Can you disprove the Mandela effect, Veeky Forums...

globes and maps aren't exactly accurate, they exaggerate the size of some areas in order to more accurately depict other parts.

Greenland isn't as big as most people think

The size distortion isn't huge unless you use the Mercator projection though.

A bigger issue is that on most projections the shortest distance between two places isn't a straight line.

yea seriously, wtf is this mandela effect?

HOLY SHIT

Some of these...

Visualize where Japan is relative to South Korea.

Now google "east asia map".

WHAT THE FUCK.

Some of the others are also definitely true.

What the absolute fuck.

>trusting your weak and fallible memory over the truth of the observable world
brainlets need to leave

I never said I believed in some paranormal explanation.

I'm just shocked.

More shocking is that so many people have these identical false memories.

The person you replied to may not have originated from the same reality world-line as you have, which would make it very difficult to prove who's right

>The phenomenon where a group of people discover that a global fact - one they feel they know to be true and have specific personal memories for - has apparently changed in the world around them.

>I never said I believed in some paranormal explanation.
>I'm just shocked.
Alright, I guess you're not a faggot then.

>More shocking is that so many people have these identical false memories.
Eh, people's brains tend to work in similar ways based on priming and cultural association and what not. In a population of millions it's no surprise that thousands of people might share some very simple misconceptions.

>so many people
Can you express that as a percentage? Preferably not a percentage of the full SEVEN BILLION, but a localized, meaningful percentage.

I just asked my gf:
"You know in Snow White where she talks to the mirror, how does that quote go? Or how does it strart?"
And she responded with:
"Mirror mirror on the wall-?"

I'm sold, gents

>thousands in millions
>express as a percentage

I'm and I find it coincidental that my gf and I have the same belief if you imply the percentage is so low

I too have a distinct memory of it being like that. I distinctly remember geography quizzes in middle school.

I'm looking through mandelaeffect.com/major-memories/ and I'm really creeped out by all of these false memories I have that so many others seem to have too.

I remember watching snow white as a child and the witch saying, "Mirror, mirror on the wall." I remember the exact voice and inflection of the entire quote. Yet she never, ever said that.

The movie doesn't quote the book word-for-word.

Unless you want to argue that this is evidence that the movie and the book come from different timelines, NOT PARANORMAL.

in a similar way I have the memory of voice inflection of Lord Farquad saying that from the first Shrek movie. I wonder if his quote says "magic" now too.

who was talking about the book?

>imply
I don't know the percentage and it sounds like you don't either. The point isn't to say it's low, but that it means nothing if we don't measure it. Repeating a coin toss a trillion so times is very likely to result in getting heads 30 times in a row.

The majority of these are just people not remembering things right. All the quote ones for instance are just people mixing up a single word.

Mandela was president of South Africa after Apartheid; of course he didn't die in prison.

All the map ones are easily explained just by the fact that people do not understand projections.

The only ones that are even kinda interesting are the Berenstain Bears and Looney Tunes.

The original post "The Berenstain Bears" is a pseudo-scientific trolling attempt. It's not actually logical or substantive. It's nonsense. In short, I do think that Psychology is not a real science. The alternative thought, and the thought that is actually true is that there is only right behavior such as politeness and rational adulthood with reference only to the Holy Bible. Specifically the King James Version in English or the Reina Valera-1960 Version in Spanish.

Without knowing exactly which media you and your sister have encountered, I can't measure any potential deviations in the timeline. To me, it just seems like a case of conflicting story formats. If you were both talking about the book or you were both talking about the movie, and you both knew you were both talking about the book, or movie, then that'd be evidence. Doing less than explicitly investigating the fine details of any supposed timeline differences is useless.

I just know the book and the movie say different things. Also, different movies for the same book are liable to say things differently.

I'm not going to address the map ones, because those ones are so far beyond retarded it's pitiful.

Notice, first of all, that they are mostly small details. Word endings, prepositions, things that are easy to interchange or confuse. The changes are always small. If this effect were explained by "gliteches in the matrix" or whatever the fuck these morons think, isn't it interesting that we don't find anybody who remembers "Borowitz Bears" instead of "Berenstain", or the like? And of course it is "-stein" that most people remember, when that's a much more common suffix than "-stain", which I can't even think of an example of besides this stupid book.

A lot of the other things are just errors that people made and they spread as people talk. The "Luke, I am your father" was probably originally started to give context to the quote, or just as a mistake. But every time I hear someone quote the movie, they say that. Same with "mirror mirror on the wall". Easy word replacement that doesn't interrupt the flow of the rhyme, so if one TV Show or something does it, it spreads.

Finally, there are almost entirely things from the distant past, especially people's childhoods (things people are more likely to not remember correctly). Why is there nobody who thinks the twin towers were attacked on Sept. 10th, or that John McCain won the 2008 election, or the like? Because they are massive, recent events that are far too obvious and frequently thought of to forget or mis-remember.

It is seriously baffling to me how popular this stupid "phenomenon" is. Really. How fucking idiotic do you have to be, to be confronted with a minor deviation from your expected reality and come to the conclusion that "No, I couldn't possibly have misread/misremembered the suffix of a book I last read when I was 6. The only logical conclusion is that the universe has collided with an alternate one, changing the title of the book"

What if history is relative?

>sister

my gf and i were both talking about the movie

Though I'm shocked at my false memories, I came to the same conclusion as you about my false memories of maps and movie quotes (though I still remember the inflection of the "mirror mirror"..)

For things like mandela, we're probably both too young to "remember" his death, but apparently tons of people who were adults in the 80's do. Hence the name, the "Mandela effect".

However, as you say, for me
>Berenstain Bears and Looney Tunes
is truly bizarre.

I can't remember the last time I was creeped out.

I distinctly remember Forrest Gump saying "life is like a box of chocolates". I also distinctly remember watching Looney Toons and "Toons" was scribbled down in handwriting, now it's just bold text.

3spooky18me

This shouldn't even be a thread. It's been shown time and time again that the human memory is mercurial. It will always change with time. It undergoes a lot of changes through time to eliminate the amount of space used. Removal and simplification type compression trims the make-up of memories so they're still coherent but they're also not 1:1. Then you have exposure to a lot of similar parameters: so what Snow White didn't say "mirror, mirror" somebody at some point has exposed you to that phrase at some point. Given how common it is it was a popular source.

What's really concerning is memory implanting which has been a proven possibility.
mccc.edu/~jenningh/Courses/documents/PSY101_journalpacket_2008.pdf

Huh, you know, there ARE some weird examples.

Like, the Lindbergh baby was actually found for instance. Or that some people have vivid memories of Billy Graham's funeral in the 90's, despite him still being alive.

I'm not going to say anything spooky or paranormal is going on here, but I think it might warrant more looking into.

>Sex in the City now Sex and the City
Reality portal confirmed

And what would be in a book would depend on who translated it. The German text from Grimms' Fairy Tales was
>Spieglein, Spieglein an der Wand

>not having an eidetic memory
I'm sorry, who's the brainlet?

Do you know for sure she knew that? If so, how? It isn't science if you don't track down every control variable.

Also: I knew you said GF. I got confused for a second and thought it was your sister, not sure why. I'm probably tapping into my ability to see into alternate timelines.

because my girlfriend doesn't read and i'm sure she's never read the book, but anyhow, want me to ask her? I know you'll just say I made the question biased or something because you're too stubborn about skepticism to consider anything remotely unfamiliar. Try being more open-minded, buddy

>Henry VIII Portrait with Turkey Leg

Never existed. Like so many people, I have a memory of painted portrait of Henry VIII holding a turkey leg in one hand.

I remember a thread perhaps a year ago in which someone posted that image, and literally everyone in the thread thought it was supposed to be "Berenstein".

Is it the Cohen Brothers or the Coen Brothers?

Christopher Reeves or Christopher Reeve?

>i'm sure she's never read the book
Well I'm not sure of that at all. I have no first-hand evidence of your girlfriend's existence at all. I'm going on what you say and what you say alone. I can't go on any other evidence because the nature of this hypothesis is such that the experimental data exists solely in your memories. I wouldn't ask you these questions if I wasn't legitimately trying to figure out what happened.

Basically I can't use your certainty without going full Schizo. I only have my own and your testimony. There's a limit to being open minded.

Who created Charlie Brown, Charles Schultz or Charles Schulz?

Daily reminder that the CIA is still active and trying to hide the mess they made without realizing the mess they made is a result of their efforts to clean it up.

Acausal logic is fun.

(As in, don't answer dichotomous questions.)

Don't impede on our rationalistic amazement at the universality of certain false memories with either conspiracy theories or paranormal speculation.

You're telling me the towers didn't fall on 9/10? Holy shit!

>How fucking idiotic do you have to be to the conclusion that "No, I couldn't possibly have misread/misremembered the suffix of a book I last read when I was 6

It's not that I misremember it. It's that it seems _everyone_ misremembers it in the _same_ way.

Also, only morons would jump to bullshit like "alternate realities". I am just amazed at the *fact* that so many people, including myself, have an identical false memories.

>I am just amazed at the *fact* that so many people, including myself, have an identical false memories.
This is because memory errors are not random. Some mistakes are easier to make, so it's not surprising that tons of people make them.

Nobody thinks it was Berenstine Bears, because that's nonsense. But "stein" is a very common suffix for surnames, so it's easy to accidentally think it's Berenstein Bears.

Look at algebra errors. Its very common to end up with the inverse of the correct answer by forgetting a minus sign somewhere. Given the same equation to solve, you'll see a lot of people make that same mistake. But you won't see anyone accidentally end up with pi or e in there for no reason.

>people's memories are bad
breaking news

Agreed, but when a huge majority make the same sign error?

Indicates something significant. (As in, significant with respect to universal idiosyncrasies in the memory-creation process, specific to specific alterations of specific shared memories).

This is why these cases are interesting, as well as somewhat startling.

solid example

There is no area-preserving way to map a sphere to a flat surface. All flat maps are distorted in some way, usually very badly.

It's pretty much a certainty that the maps most of us remember from being in elementary school used one of the poorest projections.

Me too but I think I was remembering when they write "That's All Folks."

Last time this was a thread I texted my mom (a kindergarten teacher) and asked her to spell it. She got it right.

>It's that it seems _everyone_ misremembers it in the _same_ way
Because we're either a) making a common substitution, as in "stain" becoming "stein" because what fucking name ends in "stain"? or b) remembering a common misquoting, rather than the thing itself, as in "mirror mirror on the wall". Mistakes can easily become far more popular than the original.

you people are beyond stupid

It's not even a misquote. Mirror, mirror is right unless you're specifically talking about the Disney movie.

Yeah, I think it's like this.

Your brain tends to "chunk things" to remember them, so it looks for similar patterns kind of like a compression algorithm.

Hence when "berenstain" becomes mistaken for the common 'stein' suffix because it's easier to remember the thousands of cases with the 'stein' suffix than the one sole exception with the 'stain' suffix.

>Japan was much further away from Koreas
>New Zealand was to the north-east of Australia, now south-east
>South America was below North America, now shifted to the east
plate tectoncis.

>plate tectonics actively shift Japan closer to Korea within 10~20 years
>nobody mentions it
>maps change without anyone mentioning it
>Japanese people shrug their shoulders and levitate above ground

>can you disprove it?
can you prove it?

if you thinking that amount of movement can be discerned on the scale of a map over a period that short, you might be retarded

I'm the guy you replied to.

I remember the forest gump quote as that too. Because he sounds like he says it in the movie, and because that's what everyone says when they quote it. I don't know about you, but I've seen that movie twice but heard the quote (mis)quoted hundreds of times. If you are hearing that negative reinforcement over and over, is it really such a surprise?

Same, pacific Nw USA mirror mirror.

looney tunes - remember that was also something like "merrie melodies" series related to looney tunes. also there was "silly symphonies". so if all of these names are related to musical terms, "looney toons" makes no sense at all.
sorry for my english.

>"looney toons" makes no sense at al
Yes it does.

Looney (Car)toons
Looney 'toons

does this actually happen?
then it wasn't a fact in the first place

What color were Hitler's eyes?

Everyone's image of Hilter comes almost entirely, if not entirely, from black-and-white photographs. Thus, that's a stupid question, and if most people believe they were brown but they were actually blue, that's just because dark eyes and dark hair very commonly go together.

the Bears are the only actual one on that list.

>doesn't know about different projections
holy fuck you're retarded

>Jaws "We're going to need a bigger boat" now "You're going to need a bigger boat"
>Nelson Mandela did not die in prison in 1980, he died in 2013
>"Tank Man" who stood up to tanks in 1989 on Tienanmen Square was not run over by a tank
I don't mis-remember any of these things.

>Looney Toons, now Looney Tunes
>Australia was south-east in the middle of the sea, now right next to Indonesia
>Japan was much further away from Koreas
>New Zealand was to the north-east of Australia, now south-east
>South America was below North America, now shifted to the east
>Snow White cartoon, "Mirror, mirror on the wall", now "Magic mirror on the wall"
>Star Wars "Luke, I am your father", now "No, I am your father"
>Mr. Roger's opening song "It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood" now "It's a beautiful day in this neighborhood"
>Interview with A Vampire, now Interview with The Vampire
>Bernstein Bears, now Bernstain Bears
Confabulatory Social Inertia of young people

>Forrest Gump "Life is like a box of chocolate", now "Life was like a box of chocolate"
Not true; proof:
youtube.com/watch?v=CJh59vZ8ccc

Most of these are just the confabulatory Social Inertia of young people.

Is it too much to just accept that just like how a person may misremember a fact, several people may misremember a fact (then by spreading the false information cause other people to misremember)?

99.9% of people can't imagine being wrong.
People would rather die than admit to fault.
Our lives are determined by social climbing, and this is determined by false-comparisons, competition and shifting blame.

>I made a mistake?
>No! The Universe shifted around
Yes, Humans are this psychotic and narcissistic.

You can't even get people on Veeky Forums to adhere to epistemology, coherency and the burden of proof. And they're the "science" fans.

>cause other people to
Yes, that's too much to accept.

If it hadn't said "cause" then it'd be fine. Confusion over a large subset of a population can happen but it's not a cause. It's just a wide scale effect. There is no harm in people talking about their confusion.

>99.9% of people
More like 10%, but that 10% just happens to be belligerent enough for 180% of us. Most people have no preference for being excessively correct.

Wrong.
>narcissismepidemic.com/reviews.html

+ PhD Reviews

- Police
- The Gov
- Academics
- Bosses
- Parents
- Teenagers
- Professionals
"I'm not wrong" and accusatory confabulation occur at every level in every society.

>"I'm not wrong" and accusatory confabulation
9 times out of ten I'd expect a narcissistic sociopath to misread things as being that when in reality nobody gives a shit, and they only interact because they have something to get done.

I'm not going to click your link because you give me no confidence that it actually contains enough hard statistics to actually disagree with my 10% estimate. Personally I think 10% might be a little high, so 5% might be more realistic. Belligerence is, strictly speaking, uncommon in human interaction.

>"I'm not going to click your link"
=
>"I'm not going to be proven wrong about you claiming people don't like to be proven wrong"
That's absolute confirmation, and least in your case.

>Belligerence is, strictly speaking, uncommon in human interaction.
That's not true though.
And you refuse to look at the counter-evidence, proving, infallibly mind you, that it indicates you're belligerent.

I've never met someone who admitted to being wrong. Not once. I'm 33 and I've lived in Detroit, Chicago, NYC and currently I'm in Los Angeles.

I've never met anyone who ever admitted to being wrong about anything.
So I looked up how often this happens.
And I studied. Turns out most people can't even comprehend the concept of personal wrongness.
The science is on one side of the debate.
It's the "humans are narcissistic sociopaths and social climbers".

How do you explain religious thinking if people are rational?

>That's absolute confirmation, and least in your case.
No, it's laziness. I literally couldn't give a shit what you think. There's nothing personal about this at all. I'm just casually giving my opinion at 1AM and I'm not really motivated to click a link that doesn't seem like it'll be relevant to my fun little opinion.

>you refuse to look at the counter-evidence
I don't though. I just don't have any reason to believe the article you linked it anything other than someone else's argument. I'm not going to debate someone else's stance with you, but I'm happy to discuss your stance if you want.

>I've never met anyone who ever admitted to being wrong about anything.
I'm sorry to hear that. Hopefully that's not actually autism speaking.

>"I refuse to look at counter-evidence"
>Follow by an ad hominem attack
You're an irrational sophist

>ad hominem
I'm not saying you're wrong or anything. I'm not saying anything about you or your character at all. I just don't care about what you think. That's all. I can discuss opinions if you're interested, but I'm not in an excessively caring mood right now.

I genuinely hope you don't think I insulted you.

>I'm not saying you're wrong or anything.
You said I'm wrong 4 times.
*facepalm*
When you contradict someone by stating they're wrong, then you're declaring they're wrong.

Then you rejected having to look at counter-evidence.

Then you implied I was autistic, which was an ad hominem so you didn't have to admit to your bullshit.

You're either trolling or retarded, because you contradict yourself.

I think the actual problem here is the internet working as an echobox for morons that amplifies their biased perception of the world. Kinda like /pol/ but bigger and with a more general scope.

>You said I'm wrong 4 times.
I don't think anything I said should've come across that way. Sorry if you felt I was implying it, but I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just giving my opinion.

>stating they're wrong
I didn't do that. I was just giving my opinion. It was apparently an opinion that differs from yours, but I wasn't saying mine was necessary right. 10% was a rough estimate, at best.

>having to look at counter-evidence
I'm perfectly find with counter-evidence, I just don't think the link you gave will contain any. It might, it might not. I don't really know yet. You haven't really given me a good reason to think you linked to anything other than some blog post rant. I still think it's just an opinion some some guy wrote but if it actually contains hard statistics that disagree with my opinion, that'd be noteworthy to me.

>you implied I was autistic
It's always a possibility on this board. Veeky Forums IS the autism board, after all.

But note that it wasn't intended derogatorily. I've met plenty of nice people who'd been formally diagnosed with some level of the autism spectrum. I'm willing to discuss opinions with you where you have a mental "disorder" or not. It wasn't meant as an attack or a way to discredit you and signal that I wasn't going to respond, it was how I feel about your life experience. I'm still just as willing to talk to you as I always was. I only make these replies in good faith that you'll be earnest with your own. It means something to me that I've typed all this. It's the only honest show of good faith I can really offer you right now. I can't force you to accept it, I can't unequivocally convince you that I really mean it and I won't be able to do anything if you decide to go troll on me. Each post is a risk, but it's worth it, given that I'm not really doing much more than just giving my honest opinion right now.

Agreed
/thread

>the internet working as an echobox for morons
It can work for non-morons too, it's just that most people tend to be morons in at least one way, so the only thing that gets reliably magnified is Mt. Stupid.

Not that guy, but it's interesting that your link explicitly says "this book draws on far more extensive research findings to claim that one in 10 Americans in their 20s suffers from narcissistic personality disorder."

Aka 10%, exactly what he said.

Irony? That's for you to determine.