My Bible has changed! The Mandela Effect-- What's going on?

seek10

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
It seems to be accepted on this forum that 4th Density STS can alter reality. OK, if reality is being changed, then the question moves on to how/why some people can notice the changes and others can't.
I think, the issue is not whether time travel exist or not. When one is emotionally invested in some tree( conspiratoral time travel), they tend to forget about the forest and all the tree's in the forest are looked with the same lens. Cognitive science addresses this bias. That is what we are trying to say.
 

Woodsman

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I classify Mandalla claims into two piles.

All the Berenstein bears and such go in one pile where simple cognitive/memory flaws seem altogether likely.

Then there are those stories which, when I hear them, tend to come from people who don't even know the term, "Mandela effect", and their examples are far more dramatic.

Here's a good one...

A friend of mine, when she was a teenager, had to walk up the road to a neighbor's for some reason. On the way, she encountered a downed power line and tree branch, blocking the road. She said there were sparks and foliage on fire. She carefully made her way around it on the far side of the road and arrived in a fluster at the neighbor's house and reported it. A call was put in to the power company and people were dispatched. However, they found nothing. All was normal. She was taken to the spot on the road and, sure enough, there was nothing out of the ordinary to see.

She was confused and upset and the adults were annoyed.

A few hours later, on her way back home, she came across the same scene; a downed branch and power line and burning foliage. She went home, and this time said nothing and felt like she was going crazy.

That kind of story I put into a different pile. -Of course, I don't know if there wasn't some mundane explanation for her experiences, (a particularly powerful dream mixed with old memories perhaps?), but they require a different level of analysis it would seem.

My personal thought when it comes to the effect of time adjustments: it seems reasonable to assume that our memory recording processes would be affected right along with reality. So unless we are operating at an advanced or abnormal level of awareness, such changes ought to be undetectable, or very difficult to detect. As I understand it, the feeling of Deja Vu might be the result in some cases of memory artifacts hanging over from moving through adjustment loops. A different kind of memory recording process engaged which is less tied to material 3D reality. -A sense which few develop beyond a vague instinct of something amiss.

When it comes to less extreme examples of Mandela Effect, I am more likely to take greater interest in stories which deal with reports of recent shifts; such as conversations or meetings from a day or two prior which others claim never happened. Long term memory is hopelessly unreliable. -Though I am loath to say "never". Those silly bears might actually be a genuine example of a time shift! It just doesn't seem likely to me.
 
Last edited:

Tuulikki

The Force is Strong With This One
That must have really confused the power people when they arrived a second time and found that the event had actually occurred just as had been described to them.
 

DougEE

Jedi
FOTCM Member
Mandella Effect = AI
According to Jim Stone's website in Mexico

I discussed the topic of the Gettysburg address being changed with Claudia and how the revisionists were first noticed when they claimed Nelson Mandela was still alive (after everyone knew he died in prison) and as it turns out, Mexicans all know he died in prison long long ago and this hoax "Mandela effect" never happened in Mexico. It appears that it is all a stunt the tech left is pulling to re-write the history of Western civilization, even despite it all remaining intact in countries like Mexico. Claudia said they would never get away with it in Mexico because the old books are kept by everyone and not thrown away. I am not so sure this will work for them long term, but for now, the "Mandela effect" is not happening in Mexico, at least not as much.

FOLKS, THE SCAMMING TECH LEFT HAS CHANGED THE GETTYSBURG ADDRESS. It is now Four score and seven years ago our fathers! The tech left has replaced "forefathers" with "fathers" and have obviously employed supercomputers to comb every record everyone has and change it to fathers, including photos people have, even private personal photos. There is now NO QUESTION AT ALL that's what operating system updates are really doing, they are going into everyone's photos and documents and changing what is there to match the new narrative, whatever it happens to be. If this is hard for you to believe, go check the Gettysburg Address on all sites that claim to be for "history", even the photos, and see for yourself.

There's no other way this historic document could have been purged so well, and so completely, and the quality of the hoaxing of photos is so high there's now reason to believe Julian Assange is in fact dead and they are hoaxing even him.
It might be hard to believe you did not remember the Gettysburg Address wrong after bathing in 500 photos "proving" you remembered it wrong but I found proof you did not remember it wrong. As it turns out, Johnny Cash put it to music. Since the revisionist AI was not set to hunt out music and destroy even that, it stayed preserved via Johnny Cash.
Their revisionist AI made a fatal screw up and I found it there. It can be assumed that the AI will change that Johnny Cash tune as soon as the tech left figures out it was preserved there, but I checked again this morning and it was still legit and also saved it. It is evident now that saving it on a computer will not be good enough however, the AI will find it's way in and wipe it out. This is obviously what all those huge supercomputers are at least in part, really for.


If you still have those old encyclopedias, or there is a set you can go get, DO IT, AND GUARD IT WITH YOUR LIFE. Believe nothing, the tech left is clearly hell bent on destroying true history.
 

3DStudent

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Really, AI changing the Gettysburg Address? When I read it, 'fathers' didn't sound off. But I may just not remember it. If anything, I would have said neither, and rather 'founding fathers'. Now, I do remember (or think I do) the Declaration of Independence, so if that gets changed, I think I'll know.

But for real? So just make some text documents with 'forefathers' and see if they get changed... 🙃
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Really, AI changing the Gettysburg Address? When I read it, 'fathers' didn't sound off. But I may just not remember it. If anything, I would have said neither, and rather 'founding fathers'. Now, I do remember (or think I do) the Declaration of Independence, so if that gets changed, I think I'll know.

But for real? So just make some text documents with 'forefathers' and see if they get changed... 🙃
Yep, this one too sounds pretty far-fetched. It sounds like just another cognitive error to me. Given that the sentence starts with "four", and "forefathers" is appropriately old-sounding, it's not very hard to believe that people would unconsciously replace fathers with "four"-fathers.

What really strikes me about much the Mandela Effect phenomenon is how much it reveals about the arrogance of the people who believe it so strongly. They're so convinced about the infallibility of their own memory that they're willing to believe the entire world has changed rather than the fact that they simply made a mistake. It's the old "I'm not crazy, so the world must be" idea, which Lobaczewski talks about in the section on pathological egotism. It's pretty astounding that people don't know how unreliable memory can be. Not only is it basic psychology 101 stuff, a tiny bit of self-awareness would reveal it as obviously true. How many times have we looked at something and realized, "Oh, I never noticed that detail before!" or "Wow, I always thought x was y" or "I have no memory of doing that" etc. And how many times have we seen it in OTHER people, like when we're sure we remember something correctly but someone else disagrees with us. Maybe we even seek out the evidence to prove they're wrong. (Or we find out we were wrong!)
 
When you play a video game, you control your Avatar and do something wrong and it dies. Well, you play again from the last saved game.

For a while ... This I have already lived! Deja vu!

And you continue the game until you fail again and reload it from the next saved game.

Deja vu ... Again.

In an online game with millions of players, in principle it should not happen, what happens is caused by the action of many.

Unless ... that the simulation manager changes something in the game, for it to develop more according to his wishes.

Then Deja vu in the Avatars who have experienced some change in the simulation.

Be that as it may, "the Avatar" continues to "play" oblivious to the actions of his "player" or the "administrators" of the game, except for those strange sensations of Deja vu.

I've read somewhere that you have to try to be a "conscious" player.

The Avatar who knows he is an Avatar inevitably changes the way he plays ...

🤔
 

3DStudent

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Then Deja vu in the Avatars who have experienced some change in the simulation.

Be that as it may, "the Avatar" continues to "play" oblivious to the actions of his "player" or the "administrators" of the game, except for those strange sensations of Deja vu.

I've read somewhere that you have to try to be a "conscious" player.

The Avatar who knows he is an Avatar inevitably changes the way he plays ...
That reminds me of the move Edge of Tomorrow, which I'd recommend. And knowing that you're an Avatar reminds me of this quote:

“So live as if you were living already for the second time and as if you had acted the first time as wrongly as you are about to act now!”

― Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning
 

Ennio

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Anybody have any comments about the recent session and Art now having two hats?
Yes. The encouragement given here to shore up one's knowledge of cognitive errors still stands, lest we misattribute all kinds of perceptions or experiences to causes strange and metaphysical. You know, your writing 'Art' - instead of Ark, is an example of a cognitive error, albeit a pretty minor one (even if Ark's name is printed out over a dozen times in the session transcript). But I got that one beat! I must have watched an actor's name on the show titles I was watching over three dozen times before a friend pointed out to me that his name wasn't Walter Goggins (as I used to refer to him), but Walton Goggins. And he was right! See what I mean?

If we're not thinking about our own thinking, as much as possible, and if we don't use some of the tools to rule out many of the most basic possibilities, then we can get easily lost in the mire of 'mandela effects' and all kinds of things. So, again, starting from square one with the most basic of possibilities (which many folks don't even know exist) is, I think, a great place to work from; the suggested reading being here for a reason.
 

Ina

Jedi
Yes. The encouragement given here to shore up one's knowledge of cognitive errors still stands, lest we misattribute all kinds of perceptions or experiences to causes strange and metaphysical. You know, your writing 'Art' - instead of Ark, is an example of a cognitive error, albeit a pretty minor one (even if Ark's name is printed out over a dozen times in the session transcript). But I got that one beat! I must have watched an actor's name on the show titles I was watching over three dozen times before a friend pointed out to me that his name wasn't Walter Goggins (as I used to refer to him), but Walton Goggins. And he was right! See what I mean?

If we're not thinking about our own thinking, as much as possible, and if we don't use some of the tools to rule out many of the most basic possibilities, then we can get easily lost in the mire of 'mandela effects' and all kinds of things. So, again, starting from square one with the most basic of possibilities (which many folks don't even know exist) is, I think, a great place to work from; the suggested reading being here for a reason.
Little errors but maybe not so little.
With the embarrassment of repeating myself, here is the story. I assume everyone here knows the difference between a tube and a cube. Well, I met this year 2 physics student that needed help with one of his optics assignments. After reading the problem to me it was a straight forward comparison of refraction in two media. When I asked him to draw the experiment, instead of a cube filled with water he represented a tube filled with water. Long story short, his cognitive issue was caused by his spelling incapacity. So here we go. ‘Moses supposes his tosses are roses so Moses supposes his tosses to be.’ I hope the guy learned the difference as now he must be some big manager somewhere.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom