The Mandela Effect

[UltraBudgie]

This is all very well understood, and it also appears to be a "fact" that some of these ME's are quite profound for particular individuals and often times the same ME spans into the countless. I do believe that many are a product of false/fallible memory, but the question remains: are they all? It doesn't feel that way to me but feels more like there is something more at play here. Something that goes beyond the false and fallible.

The relegating of sensibility with some of these changes also hints at something "more", but any of the changes, if in fact that is what they are, would give clues to the very nature and fabric of reality – that it is not as concrete as we perceive it.

This is true of course, and I would venture to say that for the majority of experiencers, those for whom the subject is important, the ME is actually a fairly minor component of the reasons they have the worldview that reality is not as concrete as perceived. Materialists who observe the phenomena see individuals who are so untethered that they confuse reality and imagination, reenforcing each other's delusions. However, those who have had experiences that awaken a perception beyond the material tend to see the Mandela Effect as more of a minor and usually harmless reminder not to get too caught up in the illusion. The symbology and download effects can be especially hilarious to observe, if you move beyond the fruitless and childish instinct to impose a determinable paradigm. Same with exasperation about perceived gaslighting. Gotta just smile and let it be, man.

Even to materialists, the subject should be fascinating, as it hints at a coherence of unseen deliberation in misinformation and psychological warfare, if it is a purposefully induced effect, or an interesting psychosocial commonality of the exact particular ways memory is fellable, if not. Unfortunately I believe one of the major reasons there is not more rigorous investigation of the subject is that very few serious scientists want to be mocked by their colleagues for entertaining such moonbeam wingnuttery. Sad, but perhaps that's for the best. One might think it say something about the institution of modern science, and yes, but I think it's deeper -- human nature in the compulsion to build determinable models, and a two-edge sword of science itself in its regard and denial of unknown unknowns.

Anyway I forget what I wanted to say.