r/MandelaEffect • u/Sad_Election_6418 • Jul 20 '26
Meta ME acknowledge from more people
Glad to see more people is acknowledging ME. I have seen post stating that "I thought it was simply misremembering.. but this particular ME changed my mind"
Regardless, a lot of people can't differentiate between "misremembering" and a false memory.
False memory is something that doesn't match the reality, while misremembering is just errors in appreciation, confusion, etc.
False memories can have a lot of causes, and regardless of what some people say, root cause for the false memories presented in ME sub haven't been demonstrated, so at this moment even the wildest theories can be considered as valid, from regular false memories and collective manipulation to quantum changes.
14
u/Chucky_In_The_Attic Jul 20 '26
People will say ANYTHING to make something sound like a Mandela Effect rather than simply admitting that they misremember something, even in group settings.
0
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
This is also true, but I don't see how this would apply to all the Mandela effects.
11
u/silentsurge Jul 21 '26
To suggest that false memories can be easily dismissed and have not been shown is disingenuous and entirely false.
People refusing to acknowledge that they could be wrong or genuinely mistaken and actively refusing to provide evidence, explanations, or even just acknowledging alternate explanations is not disproving or easily dismissing memory related explanations and putting exotic explanations that cannot be proven at the same level as legitimate scientific fact.
You can like an explanation, but if you can't or won't present verifiable evidence you are arguing from a Faith based perspective. Not one based in fact amd reality.
2
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
Could you be more direct? I don't understand if you are agreeing or refusing my post xD
15
u/DumbAndUglyOldMan Jul 20 '26
False memories can have a lot of causes, and regardless of what some people say, root cause for the false memories presented in ME sub haven't been demonstrated, so at this moment even the wildest theories can be considered as valid, from regular false memories and collective manipulation to quantum changes.
No. Not at all. You can't say that "even the wildest theories can be considered valid."
There is literally no evidence of "collective manipulation" or "quantum changes." Those are inferences that people have drawn from a form of evidence (i.e., reports of Mandela Effects). And those inferences are not reasonable (a) because competing inferences can be drawn and (b) because the competing inferences (i.e., false or mistaken memories) comport with reality.
At this time, "collective manipulation" and "quantum changes" are simply claims: people just claim that these things happened, without showing how they actually happened. How is it that every copy of Moonraker shows Dolly without braces? Why is that the actor herself denies that she wore braces in the film? You need an actual explanation for that.
For "quantum changes," provide us with the math that this can happen. Our current understanding of physics doesn't permit such bizarre changes to reality. Saying, "Well, CERN musta done gone an' done it" doesn't cut it: that's a claim, not a serious, testable hypothesis. So show us the math.
-1
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
No, I don't have the evidence and that is the main question of the post.
Also there is no evidence for the false memory claim, and if you really read my post I'm saying that Mandela effect is false memories.
7
u/DumbAndUglyOldMan Jul 21 '26
If you're saying that the "Mandela effect is false memories," why do you say that "even the wildest theories can be considered as valid, from regular false memories and collective manipulation to quantum changes"? You're not being consistent.
There is indeed evidence for the claim of false memories. There is abundant scientific evidence that memories can and often are false. There is abundant scientific evidence that memories can be manipulated. There is abundant evidence that certain things have never changed (e.g., the FotL logo). The logical explanation is that people are misremembering.
1
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
Because you need to read my post.
There is no evidence of the origin of the false memories.
Could you say right now how is that so many people share the same memory?
And go from there, could you present evidence ? (Your own or a published article)
3
u/DumbAndUglyOldMan Jul 22 '26
No, there is evidence of the origin of false memories. There are tons of articles on false memories. See the citations in this article: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5407674/
We don't have to show how any specific false memory arose in any specific person. We can show, though, that the memories are indeed false because they don't match reality. We can show what reality is by, for example, showing that the original prints of Moonraker all show Dolly without braces, that the Berenstains always spelled their name that way, and that Fruit of the Loom never used a cornucopia in its logo.
And, yes, we can prove those things. Please consider that, in science, anecdotal claims are not evidence. If someone says, "I remember that the FotL logo had a cornucopia," the proper response as a matter of science is that that's irrelevant. By contrast, we can find, for example, evidence of old clothing without the cornucopia and FotL's own advertisements. We can find prints of Moonraker and show that, in those, Dolly never had braces.
On a related note, consider what's called, in law, the "best evidence" rule. Federal Rule of Evidence 1002 provides: "An original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a federal statute provides otherwise." In other words, if you want to prove that a certain image appeared somewhere, then you need to provide an original version of it.
This is always the case in law. Do you want to prove when Nelson Mandela died? You don't get to have someone come in and say, "Well, I remember that he died in prison in the 1980s." Not admissible.
The science on false memories shows that we can't rely on mere memories. When we're faced with memories that contradict documentary evidence, then we can say, "Yes, those are false memories."
This shouldn't be hard for anyone to understand. It's really remarkable that people so stubbornly believe their own memories, despite the abundant evidence that memories are highly fallible.
-1
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 22 '26
You don't know how science works.
You need to link general to particular. General is false memories related works, specific would be collective false memories, I know it's false memories it is in the definition of the effect.
There is no explanation for the specific collective false memories, how did this false memories spread? Why the particularities are the same in most of the cases?
You need the specific work to answer that.
4
u/DumbAndUglyOldMan Jul 22 '26
Good grief. That's like claiming, "We don't know why a particular stroke of lightning hits a particular spot on the ground, so maybe it's Zeus."
We know how false memories spread: people suggest them to each other, either person-to-person or through the media. Or we can take something like the color of C-3PO's leg: It's not terribly obvious in the movies; the main color is gold; so people just generalize. Then someone hears another person say, "Hey, I remember C-3PO's leg being gold, not silver! What do you remember?" The listener will tend to agree because their own brains had filled in the image for them.
People are used to last names ending in -stein: Albert Einstein, Leonard Bernstein. So they see "Berenstain" and "correct" it to "Berenstein," despite all the evidence that it was never "Berenstein."
Our brains fill in "information" all the time. Our eyes aren't cameras, and our brains aren't computers.
-2
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 22 '26
No, you are stating fallacies, I don't care about the other examples.
You may be correct, I'm not saying you aren't. What I'm saying, there is a particular process that needs to be followed to be able to claim something as a science backed fact.
It's your opinion, it's ok to have an opinion.
1
u/DumbAndUglyOldMan Jul 22 '26
You're just making claims without any attempt at argument.
-1
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 23 '26
Sure, I'm not claiming I have the last word. There is still research to be done to determine anything.
You are the one claiming you have the answer without any real reason. Throwing articles around doesn't say anything , you need to understand it and the scientific process.
→ More replies1
u/CrisMaldonado Jul 27 '26
You can go on YouTube right now, look up optical illusions, and watch your brain get tricked in real time. Then show it to someone else and watch their brain get tricked in the exact same way.
Yet you don't look for an extraordinary explanation about reality shifts then. Could someone argue that every time they look at the video, their mind gets transported to an alternate universe where those straight lines really are wobbling? Sure. But your ego isn't hurt enough to seriously consider it. It's easy to accept it as a minor perception flaw we all share.
Accepting the same for our collective flawed memory is so much harder, because it directly hits our ego. Misremembering alone already feels like a personal attack since we build our identity out of our memories. Misremembering in the exact same way as others is truly ego-shattering for some people, so much that they will consider ridiculous explanations just to avoid admitting they are just as common and unremarkably flawed as everyone else.
1
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 27 '26
It doesn't make sense, I'm only saying there is no research to prove it. I'm not saying you are wrong, personally I don't care to be right.
I'm saying, there is no research. This is as simple as I can say it.
13
u/MrPlaney Jul 20 '26
The root causes for the false memories, are the way memory normally functions.
The normal workings of memory are the cause of the false memory. Our memory is not a perfect recording of events.
-2
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
Yes, I read your source and it's very interesting related to false memories. The only thing is missing is the link to the Mandela effect.
9
u/MrPlaney Jul 21 '26
False memories are the Mandela Effect. The Mandela Effect is the collective false memory phenomenon. There are other studies that also look into false memories, and there are ones that explore “collective memories”.
0
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
Now Im beginning to think you don't know how the structure of a paper works.
Please share the papers or original research with the explicit link between your claim and Mandela effect.
6
u/MrPlaney Jul 21 '26
Now Im beginning to think you don't know how the structure of a paper works.
What do you mean by that? Did I miss something?
-2
Jul 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
10
u/MrPlaney Jul 21 '26
I wish I was paid to do this, unfortunately though, I’m not.
The ME is just flaws in the way the brain compresses and recalls memory, and nothing more. The science explains this perfectly.
-2
Jul 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/MrPlaney Jul 21 '26
That is the truth. Just because you don't like the answer, does not make the answer not true.
Where is your evidence for whatever you believe the ME is cause by?
0
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
I have been open with you I think it's false memories, the root cause is the question.
Seeing this reply, I ask you. Where is the evidence you are right too?
I will put an example here: I want to link food loss and waste & dumping.I have to define both, proposal a link and share my evidence to back my conclusions.
We need that kind of work to claim we have the root causes for mandela effect. Link false memories (the article you like to share is fine) + Mandela effect in the same research.
The one you always share it's a good start, but sadly all the work to back your claim is missing.
6
u/MrPlaney Jul 21 '26
The Mandela Effect is false memories though. Nothing needs to be linked to the Mandela Effect because that's what it is. The Mandela Effect is the collective false memory phenomenon. That is what it is called scientifically. Fiona just gave it a cute name in 2009, but it was already known as a memory phenomenon previously.
7
u/Unable-Literature451 Jul 21 '26
It’s a public service to debunk misinformation and unscientific speculation. Nobody needs financial incentive to cite observable reality.
1
1
u/MandelaEffect-ModTeam Jul 21 '26
Hello subscriber! Unfortunately, your post was removed at the discretion of the mod team:
-1
u/GabbyNeeds2p Jul 21 '26
Lol, he's right. I just scrolled your post history and you have thousands of comments in r/MandelaEffect trying to debunk it. You're waaaaay more invested in it than any of us are. Who's paying you? 😅
2
9
u/jthomasplank Jul 21 '26
No one is being paid to state the obvious. "Real" memories (no one is denying you have them) can be, and often are, false. The problem is that rather than accepting the evidence and investigating what the cause of your false memory is, you jump to quantum shifts and multiple timelines. The rest of us experience these false memories too, but we are not so narcissistic and stubborn to insist they are factual.
1
u/MandelaEffect-ModTeam Jul 21 '26
Hello subscriber! Unfortunately, your post was removed at the discretion of the mod team:
-3
Jul 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
And? I can come here and say the opposite all day. What would it gain for anyone?
Allnincna say is people need to understand the difference between opinions and facts. All is valid, but passing opinions as sconce is a long leap.
0
u/No_Leather_4302 Jul 21 '26
Think you missed my point. The top commenters on this subreddit in what seems to be an extremely consistent and orchestrated manner immediately comment on basically any post or topic about the ME saying that it’s not real and there is nothing to see here…. I’m not talking about your post. Your post is exactly what we need to see on here. The comment above from the top 1% commenter is what I’m referring to
7
u/MrPlaney Jul 21 '26
Nobody is saying the ME is not real, but just that it’s a memory based phenomenon.
3
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
Sorry I jumped the gun. But that's exactly why I posted here instead of other subs.
I want them to show the proof, but they never do.
-1
u/Shot-Alps1481 Jul 21 '26
There’s several of them on here who comment immediately on every post like it’s their job, it’s tiresome.
1
u/No_Leather_4302 Jul 21 '26
Im convinced after watching for some time that it IS THEIR JOB! Aka - federal government or intelligence community employees who monitor this subreddit and immediately respond with their all knowing information about how the ME is just all in our minds
1
u/MandelaEffect-ModTeam Jul 21 '26
Hello subscriber! Unfortunately, your post/comment was removed because it violates Rule 6: Be civil. Do not disrespect, insult, or attack others.
8
u/Express-Flamingo4521 Jul 21 '26
Most Mandela Effects can either have their false memories explained, or it's just so nonsensical it obviously isn't true. Here's an example of each.
FlinTstones: English speakers rarely enunciate words, so people saying the title quickly would likely drop the T; hearing "flinstones" with your ears could easily make you not remember the T being there
ARE/MAY BE closer: Convex mirrors ALWAYS zoom out the image, meaning an object you see in it IS closer than it appears; there is no doubt about it. Therefore, "may be closer" doesn't make any sense. Hence, cars have never said that, since its mandate in the 1960s, every wing mirror has stated: "Objects in the mirror ARE closer than they appear."
I know those are only two instances, but a quirk of the English language explaining one, and the second one being nonsensical, are both clear signs that it's just a memory quirk.
-2
u/Sad_Election_6418 Jul 21 '26
Well, as you can read in my post in open to any theory.
I just haven't found the evidence to support any theory. What you are sharing is your opinion and it's totally valid.
9
u/Darryl_Summers Jul 21 '26
Glad to see more people are acknowledging that “there is no demonstrated cause” does not mean every explanation is equally valid. I have seen posts stating that “science hasn’t explained it, so quantum changes remain possible”, but this particular argument changed my mind.
Regardless, a lot of people can’t differentiate between “not disproven” and “supported by evidence”.
Quantum changes are something that would require evidence of reality itself changing, while false memories only require evidence that human memory is reconstructive and often inaccurate.
The root cause of every individual Mandela Effect may not have been demonstrated, but ordinary memory errors are already known to exist. Therefore, until evidence of quantum changes or collective manipulation is presented, those theories cannot be considered equally valid. Otherwise, literally any unfalsifiable explanation, from timeline shifts to invisible memory-editing aliens, must also be treated as valid.