Mandela Effect - Kidney Proof - Internal Organs Changed Position

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Ruiner1978

Yes it does. It makes perfect sense in terms of character and context, as proved a few pages back. Many, many examples were given.

You just don't get what I am saying, yes many examples were shown that had nothing to do with Star Wars.

In terms of character, No, It doesn't make sense for Vader to speak as as some claim, That could be why the final product is what it is, both lines might have been spoken during filming which is why James Earl Jones remembers such however when it came to editing the final cut it must have been out of character to say "Luke" and Lucas went with "NO".

It is a bad argument to support your stance on the matter as it simply isn't true. Also keep in mind I share your stance, Vader didn't say "Luke". But it would have been perfectly acceptable if he did.

No its not, it might be to you and to others but to some it makes sense, why the line is actually "No" and why "Luke" would be out of Character for Vader to say.

Unless you can provide the link that Raymundoko was asked for and couldn't supply earlier, this is now a non argument.

I really don't care if its good or bad grammar, I am not arguing that so I am not sure why I would or should link to anything another poster arguing.

In fact, Yes, Ray was correct and anyone can study English grammar and find out for themselves

However, that has nothing to do with what I am saying when I say its out of context for the scene and what leads up to it and out of character.

I've never seen so many conflicting and contradictory statements in a single post before.




Absolute nonsense...

originally posted by: TheMaxHeadroomIncident
a reply to: TerryDon79

Like I said, "feelings" and "knowings". That's what your "gut" is.

You don't say. Why are you stll on about this? This clear to everyone. I don't care that it is meaningless according to you, cause your brains can't go beyond current scientific paradigms and whatever it is that is the norm.

And your brain (I'm assuming it was in your head in your timeline?) can't get passed the fact that you, and all the other "ME'rs" are simply wrong.

2 easy steps to become an ME'r.

1, Ignore science.
2, Don't ever say you remembered wrong.

a reply to: TerryDon79

Ignore science.

Science doesn't prove that faulty memory causes these experiences. I tonly shows that memory can be wrong.

If people have shifted timelines it would be expected that people from the timeline they shifted to would say that it is due to faulty memory.

And your brain (I'm assuming it was in your head in your timeline?)

I think that consciousness exists above matter.

a reply to: TheMaxHeadroomIncident

So, science can prove that we have faulty memories, but the ME can't possibly be that because........"reasons"?

Regardless of what you think about consciousness, I was talking about memories. We (well, people who bother to read sciency stuff) understand what certain parts of the brain are for.

You have a non-argument.

Derp.

a reply to: TerryDon79

You can't even begin to fathom my argument.

originally posted by: TheMaxHeadroomIncident
a reply to: TerryDon79

You can't even begin to fathom my argument.

Oh, I know your argument.

"Feelings" and "knowing" lol.

a reply to: TerryDon79

There is enough scientific evidence to at least contemplate the idea of consciousness being more than just the result of a physical process.

And yes, feelings.


Again, this is the Skunk works forum. Speculative theories, troll.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: SeaWorthy

Again, the best way to feel your heart is to place the base of your palm on the sternum and the remainder of the hand over the ribs. If you didn't do that half your hand would be off the chest.

Isn't this the 3rd time this has been explained to you?

Lol how old are you again?

a reply to: Ruiner1978

That pic of George W made me spit coffee everywhere.

Lizard heart position maybe?

originally posted by: TheMaxHeadroomIncident
a reply to: TerryDon79

You can't even begin to fathom my argument.

I thought your argument was all about protocols.

originally posted by: TheMaxHeadroomIncident
a reply to: Greggers

You are very lame and uninspired.

Ad hominem. That's an actual tos violation. Plus, protocol.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: TheMaxHeadroomIncident

Obviously some people DON'T understand it. If they did, there would be no Mandela effect threads, websites and YouTube videos.

You and many others seem to feel very intelligent and superior but you are the one with a lot to learn and closing your eyes is NOT Denying Ignorance or anything else!

Quantum Mechanics Forbids a Single History
Thomas Kuhn wrote that a paradigm defines “the practices that define a scientific discipline at a certain point in time.” When we notice that there is a strong possibility we are witnessing macroscopic signs of quantum phenomena as some of us recognize that we’ve been experiencing ‘glitches’ and shifts in reality for years, it becomes clear that rather than a conspiracy, we’re dealing with a radical re-visioning of reality. Thomas Kuhn described how there are four basic ways that a new paradigm influences the scientific process, because paradigms dictate: what is studied and researched, what types of questions are asked, the exact structure of the questions asked, and how research results are interpreted. Thanks to the work of physicists such as Stephen Hawking and Thomas Hertog suggesting back in 2006 that we might live in a “top down” universe which prohibits single histories, people are increasingly becoming more familiar with the idea that we exist in a superposition of states–such as in a holographic multiverse, where we can sometimes experience various other possible realities. Nature magazine reported Thomas Hertog stating,

cynthiasuelarson.wordpress.com...

originally posted by:

Nothing only all these people that share the same faulty memories.

The same faulty memories which have not been collected or quantified in any scientifically valid manner and which involve commonly experienced cultural influences.

Like I said... nothing.

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: TheMaxHeadroomIncident

Obviously some people DON'T understand it. If they did, there would be no Mandela effect threads, websites and YouTube videos.

You and many others seem to feel very intelligent and superior but you are the one with a lot to learn and closing your eyes is NOT Denying Ignorance or anything else!

Quantum Mechanics Forbids a Single History
Thomas Kuhn wrote that a paradigm defines “the practices that define a scientific discipline at a certain point in time.” When we notice that there is a strong possibility we are witnessing macroscopic signs of quantum phenomena as some of us recognize that we’ve been experiencing ‘glitches’ and shifts in reality for years, it becomes clear that rather than a conspiracy, we’re dealing with a radical re-visioning of reality. Thomas Kuhn described how there are four basic ways that a new paradigm influences the scientific process, because paradigms dictate: what is studied and researched, what types of questions are asked, the exact structure of the questions asked, and how research results are interpreted. Thanks to the work of physicists such as Stephen Hawking and Thomas Hertog suggesting back in 2006 that we might live in a “top down” universe which prohibits single histories, people are increasingly becoming more familiar with the idea that we exist in a superposition of states–such as in a holographic multiverse, where we can sometimes experience various other possible realities. Nature magazine reported Thomas Hertog stating,

cynthiasuelarson.wordpress.com...

I knew it was only a matter of time before someone quoted a psuedo scientific shaman about the inevitability of multiple dimensions.

There is zero empirical proof of alternate dimensions. They are searching for tiny, subatomic spatial dimensions at CERN to corroborate string theory, but so far no dice.

The strangeness of the quantum universe still falls into the scientific black box described by Niels Bohr many decades ago.

a reply to: Char-Lee

If only we all got our science from a blog right???

a reply to: raymundoko

The blog was qouting two phycisists.

a reply to: Greggers

There is zero empirical proof of alternate dimensions. They are searching for tiny, subatomic spatial dimensions at CERN to corroborate string theory, but so far no dice.

They also don't exclude the possibility of actual alternate dimensions.

The strangeness of the quantum universe still falls into the scientific black box described by Niels Bohr many decades ago.

So you think it is strange. So how do you go about looking for an explanation without thinking outside of the box?

originally posted by: TheMaxHeadroomIncident
a reply to: raymundoko

The blog was qouting two phycisists.

The fact remains that there is as of yet no empirical proof that alternate dimensions, either spatial or temporal, exist.

Bohr was adamant about his belief that quantum strangeness could never be explained. Einstein disagreed, but so far Bohr remains correct.

I would love for extra dimensions to be proven. But even that wouldn't prove that people are teleporting between them.

So you think it is strange. So how do you go about looking for an explanation without thinking outside of the box?

You carefully design a new box with scientifically falsifiable properties, such as the super symmetry of string theory. Then you test super symmetry in a collider.

a reply to: Greggers

That's not the point, you guys act like the theories that were just mentioned are off limits, and that people discussing them are all kooks. You say the stuff is strange yourself, but you look down on people for not coming up with theories that are rational to you.

You are just very close minded, waiting for the "all clear" from the whole scientific community before you even dare to look past the paradigm, of which you must admit it is always changing over the years.

Quantum Eraser and Delayed Eraser experiments have already shown that time is not linear for instance and I see only one explanation for the behavior of particles in these experiments.