Mandela Effect - Ford Logo - Three New Strong Evidences Found

originally posted by: FlabberGhast
a reply to: Jonjonj

So what is the argument against the ME about the Ford logo changing?

The argument is: The logo always had a twirly bit in the other timeline, and never changed, but in this timeline there are some twirly bits sometimes and other times there are no twirly bits.

Ergo the ME is real.

Or it might be the other way around, in which all twirly bits referred to previously should be, from now forward, called non-ME twirly bits.

Or hold on, no, that isn't right, the previously mentioned twirly bits never changed in THIS reality, even though there are photos, because it is the photos that changed and then the people who came here from the other timeline felt at home...FOR A WHILE TILL THEY NOTICED THE TWIRLY BITS HAD CHANGED!

I think that is about it really.

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
a reply to: Pearj

You were shown why the maps are/were made that way but you choose to ignore it all and equal it all to the Mandela effect when it is has been explained.

Well it seems that a lot of these believers want to ignore reason and do no research as to why these changes occur. Unless of coarse it's research that feeds into their delusion.

originally posted by: paperdoll

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: paperdoll

I think the point of this thread is to invalidate any argument about the Ford logo changing because...it NEVER changed in the other timeline.

I think that is the point...

Yeah..

I know better than to click on all of these many, many ME posts but I just can't help myself!

They are fascinating, without a doubt.

a reply to: Jonjonj

but in this timeline there are some twirly bits sometimes and other times there are no twirly bits.

In this timeline there has been a twirly bit in the logo for over a century........

originally posted by: FlabberGhast
a reply to: WakeUpBeer

You are sad because I can't possibly answer the questions you asked? I could speculate but what would you say to that?

I'm not sad. You're a real rib tickler!

I'd say the entire ME is speculation from those who lack a solid set of critical thinking skills.

But if you want to try to exercise some, thinking about and discussing the mechanics of such an effect could be a step in the right direction. Attempting to form hypothesis etc. Asking questions about the ramifications of such an effect. Other hints and clues and signs it's happening. Speculation is fine! It's how real answers can be found.

Here is are some simple questions.

Why are parallel universes or timelines shifting the explanation?

What evidence suggests this and could it suggest something else?

As I said. My mind can be changed.

originally posted by: FlabberGhast
a reply to: Jonjonj

but in this timeline there are some twirly bits sometimes and other times there are no twirly bits.

In this timeline there has been a twirly bit in the logo for over a century........

So what?

a reply to: Jonjonj

So what?

First off the argument that companies change their logos is invalid since it hasn't changed for over a century.

Second,

The argument is: The logo always had a twirly bit in the other timeline, and never changed, but in this timeline there are some twirly bits sometimes and other times there are no twirly bits.

The argument is that it DIDN'T have the twirly bit in the other timeline, and in this timeline it officially had the twirly bit for over over a century.

Let me ask again: Isn't the premise of the Mandela effect that timelines shift? So why would pictures of the logo from the old timeline exist in the supposed new timeline?

That's why it is called residual evidence.

originally posted by: eriktheawful
Do you think that companies do not change their logos?

Ford has changed their logo many times. The way a logo is imprinted, cut, stamped or put on has changed over time too:

Changing logos is what they do:

OMG, I totally don't remember some of those, therefore.....ME. (Is that how this works?)

originally posted by: FlabberGhast
a reply to: Jonjonj

So what?

First off the argument that companies change their logos is invalid since it hasn't changed for over a century.

Second,

The argument is: The logo always had a twirly bit in the other timeline, and never changed, but in this timeline there are some twirly bits sometimes and other times there are no twirly bits.

The argument is that it DIDN'T have the twirly bit in the other timeline, and in this timeline it officially had the twirly bit for over over a century.

Are you absolutely sure those are the RIGHT arguments though? How do you know it isn't you who switched out or whatever? I mean how can anyone know, really?

It isn't as if there is any logical argument to be had, right?

a reply to: Pearj

So I'm trolling now...okay.
I just wonder why you continue to ignore any reason for the so called mandella effect. Look at the thread you made a couple of days ago you didn't even have the bottle or decency to admit you are wrong. You continue to bleat mandella effect when shown the facts and reasons, you refuse to admit you can be fallible and ignore physiological facts like false memories, Cryptomnesia and The misinfomation effect.
It bewilders me that you have not studied the reasons why you think like you do and just jumped on the mandella effect.
I will ask you again like I have so many times.
1) Are you fallible? can you be wrong?.
2) If yes why not now?
3) If no what makes you different and others to see the so called difference?.

I'm honestly questioning your own mental state tbh I think you are obsessing and making yourself believe this nonsense, you refuse to see any sense or reason and dismiss anyone who shows you that you are wrong.

Oh and I continue to show people sense and reason to help fight against this type of madness because some poor souls will fall for it and go mentally unwell.

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

Why are parallel universes or timelines shifting the explanation?

Besides the faulty memory argument?

You have not figured out why the phenomenon is being explained this way, at this point? This is your first time reading about the ME?

What evidence suggests this and could it suggest something else?

You have absolutely no knowledge of any of the many examples that are being put forward about things being changed?

Or are you trying to get to your explanation of it being faulty memory? What is the point in me answering your questions then.

So are objects now shifting too?

How else could there be real evidence in this world?

a reply to: Jonjonj

Are you absolutely sure those are the RIGHT arguments though? How do you know it isn't you who switched out or whatever? I mean how can anyone know, really? It isn't as if there is any logical argument to be had, right?

Now you are just deflecting with empty rethoric. You made some incorrect statements which I corrected and I explained why arguments about the Ford logo being used here against the ME, are invalid, which they are, regardless of your stance on the ME.

originally posted by: FlabberGhast
a reply to: Jonjonj

Are you absolutely sure those are the RIGHT arguments though? How do you know it isn't you who switched out or whatever? I mean how can anyone know, really? It isn't as if there is any logical argument to be had, right?

Now you are just deflecting with empty rethoric. You made some incorrect statements which I corrected and I explained why arguments about the Ford logo being used here against the ME, are invalid, which they are, regardless of your stance on the ME.

NO! I made a ridiculous summation intended as sarcasm which you decided to cherry pick to make your point. Is that you Raymundo, or Max maybe?

You guys all look alike in skunkworks.

Continued..
why is this post not in the HOAX bin
people just feel the need to exaggerate the truth
you need to stay away from particle physics your clueless
whole made up Mandela Effect to those who see it for what it is...hysterically funny.

..And that's the slimmed down list.

Looks like there's even more that could be added, just while I was making the above.

Understand this is relavent because you stated I 'screamed "Mandela Effect!!"'. With the above quoted, I think it's fair of me to say the proponents are not the ones screaming.


I'm honestly trying to discuss the Effect, not be harrased.

Technically I have to ask why these folks with scathing replies even read these threads. It's like continuing to hit your thumb with a hammer, even though you know it hurts.

I continue to handle it the way I stated from the get-go. I've already seen a few people say my threads caused them to take a second look at the Effect. I'm going to continue to accomplish my goal.

I'm tired of commenting on these threads. The best response I can give now is...

[Insert AugustusMasonicus comment here]

a reply to: Jonjonj

NO! I made a ridiculous summation intended as sarcasm which you decided to cherry pick to make your point.

Your intial comment was incorrect. I pointed this out and then you responded with this ridiculous sarcasm, which was also based on incorrect statements. Your intention of being sarcastic doesn't make anything you said more accurate.

Is that you Raymundo, or Max maybe?

Why would I be Raymundo? Is he not extremely anti ME?

originally posted by: FlabberGhast
a reply to: intrptr

Let's stick to the claim you made. You are claiming that officially changed company logos are the cause of the "confusion".

So I ask you, at what point in time did they have a logo without the swirl ?

What does any of this have to do with Nelson Mandella?