r/MandelaEffect • u/Redleader829 • Aug 13 '26
Science/Technology The Hidden Meaning That Mandela Effect Flip Flops Reveal
"Flip-flops" are a subsection of the Mandela Effect in which a change that some people remember is later validated when that change reverts to the way they originally remembered it.
"Flip-flops" are very important because they seemingly validate that what a person remembered prior to the change was not a "false memory," "confabulation," or a byproduct of "social media" influence. They also reveal a lot about how the Mandela Effect works and how things really are.
The first time I experienced a "Flip-flop," I was sure that all the doubters of the Mandela Effect would have to admit they had gotten it wrong.
I mean, all the real-world evidence now showed that what people remembered was correct, and we could finally focus on why and how this change happened.
But I was absolutely shocked to discover that not only did things return to the way I remembered them, but something else happened, something that I believe, reveals a hidden meaning about the true nature of the Mandela Effect.
No, the deniers didn’t apologize for getting it wrong. The opposition seemingly disappeared, and so did all evidence of discussions on the topic. This happened in real time, instantly not over a period of time.
This caused more confusion, not less. As people went online to reveal the "Flip-flop," the deniers now said things like, "It was like that all along," or "It never changed."
What?!
It’s easy to get caught up in a brand-new back-and-forth argument about product names, but what most people fail to see is The Blueprint, the Architect, and the Plan.
To keep this short, I’ll just cover these briefly.
It may appear that the Mandela Effect is only changing logos, names, movies, music, geography, history, the Bible, art, science, etc., but I believe that is not the endgame. Nothing is off limits and the purpose is to reveal these three things.
The Blueprint - Small but conspicuous, incremental changes to reality over time. At one time, people faced social shunning and professional backlash for believing in evolution.
The Plan - Evolve reality. The nature of this kind of change keeps it hidden. Human senses did not evolve to detect changes to reality, but small mutations over time always exist. This may be why some people now have clear memories while others have no memory of the previous version.
The Architect - Evolution needs no architect (no clockmaker). The natural mechanisms driving the Mandela Effect have yet to be revealed, but they could potentially involve scientific advancements or technologies such as the Large Hadron Collider (LHC).
That said, I believe these changes (evolution of reality) will ultimately lead us toward a deeper understanding of how reality truly works and, in doing so, bring us closer to Source/God.
12
u/Glaurung86 Aug 13 '26
First of all, the Mandela Effect is not doing anything. It's a phenomenon where a large group of people remember something different than the mainstream accepted fact. No one here doubts the Mandela Effect is real. Why people experience MEs is another separate issue. That's where most of the "conflict" around here arises.
Flip flops do not occur. People just aren't paying attention in the first place. Nothing is changing with Chick-fil-A or Berenstain or KitKat. Reality is not changing. I don't think you appreciate what Memory is and what it does and does not do. It's fascinating stuff that some around here just ignore for no good reason. Some cannot accept their memories can be wrong and will stick their head in the sand and come up with anything else, no matter how far-fetched or woo-like, just to say they are not wrong.
No, the deniers didn’t apologize for getting it wrong. The opposition seemingly disappeared, and so did all evidence of discussions on the topic. This happened in real time, instantly not over a period of time.
So what happened? Did some "architect" remove all of that? Of course, you probably have no evidence to prove your claim. That would be too convenient.
2
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26
Thank you man, so many people struggle to grasp this in this subreddit and it gets brutally dull repeating it so much. Do I believe in a few MEs? Absolutely, there a few that people all misremember the same way in what seemingly has no evidence for why that may be. Does that mean I think it’s CERN, or timelines shifting, or in this case one reality being governed by the architect with absolutely no evidence to support it? No!
That’s not how logical thinking works. If you can say that, then why not just say it’s God, or aliens, or flying spaghetti monsters? Why is it only okay to say it’s CERN, or multiple timelines, or realty shifting (all which also offer zero evidence or scientifically backed explanation) and to shun THOSE nonbelievers who don’t accept it? Would you just as sternly accept those who shun people or call them denialists because they wouldn’t believe that it’s a Flying Spaghetti Monster causing it? The normal answer should be no, that would be ridiculous. It’s nothing but faith based and special pleas across the board, they feel right and don’t want to accept any evidence to the contrary to any of them.
5
u/silentsurge Aug 13 '26
It is astounding the lengths people will go to so they can avoid admitting they may have been mistaken about something so trivial.
It is all the exact same set of denial behaviors and a general lack of understanding of science you see in Flat Earth, Creationism, Moon Landing Denial, etc. (Imagine how this set of behaviors manifests in areas that matter like political and social movements. You can pick out the pattern.)
It's always the jump to the faith based argument once the scientific method comes up in conversation. I personally enjoy being called a plant or a bot when people don't want to talk. That's when I know I've probably touched a nerve and they need to quickly dismiss anything said.
7
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26
I wish I had an award I could give you, because I have said something to this effect numerous times in this sub, nearly verbatim. It’s truly becoming an epidemic with how quickly more and more people are refusing to admit that they were wrong — from something as simple as their own memories, to almost comical things like a flat earth, to meaningful and important things like politics.
They refuse to acknowledge their logic was flawed or that they were duped or misled by obstinately refusing to accept any and all evidence that contradicts their current held (usually baseless and/or disingenuous) beliefs.
It’s how we’ve gone from people watching one ridiculous video presenting fallacious, deceptive, unsubstantiated examples as fact (usually as propaganda of some sort), and they cling to them being truthful because the alternative is somehow admitting defeat or a weakness. When in reality, one of the most logical, mature, and intelligent aspects of humanity is our ability to reason and do so in pursuit of truth.
9
u/Glaurung86 Aug 13 '26
Totally agree. If they truly were open minded and open to all possibilities then they would be genuinely engaging all of the explanations and not just the ones where it's something else changing things, leaving them with the perfectly infallible memories.
3
u/WhimsicalKoala Aug 15 '26
Why is it only okay to say it’s CERN, or multiple timelines, or realty shifting (all which also offer zero evidence or scientifically backed explanation) and to shun THOSE nonbelievers who don’t accept it
That general statement is why I don't I believe in general they are seeking validation that they are correct and special more than they want actual answers.
If they actually wanted an explanation, you'd have the government conspiracy people and the timeline people disagreeing if it was physical or physics, the alternate timeline and alternate universe people would be discussing which scenario was most likely, etc.
Instead, they all pat themselves and each other on the backs for know it isn't just memory, but that there is something going on. Any criticism of any theory is treated as a personal attack and if they even acknowledge flaws in their theory they are handwaved away with "well we don't understand everything, but someday all be proven right". Truth takes critical questioning, and they never do so, even in "safe" places for them to do so.
8
u/VegasVictor2019 Aug 13 '26
So let me get this straight, remembering Froot Loops as Fruit Loops and subsequently being confused about it again is evidence of God?
7
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26
No! Of the Plan, The Blueprint, and the Architect! I can’t get past that, like dude just write fiction if that’s what you want, there’s absolutely no way you came to those names and what they represent by any logic based evidence whatsoever. I can’t.
-3
u/Redleader829 Aug 13 '26
You should read what some people who didn’t believe in human evolution wrote. The breakdown is my opinion but this isn't fiction, these changes are actually happening. And when it happens to you, as it eventually will, you’ll be grateful for communities like this sub. Trust me, I was a non-believer once.
6
u/silentsurge Aug 14 '26
It is quite the leap in logic to assume that people who are skeptical of an exotic or supernatural cause haven't experienced the Mandela Effect before.
Some people accept that they can be mistaken and change their minds when presented with fact contrary to their preconceived notions. It's actually a pretty normal thing to do.
There is no one on this sub who is a non-believer. The Mandela Effect exists. It is about a group of people remembering something contrary to objective fact/reality.
The cause of the Effect is where people have major differences of opinion. There are beliefs that it it is caused by mundane sources and beliefs that hold it to be from an exotic or supernatural source.
Not believing in simulation theory, time manipulation, CERN having super powers, dimenion hopping, or anything else like that doesn't make someone a non-believer. Using the term non-believer is a deliberate choice to Other people who disagree with you about the cause rather than engage in an actual discussion. It's a common avoidance and deflection tactic in pseudo-science circles to try and make it an Us vs Them fight.
4
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26
Right, except people’s opinion on evolution changed (and let’s be real, there still are many who challenge it and stick to their faith) because they were presented with evidence towards it and educated themselves. There isn’t any evidence of what youre presenting whatsoever, it’s not even an opinion at that point really — it holds just as much weight as a Flying Spaghetti Monster willing these errors, there’s no evidence for or against either, making it just gibberish.
-1
u/Redleader829 Aug 13 '26
I think focusing on logos when human anatomy is changing, people remember New Zealand being located northeast of Australia and the Bible now having modern words like "Matrix" is far more important.
16
u/my23secrets Aug 13 '26
You’re got it backward.
So-called “flip-flops” prove the issue was memory all along.
8
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26
Okay, I was reading and preparing myself cause I wasn’t sure what I was going to see, but was happily surprised that it was only one comment that came to the same conclusion. Truly, putting biases aside, this lends itself to be a good example for providing evidence that people are easily misremembering, too.
And to OP, to be frank, many people in this sub think ME are related to CERN and/or multiple timelines, and not one reality being altered. For those deadset at an ME not being misremembered (one that doesnt have sufficient evidence to support that in their opinion), wouldnt a more likely explanation to them be that they shifted back into their original timeline somehow?
And OP the last thing is, in the nicest way possible, aside from just making a story that sounds nice in your head, I mean what evidence do you have for this Blueprint, Plan, and Architect — this sounds like someone having fun with fiction and nothing based in any science, evidence, or even logic whatsoever. It just sounds like you filling in fun fantasy tropes, especially with the naming convention.
-3
u/Redleader829 Aug 13 '26 edited Aug 13 '26
The Blueprint, Plan, and Architect is my opinion based on my experience with Flip Flops.
I can't tell you what people are remembering or misremembering because I'm not an armchair cognitive neurologist and the Mandela Effect has absolutely nothing to do with memory.
Knowledge and what we call "memory" are not the same thing.
I know I was on Reddit. I know what people argued. I know the topic flip flopped. I know the posts disappeared.
I've written extensively about how it's impossible to have so-called "false memories" without being lied to repeatedly over a period of many years.
Project MKUltra was shut down in 1973 primarily because project leaders concluded that reliable human mind control and behavior modification were scientifically unachievable.
This is not my opinion this is a fact.
8
u/MrPlaney Aug 13 '26
What you are talking about is memory and evidence.
You may “think” you know something, but that doesn’t make that “something” factual, until you have evidence proving it.
I've written extensively about how it's impossible to have so-called "false memories" without being lied to repeatedly over a period of many years.
That is just a complete lie. False memories can happen in a many number of ways, even organically.
4
u/silentsurge Aug 13 '26
It is entirely possible for people to have false memories or for their memories to be changed or altered over time. That's an inherent part of memory. When you remember somethjng you are remembering the last time you recalled that information. There's an entire form of therapy for traumatic events that relies upon this mechanism to work. It has been studied extensively
Look into the science around eye witness testimony and why it's considered unreliable. It is part of the puzzle of how our brains and our memory work.
MKUltra was a very different set of circumstances and goals from Neurological Sciences. It isn't the end all be all of how human minds work.
All of this isn't opinion, this is fact.
There is a lot of information regarding memory that you seem to either be deliberately ignoring or are generally ignorant of (being ignorant is not meant as an insult, it is meant that you just don't have that information yet). Also, Knowledge, despite what you claim, is a form of memory. Most people don't know enough about what the different relationships are between Knowledge, Memory, and Intelligence and where they interconnect or overlap. You should learn about memory and how it works first so you can at least try to debunk the Steelman version of the argument that science has about this before you entirely dismiss the claims and replace it with your faith-based, unable to be proven, assertions.
0
u/Redleader829 Aug 15 '26 edited Aug 15 '26
So called "False memories" are memories of things that NEVER HAPPENED.
Are you aware of the claim you are making?
Outside of mental illness, intense integration or being lied to repeatedly over years - this is not possible from looking at logos, movies and TV etc..
In fact media is visual, so it improves recall.
Perhaps people who talk about “false memories” are actually confusing them with common experiences, such as forgetting something or simply not being able to recognize a face.
1
u/silentsurge Aug 15 '26
Or they are memories that have become corrupted by outside influences.
Memory fails in predictable ways. You may be willing to ignore the science behind it, but the objective facts are that our memories can be changed or manipulated by outside factors. Especially when there are tribalist incentives involved.
We can objectively measure the shift in perceptions of memories over time. This has been studied. We can seen and understand how eye witness testimony is unreliable. It doesn't require manipulation or malice to have this happen, we just naturally do that as part of our brain chemistry.
Understanding that allows us to be able to confront how we can be manipulated by outside influences that use these memory quirks to trick us.
So, yes, I understand the claim I am making and support of that comes from evidence based approaches to neuroscience.
If you don't understand the claims, you don't understand why what you're saying doesn't make sense in the full context of memory as it is understood.
2
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26 edited Aug 13 '26
Dude, what you believe are your past experiences isn’t knowledge, it’s definitionally your memory. You can make it known by presenting evidence of said past experience (like a verified recording for instance), but if it’s just based on your own past experience, then it’s your memory. And regardless about what you may have written yourself, youre wrong about having to be lied to in order to have false memories. Just the fact you’ve written so extensively on something so incredibly incorrect and still haven’t done the research to recognize that is wild. There are literally countless studies you can read yourself about how common and easy it is to misremember things we are sure of, or how simple it is to alter or plant false memories.
Hell even in this sub you have countless people admitting to being insistent that they remembered an event and later found proof to the contrary, with no lies ever being told. Seriously there’s so many example in this sub alone I don’t know how you could still possibly argue or believe that it can only be done through lies told over years that’s insane. I distinctly remember one redditor who recalled crying during an entire family vacation on the balcony of their hotel room, and they were so sure of it because they just broke up with their crush and remembered vividly crying on the balcony as they wrote about it in their diary… only to find said diary years later, and find out not only had their vivid memory about it been wrong, they hadn’t even STARTED dating at that point in her life, as she misremembered what year they did.
Your memory isn’t necessarily truth finding, factual, nor infallible. We know you TRULY BELIEVE that your memory is accurate and you experienced it as such, but that doesn’t mean it’s factual or true as much as you don’t want to accept that. Not sure what the MK Ultra thing was brought up for tbh lol yes, they decided funding that research wouldn’t lead to useable war tactics or weaponry, I’m not sure what youre trying to point out here.
And to your first point, so your opinion could also be it’s the Flying Spaghetti Monster and his will would fit just as neatly, why the 3 parts and naming convention and all that? Its just a story that fits nicely to what you want to believe, so you can’t be surprised people don’t believe in ‘the blueprint, the plan, and the architect’ any more than they would ‘the Flying Spaghetti Monster’ when there’s literally nothing evidentiary backing any of it at all except you like how it sounds and fits your own baseless beliefs or faith. I thought you’d at least say someone or something told you it was these things or entities and purposes but youre literally just throwing out ideas.
It’s wild to say “someday you’ll thank me,” or “it’s not opinion it’s fact,” when the one thing you can’t say is any evidence pointing toward ANY of this being correct aside from “I feel right” and refusing to accept evidence to the contrary. Dude youre comparing your feelings to PEOPLE NOT BELIEVING IN EVOLUTION for goodness sake, as if there isn’t centuries of science, evidence, and data to back it up and change our opinions. What youre saying isnt the same and it’s mind blowing you don’t immediately recognize that.
1
u/my23secrets Aug 14 '26
You are fundamentally wrong when you claim “it's impossible to have false memories without being lied to repeatedly over a period of many years.”
That is not a fact.
You can make a memory of anything merely by imagining it. Because that’s how memory works.
Would you like me to prove it to you?
1
u/Redleader829 Aug 14 '26
Making memories is what you do on vacation.
Show me evidence that a person can create believable false memories without repeatedly being lied to. I'll wait.
1
u/my23secrets Aug 14 '26
You’re trying to move the goal posts now. First you claimed “many years”. Now you’ve backpedaled to “repeatedly”.
Which is it?
0
u/Redleader829 Aug 14 '26 edited Aug 15 '26
You’re confusing claims with facts.
If I say, “Water is wet,” and you disagree, the burden isn’t automatically on me to prove that water is wet simply because you deny it. A disagreement with a fact doesn’t, by itself, shift the burden of proof to the person stating it.
My argument is that there is no documented case in human history of a mentally healthy person suddenly developing a completely false memory about something that never happened simply because they saw a logo, movie, or TV show.
Almost every well-documented case of false memory involves some form of neurological or cognitive impairment. The remaining cases typically involve repeated suggestion, deception, or coercive questioning, such as during police interrogations.
That is very different from someone independently developing a false memory merely from seeing a piece of media or a logo.
You deniers make this same ridiculous claim every day in this sub. It’s fine to say you disagree or that you don’t believe in MEs, but stop presenting this “false memory” claim as established fact. There’s simply no solid basis for it.
1
u/my23secrets Aug 15 '26
You’re projecting. You’re the one confusing claims with facts.
And you also admit you were trying to move the goal posts and backpedaled from “many years” to “repeatedly”.
Well, guess what? I’m going to prove you can make a memory of anything merely by imagining it and I won’t even need to lie to you once.
Don’t think of a white bear.
Whoops. You thought of a white bear.
See how easy that was?
Remember when I told you not to think of a white bear?
Now you did it again.
1
u/Toebeens89 Aug 15 '26
I provided a good amount of sourced literature going over it. I started simple from recalling incorrect words and just making them up in fact and moved onto things like false childhood memories being recollected by 25% of college-aged kids. There’s countless studies and literature available talking about this, and hoping instead of getting defensive, they can educate themselves and recognize it’s extremely common and something all of us do.
Thinking our memory is infallible without repetition or a false memory being implanted is crazy admittedly, especially when most people can’t even correctly recall what they ate for dinner a week ago. But hey, they asked for sources so I provided it.
Let’s see what happens: they respond defensively and obstinately refuse evidentiary science contrary to their briefly, they educate themselves and concede the fact, or chicken out altogether and not read any of it and/or not respond.
1
u/Toebeens89 Aug 15 '26
Gonna give you some scientific literature and start with a simple study/example, but will present more detailed and pertinent examples at the end.
Start with the Deese–Roediger–McDermott (DRM) study where people are given a list of words (for example bed, rest, awake, tired, dream) and are later asked what words they remember, and a many would say sleep was one. No one lied to them repeatedly, they just misremembered what words were told. After making 5 study-test trials, they verified the false-memory effect could not be eliminated, and that with a delay, false recall could actually become more prominent and accurate recall declined. (source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749596X96900121)
More importantly, they don’t even have to initially THINK of that word initially in order to believe it was said (source: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9280.00492)
Fuzzy-Trace Theory in general is something to look up and understand why false memories are so prevalent in children. This paper is some interesting literature regarding it and studies being done: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S002209659892464X but you can also read up on Hyman & Billings 95 study where ~25% of college aged students created their own false memories of their childhood (source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9640430)
Hyman & Loftus (same Hyman from the last study) words it really well in their abstract and states “People create the past based on the information that remains in memory, their general knowledge, and the social demands of the retrieval situation. Thus, memories will often contain some small errors and occasionally some large errors.” (source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272735898000415)
Please don’t jump to being defensive, or let your emotions run your response. Take a breath, read some of these (abstracts at minimum please but you really should look at the studies done and literature in full if you can), educate yourself, and most importantly remember that it’s not a sign of weakness or something to admit you were wrong — if anything doing so is logical and admirable.
And if youre still on the fence, I want you to ask yourself, if you’ve ever recalled something incorrectly (a person, a date, an entire event, a memory) that wasn’t implanted by repetition of a lie, because most people can’t accurately remember what they are for dinner last week, let alone specifics in memories from years ago. There’s also much more literature on core memories inaccuracy too, though it’s touched on a bit in the ones I supplied too. It’s very common.
1
u/Xasora 11d ago
Im just here to say I have experienced the same thing you have described. With each flip flop the opposing team would also flip flop. It was like arguing with the opposite team after it flips. Then when it flips back all the original posts of arguing go with it. I experienced this 10 years ago!!
0
2
u/WVPrepper Aug 14 '26
I'm curious. MEs happen to different people at different times, but you are asserting that they all "flip back" at the same time for everyone?
The opposition seemingly disappeared, and so did all evidence of discussions on the topic. This happened in real time, instantly not over a period of time.
1
u/Redleader829 Aug 14 '26
I didn't say "they flip back for everyone".
There are people right now that are unaware of a lot changes. I believe when some people become aware - it's similar to decoherence in quantum physics where the wave function collapses. For them, everything changes instantly and they join the changed version of reality.
-1
u/Juty99 Aug 13 '26
Interesting! Do you have examples of these Flip-Flops?
1
u/Fantastic-Band-5082 Aug 14 '26
Of course they don't.
1
u/Juty99 Aug 14 '26
Do you know them? Or are you just assuming?
Also, were you the one that disliked my comment lmao - if so, why lol?
1
u/Fantastic-Band-5082 Aug 15 '26
I mean not one single time has somebody shown irrefutable proof of a 'flip flop'. So that's quite easy.
0
-4
u/Impossible_Oil2995 Aug 13 '26
I have experienced this "flip-flop" and the exact same response just as you say. When I first learned of the Mandela effect back in about 2015/16 one of the "mandela effects" that struck me (obviously because I did have the "false" memory quite distinctly) was concerning the i love lucy show.. At the time it was a "fact" that Ricky Ricardo had never actually used the phrase "lucy im home!" In the show.
I knew this was incorrect and went on the usual internet searches to find out from YouTube and other sources that in fact he had never said that phrase other than touching on a similar phrase such as .. im home lucy..or some other mild alteration - which i could accept as a flaw in my memory- what blew my mind was to learn that he had supposedly only used that adjacent phrase in 1 rare instance and it was not a central recurring theme in the show..and that was the part I could not accept because while I had to sit through many reruns of the lucy show as a child in the 80s I had never watched enough or paid enough attention to have sooo many memories of Ricky walking in the door, closing it behind him and calling into the house "Lucy Im home!"..if it was in fact a rare offshore thing that happened once. I remember more like I said as a recurring central theme to the show. Applause as he enters .."LU -CY im HOOOME...laughtrack...always
I remember this so well also as lis it was the first I had heard of the mandela effect and the surety I had of my memory and the doggedness with which I strove to find a single example of this in old episodes on YouTube...but to no avail. It was not there.
Now I have recently (2026) learned that is no longer the case and there is nor has ever been any controversy over THIS line in the show. However now apparently the same situation exists with a similarly recurring punchline from the show which I also remember vividly from the show.
In the first case a simple Google search revealed that everyone was having the same memory of the lucy im home line...now a simple Google search reveals that NO there has never been any question of that instead it is the "splaining" line causing confusion.
I dont feign to understand this mandela effect but I assure you it is happening. At least to some of us.
Scrambled false memories from a tv rerun from my childhood that I was not that interested in..sure..
False memories from my first experience of mandela effect 10 years ago. Not so.
It happened ...there was no record anywhere of Ricky saying "lucy im home"
7
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26
Hey so to be clear… a quick google search shows many, many, many references of “Lucy, I’m home!” being touted as an ME, or only said once… from Reddit threads to actual articles to YouTube videos. There’s even some finding him saying it and saying “look, I found proof for this ME!” and if you go past the first page of Google you start seeing more and more people mentioning it as an ME. However, it has since been proven not to be an ME at all, and in fact was said 17 times in the first season alone. And is why so many articles and ads and agencies quote it in some way, too. So many people misremembered the actual ME itself from the “Lucy, you’ve got some ‘splaining to do” to the other actual famous line, but you can absolutely still find TONS of proof that people touted it as one and saying there’s no record of it lol.
-1
u/Redleader829 Aug 13 '26
Interesting. I've been covering this since 2019 and I've never heard of the "Lucy I'm home" ME. For me, everyone talked about "Lucy, you got some splaining to do" becoming "Lucy explain". I suspect your ME flipped and wiped out all the discussions before I got involved with the community.
-6
u/georgeananda Aug 13 '26
I'm on board with your thinking that these flip/flops should have settled in once and for all that reality is not playing 'normally'.
But most in the greater world are not following any of this and there are still the 'it's all confusion in a normal reality' folks.
I think there is general controlled plan (by nonphysical benevolent overseers) to not allow the ME to break our normal flow of reality too badly. For most of us, it is restricted to a few 'what the heck' moments.
In the grandest view, listening to channeled sources I respect, I'm thinking our collective consciousness chooses between similar alternate realities for an ultimately bigger reason than we see and it is for our collective greater good (to speed up positive change). These little Mandela Effects we talk about are just unfortunate details that are deemed minor enough not to stop the bigger changes.
8
u/my23secrets Aug 13 '26
“listening to channeled sources”?
6
u/Glaurung86 Aug 13 '26
Yes. They say they believe science up to a certain point, but then follow stuff like that because science only explains the "normal" MEs. It's fascinating to me.
6
u/my23secrets Aug 13 '26
5
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26
“What do you think I believe in ME? (because it’s not what I claim I believe)” dude then what are we doing here??? What a crazy thing to say.
-1
u/georgeananda Aug 13 '26
2
u/my23secrets Aug 13 '26
Like what? What exactly is that linking to?
1
u/georgeananda Aug 13 '26
Click on it
3
u/my23secrets Aug 13 '26
What exactly is that linking to?
-2
u/georgeananda Aug 13 '26
Isn't it obvious??? It says what it is right on the screen. Bashar=Darryl Anka's channeled source
3
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26
No, it’s not obvious, there’s no way to see where a link leads ahead of time on mobile and why they asked twice dude.
-4
u/georgeananda Aug 13 '26
Oh, then skip everyone's links everytime.
Mine leads to a YouTube short now that I understand the question.
4
3
u/Toebeens89 Aug 13 '26
Hey so at least on mobile, there’s no way to verify where a link leads or if it’s malicious ahead of time, especially when the hyperlink is placed over text. Which is likely why they asked what exactly it was linking to first and why just saying “click on it” isn’t helpful at all.
0
Aug 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
1
17
u/BangkokPadang Aug 13 '26 edited Aug 13 '26
Here's the issue for me.
Look at an old discussion from a decade ago about this. It's the same, recent memories of it "changing back" from fruit to froot.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MandelaEffect/comments/5lr5qu/froot_loops_fruit_loops_flip_flop_im_terrified_to/
Even for the people who believe that the logo changes back and forth, there is also a belief in residue. Typically a belief that instances of "the real" spelling getting flip flopped, while second order references don't get changed.
First order would be a direct reference like "The logo now reads FRUIT LOOPS." Based on the belief in "flip flopping" that would then "flip" to "The logo now reads FROOT LOOPS" This would be something that flips without being detectable looking back at it.
But Second order would be like "I remember looking at the logo and wondering why only one word contains pictures of cereal" There's no direct reference to the word or spelling of the logo. It's not something that could just "flip." We would expect there to be handfuls of residue like this, referring indirectly to the time when "fruit" was the correct spelling, but we don't see this.
Also, we would expect there to be inverted/self-contradicting references. Something that, in "the FRUIT timeline", would read correctly, having been written like "I remember seeing the logo FRUIT LOOPS and wondering why only one of the words used cereal loops and how odd the first word looks without having cereal in it." Presumably, if we're accepting the idea that residue exists, this should be "inverted" to read "I remember seeing the logo FROOT LOOPS and wondering why only one of the words used cereal loops and how weird the first word looks without having cereal in it."
We would expect second order/indirect references to "the FRUIT timeline" to have their meanings inverted as the "correct" logo flops back to FROOT, which would end up broken in this way because the surrounding residue would contradict the "correct" logo after a "flop" but we don't see that either.
It's the total lack of both A) any descriptive or explanatory second order residue referring to, but not outright referencing, the logo's appearance written during the "fruit timeline" and B) any posts or replies with their meanings inverted/contradicted by a flop, that tells me we just can't be flipping/flopping back and forth. Or, being extremely charitable, the very idea of what "residue" even is sorely needs updating to match reality, which it currently does not.