories among some people.


You mean apart from all the scientific studies that proves confabulation exists?

Where's all the scientific studies into ME being caused by an alternate timeline?

Sorry but Confabulation isn't a satisfactory explaination for me.
See page 2 of Mandela Effect Theory thread if you're interested in a logical reason why it should be dismissed.

Btw confabulation has been thrown around a lot lately.
I guess a few people learnt a new word this week...


Just tell me the explanation in here. If anything, it should add to the thread.

ETA: I just checked the thread you referred to. So you dismiss confabulation for no reason? There wasn't any logical reason, just you saying you dismiss it.


Then frankly, you need to learn to read....


You said you don't accept confabulation for the same reasons you don't accept mass hallucinations.

So, what's your reasons for not accepting the scientifically studied answer, but accept one that has zero proof?

No see, you need to learn to read...
That is not what I wrote at all.
I didn't say I don't accept confabulation.
I said I dismiss your explanation of confabulation.
As I'm taking about independent experiences of multiple people of the same thing, "group confabulation" is a cop out of an explanation in the same way "group hallucination" explanations are for strange sightings.
And now I'm having to write it out again because you can't read properly...

Do. You. Understand. Now?
What is the reason you object to it? So far a I see is "I reject it because it means I could be wrong".



And please tell me... Just what is this answer you have the sheer arrogance to claim I have accepted??
Arrogance? No. You claim that memory problems is it so it only leaves a couple of options that have no proof.


If you took the time to learn to read and actually read what I write properly you would know that I haven't subscribed to any explanation.
Yet you dismiss the scientifically studied answer for no reason.


You display ignorance to the highest degree...
As opposed to ignoring evidence of what it could be?

All a can suggest to you is try to read what I have already written and what I write in future a little bit slower and a bit more carefully. I'll not be responding to you until I can see you're able to read properly and respond to me reasonably.

So you've avoided answering my questions as to why you dismiss confabulation, twice. You also gave no reason in the other thread.

I guess is you want the supernatural answer, you have to dismiss the natural answer.

I've just realised that you've probably only read my last post in the other tread.
I did say earlier it's over a few posts on page 2.

The person I'm replying to in the other thread seems to have no problem with my debate. Very reasonable. Maybe because he has the whole context of it and not making assumptions about anything like you are. No wonder you're coming across as a 9 year old lol
I suggested you properly read all of page 2 and get a proper understanding, carry on the convo there if you have anything reasonable to add.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
a reply to: hellobruce

It is just a theory you are trying to push. No proof that this is what causes the same memories among some people.


You mean apart from all the scientific studies that proves confabulation exists?

Where's all the scientific studies into ME being caused by an alternate timeline?

Sorry but Confabulation isn't a satisfactory explaination for me.
See page 2 of Mandela Effect Theory thread if you're interested in a logical reason why it should be dismissed.

Btw confabulation has been thrown around a lot lately.
I guess a few people learnt a new word this week...


Just tell me the explanation in here. If anything, it should add to the thread.

ETA: I just checked the thread you referred to. So you dismiss confabulation for no reason? There wasn't any logical reason, just you saying you dismiss it.


Then frankly, you need to learn to read....


You said you don't accept confabulation for the same reasons you don't accept mass hallucinations.

So, what's your reasons for not accepting the scientifically studied answer, but accept one that has zero proof?

No see, you need to learn to read...
That is not what I wrote at all.
I didn't say I don't accept confabulation.
I said I dismiss your explanation of confabulation.
As I'm taking about independent experiences of multiple people of the same thing, "group confabulation" is a cop out of an explanation in the same way "group hallucination" explanations are for strange sightings.
And now I'm having to write it out again because you can't read properly...

Do. You. Understand. Now?
What is the reason you object to it? So far a I see is "I reject it because it means I could be wrong".



And please tell me... Just what is this answer you have the sheer arrogance to claim I have accepted??
Arrogance? No. You claim that memory problems is it so it only leaves a couple of options that have no proof.


If you took the time to learn to read and actually read what I write properly you would know that I haven't subscribed to any explanation.
Yet you dismiss the scientifically studied answer for no reason.


You display ignorance to the highest degree...
As opposed to ignoring evidence of what it could be?

All a can suggest to you is try to read what I have already written and what I write in future a little bit slower and a bit more carefully. I'll not be responding to you until I can see you're able to read properly and respond to me reasonably.

So you've avoided answering my questions as to why you dismiss confabulation, twice. You also gave no reason in the other thread.

I guess is you want the supernatural answer, you have to dismiss the natural answer.

I've just realised that you've probably only read my last post in the other tread.
I did say earlier it's over a few posts on page 2.
I read from page 1 to page 3 to be sure I didn't miss anything.


The person I'm replying to in the other thread seems to have no problem with my debate. Very reasonable. Maybe because he has the whole context of it and not making assumptions about anything like you are.
So? You don't accept a valid option for no reason.


No wonder you're coming across as a 9 year old lol
Oh, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You so funny!


I suggested you properly read all of page 2 and get a proper understanding, carry on the convo there if you have anything reasonable to add.
Or, you know, you could offer your reasons in this, a completely different thread?



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
I believe you're right about the Mandela Effect.
There used to be a lot smarter people in the world before.


I think you just converted me to believing the Mandela effect is real. I'm sure people had better reasoning skills and understanding of science in my timeline.



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
I believe you're right about the Mandela Effect.
There used to be a lot smarter people in the world before.
lol... i know, their obsession has taken over the thread.... I am just laughing and watching the ego show....haha



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
a reply to: hellobruce

It is just a theory you are trying to push. No proof that this is what causes the same memories among some people.


You mean apart from all the scientific studies that proves confabulation exists?

Where's all the scientific studies into ME being caused by an alternate timeline?

Sorry but Confabulation isn't a satisfactory explaination for me.
See page 2 of Mandela Effect Theory thread if you're interested in a logical reason why it should be dismissed.

Btw confabulation has been thrown around a lot lately.
I guess a few people learnt a new word this week...


Just tell me the explanation in here. If anything, it should add to the thread.

ETA: I just checked the thread you referred to. So you dismiss confabulation for no reason? There wasn't any logical reason, just you saying you dismiss it.


Then frankly, you need to learn to read....


You said you don't accept confabulation for the same reasons you don't accept mass hallucinations.

So, what's your reasons for not accepting the scientifically studied answer, but accept one that has zero proof?

No see, you need to learn to read...
That is not what I wrote at all.
I didn't say I don't accept confabulation.
I said I dismiss your explanation of confabulation.
As I'm taking about independent experiences of multiple people of the same thing, "group confabulation" is a cop out of an explanation in the same way "group hallucination" explanations are for strange sightings.
And now I'm having to write it out again because you can't read properly...

Do. You. Understand. Now?
What is the reason you object to it? So far a I see is "I reject it because it means I could be wrong".



And please tell me... Just what is this answer you have the sheer arrogance to claim I have accepted??
Arrogance? No. You claim that memory problems is it so it only leaves a couple of options that have no proof.


If you took the time to learn to read and actually read what I write properly you would know that I haven't subscribed to any explanation.
Yet you dismiss the scientifically studied answer for no reason.


You display ignorance to the highest degree...
As opposed to ignoring evidence of what it could be?

All a can suggest to you is try to read what I have already written and what I write in future a little bit slower and a bit more carefully. I'll not be responding to you until I can see you're able to read properly and respond to me reasonably.

So you've avoided answering my questions as to why you dismiss confabulation, twice. You also gave no reason in the other thread.

I guess is you want the supernatural answer, you have to dismiss the natural answer.

I've just realised that you've probably only read my last post in the other tread.
I did say earlier it's over a few posts on page 2.
I read from page 1 to page 3 to be sure I didn't miss anything.


The person I'm replying to in the other thread seems to have no problem with my debate. Very reasonable. Maybe because he has the whole context of it and not making assumptions about anything like you are.
So? You don't accept a valid option for no reason.


No wonder you're coming across as a 9 year old lol
Oh, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You so funny!


I suggested you properly read all of page 2 and get a proper understanding, carry on the convo there if you have anything reasonable to add.
Or, you know, you could offer your reasons in this, a completely different thread?

You keep saying I've dismissed without giving reason. The reasons I can dismiss it in the case I'm talking about in the other thread are there. I gave the reasons.
It's not that hard to grasp..


Are you deliberately confusing the facts as not to lose face? Seems being "right" is more important than any reasonable discussion to some.

I tell you what. I concede.
It's all group confabulation. You win bud
lol



posted on May, 18 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Ruiner1978

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief
a reply to: hellobruce

It is just a theory you are trying to push. No proof that this is what causes the same memories among some people.


You mean apart from all the scientific studies that proves confabulation exists?

Where's all the scientific studies into ME being caused by an alternate timeline?

Sorry but Confabulation isn't a satisfactory explaination for me.
See page 2 of Mandela Effect Theory thread if you're interested in a logical reason why it should be dismissed.

Btw confabulation has been thrown around a lot lately.
I guess a few people learnt a new word this week...


Just tell me the explanation in here. If anything, it should add to the thread.

ETA: I just checked the thread you referred to. So you dismiss confabulation for no reason? There wasn't any logical reason, just you saying you dismiss it.


Then frankly, you need to learn to read....


You said you don't accept confabulation for the same reasons you don't accept mass hallucinations.

So, what's your reasons for not accepting the scientifically studied answer, but accept one that has zero proof?

No see, you need to learn to read...
That is not what I wrote at all.
I didn't say I don't accept confabulation.
I said I dismiss your explanation of confabulation.
As I'm taking about independent experiences of multiple people of the same thing, "group confabulation" is a cop out of an explanation in the same way "group hallucination" explanations are for strange sightings.
And now I'm having to write it out again because you can't read properly...

Do. You. Understand. Now?
What is the reason you object to it? So far a I see is "I reject it because it means I could be wrong".



And please tell me... Just what is this answer you have the sheer arrogance to claim I have accepted??
Arrogance? No. You claim that memory problems is it so it only leaves a couple of options that have no proof.


If you took the time to learn to read and actually read what I write properly you would know that I haven't subscribed to any explanation.
Yet you dismiss the scientifically studied answer for no reason.


You display ignorance to the highest degree...
As opposed to ignoring evidence of what it could be?

All a can suggest to you is try to read what I have already written and what I write in future a little bit slower and a bit more carefully. I'll not be responding to you until I can see you're able to read properly and respond to me reasonably.

So you've avoided answering my questions as to why you dismiss confabulation, twice. You also gave no reason in the other thread.

I guess is you want the supernatural answer, you have to dismiss the natural answer.

I've just realised that you've probably only read my last post in the other tread.
I did say earlier it's over a few posts on page 2.
I read from page 1 to page 3 to be sure I didn't miss anything.


The person I'm replying to in the other thread seems to have no problem with my debate. Very reasonable. Maybe because he has the whole context of it and not making assumptions about anything like you are.
So? You don't accept a valid option for no reason.


No wonder you're coming across as a 9 year old lol
Oh, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You so funny!


I suggested you properly read all of page 2 and get a proper understanding, carry on the convo there if you have anything reasonable to add.
Or, you know, you could offer your reasons in this, a completely different thread?

You keep saying I've dismissed without giving reason. The reasons I can dismiss it in the case I'm talking about in the other thread are there. I gave the reasons.
It's not that hard to grasp..


Are you deliberately confusing the facts as not to lose face? Seems being "right" is more important than any reasonable discussion to some.

I tell you what. I concede.
It's all group confabulation. You win bud
lol
hahhahah..... man i have felt like saying that a few times, but wasnt sure if he would undsrstand I was joking....lol



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 31  32  33    35 >>

log in

join