Merged The MANDELA Effect.

[Thermal]

but they say that Sunny guy from the raisin bran cereals lost his sunglasses.

Still, there are Yahoo question threads from ten years ago about why the sun is wearing glasses.
they say that skeptics can not explain that.
Im not American so Im not familiar with that brand.

I recall that the sun started wearing sunglasses during one of their ad campaigns, but it was a short-lived thing. I remember thinking about how they were trying to make their brand cooler or something. There was no confusion with raisins, it was a very specific image tied to that sun, whose rays became more vibrant as well. It is faulty recollection shared by many, and skeptics can explain it handily.

 

[ahhell]

It could be that a cartoon of the sun wearing sunglasses is a very common image, so common that lots of folks conflate that image with an iconic brand image. Nah, that's crazy, its probably just an alternate reality version of that that brand.

We need a Sliders reunion episode in which they visit the universe responsible for all the most common Mandela effect examples. Ok, maybe just a 10 minute funny or die sketch? Ok, it wouldn't be that funny but still.

 

[3point14]

In the case of the actual Mandela effect, I think it's very easily explained:
Wasn't there this black dude, pretty famous for fighting against apartheid, and then he died in jail?
Yes, indeed! (Only, it wasn't Mandela.)

It has always been my theory that people were mis-remembering Steve Biko. (September, 77. Port Elizabeth, weather fine...)

 

[3point14]

New Zealand is in a different place on the map.

I frequently 'remember' that NZ is to the north and east of Aus. I always figured that it was just me being crap at remembering geography. It's nice to know it's the world that's changed, not me that's just a bit crap.

 

[Hellbound]

I frequently 'remember' that NZ is to the north and east of Aus. I always figured that it was just me being crap at remembering geography. It's nice to know it's the world that's changed, not me that's just a bit crap.

That's not Mandela effect.

It's plate tectonics.

 

[3point14]

That's not Mandela effect.

It's plate tectonics.

Jesus, I'm only 44, that's some bloody rapid geography going on there!



I figure the Mandella effect is just a way to work out what portion of the population have an ego so grossly inflated that they're prepared to believe the world changed rather than accept that they can't remember stuff right.

Occam would have spent about six seconds on this one.

 

[William Parcher]

the Mandella effect...

It happens when you are absolutely certain that his name used to be spelled this way.

 

[ahhell]

Jesus, I'm only 44, that's some bloody rapid geography going on there!



I figure the Mandella effect is just a way to work out what portion of the population have an ego so grossly inflated that they're prepared to believe the world changed rather than accept that they can't remember stuff right.

Occam would have spent about six seconds on this one.

I'm probably repeating myself but, yes this. It really amazes me that anyone could learn that it was always Berenstain Bears not Berenstein Bears and walk away thinking anything other than, "Wow, memory is weird man!" let alone thinking, "**** the whole universe changed!"

Its not even an anomaly. Pretty much all the evidence is that we construct are memories and we do it badly. The Mandela Effect was explained before it was even observed.

 

[Thermal]

I'm probably repeating myself but, yes this. It really amazes me that anyone could learn that it was always Berenstain Bears not Berenstein Bears and walk away thinking anything other than, "Wow, memory is weird man!" let alone thinking, "**** the whole universe changed!"

Its not even an anomaly. Pretty much all the evidence is that we construct are memories and we do it badly. The Mandela Effect was explained before it was even observed.

Right, but having the clear, yet inaccurate, memory yourself that is shared by so many others makes it a little fascinating. It's one thing to realize you made a mistake in recollection. It's a little eerie when thousands of others remember the same thing.

 

[Axxman300]

But other people misremember it the exact same way?! Well, here's a thought. Human brains are all made out of the same stuff, and function in basically the same way (the healthy ones, anyway). And people within a particular demographic are exposed to a lot of the same pop culture influences. Is it really so unbelievable, then, that said people might end up with a lot of the same memory mistakes?

I know we're all special and unique and ****, but there are only so many things a brain can do. It just doesn't amaze me that much. What amazes me is the hoops people will jump through to invent mysticism where only boring brain farts exist.

I keep telling people this.

The human brain is busy receiving input from all five senses and sorting it all out to keep on an even keel. I'm not a shrink, but in my daily life I catch myself disregarding incorrect perception four of five times a day. I'll think I see someone in a secure area on my security cameras, and run down to intercept only to find no one, and upon reviewing the footage there was never anyone on the screen. The problem is I have 12 cameras to keep track of on top of my other duties, and sometimes my brain drags nonexistent movement onto a screen covering an area where we've had problems with intruders.

And yes, just as often there are intruders.

Goes the other way too, like the time a tanker truck was hiding in my blindspot. Somehow I had missed the thing come up behind me.

The truck and the people popping up on my cameras don't drop out of a parallel universe, I'm just focused on other things, so part of my brain is on auto-pilot as I suspect other people's are too. It's part of the fun of being human,

 

[Fudbucker]

Right, but having the clear, yet inaccurate, memory yourself that is shared by so many others makes it a little fascinating. It's one thing to realize you made a mistake in recollection. It's a little eerie when thousands of others remember the same thing.

Yes, that is what it makes it fascinating. If it were just me, I wouldn't give it a moment's thought. If it's a lot of people all claiming the same thing, then it gets a little weird. Nor is it just "going along with the crowd". I distinctly remember thinking "that can't be right!", when I heard it was spelled -stain.

The most parsimonious explanation is some mass failure of memory, maybe based on how the author's name is pronounced. But I wonder what someone like Dmitri Mendeleev would have predicted about the outcome of the double-slit experiment.

 

[Veliki George]

I've found so many residuals of They Live! in German. It is Sie Leben in German, but so often I find Sie Leben! with exclamation point.

 

[esspee]

Yeah, but there was no actual content. Nothing but some vague musings while walking dogs. Pisses me off to have wasted almost 4 minutes of my time above ground. The only upshot is that I know now not you watch vids you link. Was that your desired outcome? It is the predictable one.



It is a possibility. Is there evidence of such experimentation? If not, it is the equivalent of speculating that alternate universes are colliding. Unless speculation provides some new perspective, it doesn't help much. Paranoid speculation only sheds light on being paranoid.

well as a possible explanations go, i think perception/memory experimentation ranks higher than overlapping alternate dimensions,

As a possible explanation it had not been part of the discussion on this thread, and so i thought it only fair to add it.


BTW, suggesting a new and possible explanation is not the same thing as stating that it IS the explanation.


In fact i think a lot of the effects, such as names like depend and depends, those kind of close things, could be put down to marketing.

Brand names and even stage names often are more 'sticky' to the human mind when they are just slightly off what is expected.
And so not only are such names more likely to be successful as products, and chosen by companies as a result of market research, but also marketing people will actively seek out such 'slightly off expected' names intentionally.

One good example of this is Cliff Richard. Cliff has said himself that the name Richard was chosen over the more common Richards (popular second name in the UK) because people would expect it to be Richards get it wrong and then argue over it, or have a double take when reading it or hearing it.

 

[Checkmite]

But then there is the ME-lore concept of "flip-flops". E.g a common ME belief is that Flint-stones used to be Flin-stones. Except some claim that they remember the discussion was reversed, the cartoon was called Flin-stones and people misrembered it as Flint-stones. I am wholly unqualified to diagnose anybody for schizophrenia, but this seems to indicate at least some form of cognitive problem.

There was another version involving the movie Apollo 13. Some swear up and down that Tom Hank's line, which is "Houston, we have a problem," was originally "Houston, we've had a problem". Back when I used to try reasoning with these people, I 'splained that it was probably because somewhere along the line they learned that Jim Lovell's historical statement was "we've had a problem" and the movie misquoted him, and they likely just conflated to the two lines but of course that wasn't it at all.

At any rate, many months after that discussion (and long after I'd given up taking any of these people seriously), one of the participants breathlessly begins a new one declaring that the line had been switched back! Just the other day he watched Apollo 13 and Tom Hanks says "Houston, we've had a problem"...except a number of individuals who actually own the movie were quick to bring up that they checked and found the line was still "We have a problem" in their copy, and a large discussion ensued over whether the line had switched yet again [dimensional-slip theory] or whether the "Effect" simply hadn't gotten to those peoples' copy of the movie yet [unknown editing-force theory].

 

[Checkmite]

but they say that Sunny guy from the raisin bran cereals lost his sunglasses.

There's a bunch of these. They also say Mr. Monopoly lost his monocle (he never had one) and that Pikachu's tail is supposed to have a black tip like the character's ears (it never did, at least in official art).

 

[William Parcher]

Here is a really bad way to explore the Mandela Effect and it might be a really common way as well.

A James Bond fan website did a Twitter survey with relation to Dolly's braces. They found that 47% of the respondents "remembered" Dolly wearing braces. But not so fast!

The obvious problem was that the questionnaire was multiple choice. Another problem is that the question being asked is not necessarily legitimate. It went like this...

What factor first attracted Jaws to Dolly in Moonraker (at first sight)?

Pigtails
Braces
Boobs
Glasses

Those were your choices. She does have pigtails, big boobs and glasses. But she doesn't have braces. Putting that aside, it's not necessarily apparent if Jaws is attracted to any particular body feature on Dolly.

Now, a person who is relatively unfamiliar with the scene might think that the pollster is totally honest. Jaws is attracted to one thing, and Dolly has all of the listed things. The person may have no memory of seeing braces because she didn't have braces. They know for sure that Jaws has metal teeth because everyone knows that. So if they use logic they would think that braces ought to be the attractor even though they have no memory of seeing them at all. For this person, choosing braces seems to make sense and is likely to be the correct choice.

But it's not really a false memory as much as it is a trick of the pollster. Even a person who strongly doubts the braces might still pick it.

Now, a person who is quite familiar with the scene is going to get confused. The question makes no sense and there is a bogus answer sitting in there because she wasn't wearing braces. How is this person supposed to respond? Maybe they don't choose at all and just ignore the whole thing.

You see, it really would be best not to ask as a multitude choice question. Ask the respondents to write in their own answer to the question. If they remember braces as being the initial attractor they will write it. Now how many answered braces?

Or ask the question differently. "What were a few of Dolly's most prominent visual aspects which Jaws saw?" If they remember braces they will write it. Maybe the braces are the only thing they remember and that's fine.

So I think you can see that it appears (at least to me) that this Mandela Effect might be misrepresented and sometimes isn't really a false memory per se. The pollster may be causing a spontaneous Mandela Effect when one was never really there in the first place.

A person who has no memory of her wearing braces at all could tell you that she wore braces. It's because of the way it was presented to them, not because they remember something that never was.

Here is the link to the survey article: https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/moonraker-dolly-did-not-wear-braces

The results...

21% Pigtails
47% Braces
19% Boobs
13% Glasses

 

[Axxman300]

Here is a really bad way to explore the Mandela Effect and it might be a really common way as well.

A James Bond fan website did a Twitter survey with relation to Dolly's braces. They found that 47% of the respondents "remembered" Dolly wearing braces. But not so fast!

The obvious problem was that the questionnaire was multiple choice. Another problem is that the question being asked is not necessarily legitimate. It went like this...

What factor first attracted Jaws to Dolly in Moonraker (at first sight)?

Pigtails
Braces
Boobs
Glasses

Those were your choices. She does have pigtails, big boobs and glasses. But she doesn't have braces. Putting that aside, it's not necessarily apparent if Jaws is attracted to any particular body feature on Dolly.

Now, a person who is relatively unfamiliar with the scene might think that the pollster is totally honest. Jaws is attracted to one thing, and Dolly has all of the listed things. The person may have no memory of seeing braces because she didn't have braces. They know for sure that Jaws has metal teeth because everyone knows that. So if they use logic they would think that braces ought to be the attractor even though they have no memory of seeing them at all. For this person, choosing braces seems to make sense and is likely to be the correct choice.

But it's not really a false memory as much as it is a trick of the pollster. Even a person who strongly doubts the braces might still pick it.

Now, a person who is quite familiar with the scene is going to get confused. The question makes no sense and there is a bogus answer sitting in there because she wasn't wearing braces. How is this person supposed to respond? Maybe they don't choose at all and just ignore the whole thing.

You see, it really would be best not to ask as a multitude choice question. Ask the respondents to write in their own answer to the question. If they remember braces as being the initial attractor they will write it. Now how many answered braces?

Or ask the question differently. "What were a few of Dolly's most prominent visual aspects which Jaws saw?" If they remember braces they will write it. Maybe the braces are the only thing they remember and that's fine.

So I think you can see that it appears (at least to me) that this Mandela Effect might be misrepresented and sometimes isn't really a false memory per se. The pollster may be causing a spontaneous Mandela Effect when one was never really there in the first place.

A person who has no memory of her wearing braces at all could tell you that she wore braces. It's because of the way it was presented to them, not because they remember something that never was.

Here is the link to the survey article: https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/moonraker-dolly-did-not-wear-braces

The results...

21% Pigtails
47% Braces
19% Boobs
13% Glasses

So what you're suggesting is that researchers of Woo rig their question?

Say it ain't so.

I would have sworn braces, but then I haven't see the movie in thirty years (not a favorite) so my exposure is at best three viewings 39 years ago.

 

[theprestige]

I just ask the same question: what makes it "woo"?

What makes it woo is you expanding MWI into a pseudoscientific "explanation" for any damn thing.

 

[William Parcher]

So what you're suggesting is that researchers of Woo rig their question?

Say it ain't so.

I would have sworn braces, but then I haven't see the movie in thirty years (not a favorite) so my exposure is at best three viewings 39 years ago.

This could be so complicated that the pollsters are naive and ignorant of what their poll is doing. They may also misrepresent the results and not realize that they are doing it. Some woo is like that. A person who has no recollection of Dolly wearing braces might answer that she wore braces and then still not remember that even after answering. That's not supposed to be what the Mandela Effect is.

They might tell us that 47% of people polled remember her wearing braces which would then potentially imply that 53% do remember that she is not wearing braces. But that's not necessarily true either. Some might think she has braces but that Jaws was first attracted to her boobs. Also it's important to understand that some would refuse to answer because the survey has no correct answer and they remember her not wearing braces.

It seems that you must somehow probe a person's memory without prompting them at all in any way. You can't mention braces at all in the question or the context. You have to somehow find out if their pure recollection is that she wore braces. Like this...

"Tell me what you remember about the appearance of Dolly in Moonraker."

If they remember that she wore braces they ought to tell you right away. It would be the significant answer and feature because she mates up with Jaws who has metal teeth. It would mean that it's a memory that was already in their brain and wasn't suddenly planted there by you.

Note the difference between...

"Describe the cartoon Sun on the Raisin Bran box." and:

"Does the cartoon Sun on the Raisin Bran box wear sunglasses?"

The first one asks you to describe your already existing mental image memory. The second creates a fresh mental image and asks if that already resided in your memory. It could cause you to answer as if you have a specific memory when you really don't.

 

[alfaniner]

So, anyone ready for the "Episode IV" argument?