KBS

Memetic Engineering, Holographic Universe, Quantum Mechanics & CERN – The Science Behind Mandela Effects

Spread the love
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
THE SCIENCE BEHIND THE MANDELA EFFECT

Berenstein vs Berenstain bears? Darth Vader’s famous line in Star Wars? or maybe its the multiple deaths of the iconic Nelson Mandela… all of these are a part of a phenomena knows as the “Mandela Effect”. By now, i would imagine most people are well aware of this effect that seemingly has the ability to change lines in movies, the names of books, words in the Bible & too many more to mention here.

In this episode of KBS Epic Journeyman joins me to discuss his years of research & documentation of the  phenomena known as the Mandela Effect. Epic first became aware of the seemingly changing, fluid nature of reality when he found out that a movie he had once seen multiple times while working in a movie rental store in the 90’s never actually existed. The movie in question was called Shazaam, its starred the actor Sinbad & many people remember watching this movie…. but it was never ever made!

Epic is no alone in remembering this movie from the 90’s & I myself can remember laughing with my friends anytime someone suggested renting it out as it looked ridiculous from what I can personally remember. However, Epic, as part of his job in the movie rental store, didn’t just watch this once, in fact, he had to watch it multiple times after customers complained the VHS tape wouldn’t work for them.

Epics ongoing research has led to him speaking to multiple media outlets including the BBC about his experience, interacting with the actor Sinbad & today he shares his vast research into what is referred to as the Mandela Effect (ME).

When dealing with the Mandela Effects we are often caught up in confusion as we struggle to comprehend how something we absolutely remember one way is now something completely different. We get stuck on the physics of how anyone or anything could change the past. Lets not think about the changes in question, lets start to think about how our memories & perception of past events may have been altered, in our own minds! This would explain why not everyone is being affected & would absolutely tie in with some kind of mass experiment designed to see if our memories can be altered in some way by an unknown/external stimulus.

What if the signal that carries the information that makes up our reality has been hijacked? That might sound so far out there that its even too ridiculous to be considered science fiction, but what if I told you that there is a good chance that there is something like this going on right now.

FORGET THE TERM “MANDELA EFFECT” & START TO THINK ABOUT SOMETHING EPIC HAS COINED “MEMETIC ENGINEERING”. FORGET THINKING ABOUT HOW THEY COULD CHANGE THE NAME ON A BOOK, WORDS IN THE BIBLE ETC ETC & START TO CONSIDER THAT IT IS OUR MEMORIES/PERCEPTION THAT IS ACTUALLY BEING ALTERED ON AN INDIVIDUAL LEVEL.

THINK ANALOGUE VS DIGITAL….. GOOD VS EVIL….. WHATEVER WAY YOU WANT TO PUT IT, SOMEONE OR SOMETHING IS TRYING TO HIJACK OUR REALITY!



SOURCE/RESEARCH LINKS/INFO FROM EPIC JOURNMAN

Below is a run down of the work Epic has done to date on the Mandela Effect, or perhaps it would be more accurate to call it MEMETIC ENGINEERING from this point forward.

Before the 21st century & the mindblowing explosion of technology that has come our way since then, people learned things from oral tradition, movies, paper, vinyl & tape recordings. Add to this the signals that carry TV & Radio, and all of the above were delivered in an ANALOGUE method. Back then people didn’t leave a digital footprint, not was there the ability to monitor human activity en masse, in real time.

From one of Epic’s original posts….

I have researched the formation dates of Mandela Effects before and there definitely seems to be something to the timeframe of when reported Effects were being generated.

What I am really wondering in this case is if the “How things were learned” might be more important related to why some people experience Effects and others don’t.

Are all of the memories that have changed based around things that were originally experienced in a strictly analog state?

Was it a 70mm Dolby film in the theater, a song on the radio or vinyl LP, an old analog TV broadcast, a book, newspaper or magazine article, a VHS tape, or something you personally saw or heard in the real world originally?

Experiencers have reported seeing their old Family Bibles and photos change along with a number of other “real world” items.

  • What if it is not the item that has changed, but rather the way the brain perceives it?

  • What if it’s the exposure to some kind of stimulus or signal that keeps things in a steady state for most people?

It’s no secret that researchers have long sought to unlock the secrets of the Human brain, mind, hypnosis, and how memories and learning work – but prior to the advent of the Digital World and the Internet there was no way to use techniques learned or perform large scale testing in “real life” situations like there is today.

What if the best ways to test specific groups in the Past via analog methods were too dangerous and lacked the subtlety necessary to be performed long term? After all, you don’t really want to announce that kind of thing is going on to the world and risk criticism.

…Things like what has come to be called The Pokémon Shock where an episode of Pokémon broadcast in Japan unexpectedly sent nearly 700 children to the Hospital and affected an untold number of others?

Could this have been an early test use of Optogenetics?

This event happened in 1997 and I find it notable that the adoption of Broadband Internet and formation of Google started around 1998 with the global transition from analog to digital Television broadcasting following between 2006-2008.

Today, we live in a connected, Information based Digital world with nearly every electronic device or appliance connected to the Internet.

People forget just how recent a phenomenon this digitally connected environment really is… and the world of the Past where we all learned, shared, and experienced the world strictly through tactile and analog means is rapidly becoming a distant memory.

The Effect has been around probably as long as humans have been able to argue over their memories of an experience.

Is it really so hard to imagine that in the not too distant future where facts are instantly editable in the Digital Domain that people will just accept them, rather than argue over their “unreliable Human memories” when they learned them via digital media in the first place?

What if that has been the idea all along?

Edit: It brings up a lot of questions that I spared hypothesizing answers of my own to answer…thinking about the questions is the fun part!

LINK TO ORIGINAL POST & COMMENTS….. CLICK HERE

MEMETIC ENGINEERING (FULL POST FROM REDDIT by EPIC JOURNEYMAN)

Don’t call it a PsyOp…Let’s call it Memetic Engineering.

Have you noticed the conspicuous lack of newly reported Mandela Effects lately?

I’m not suggesting that there is not a constant infusion of new people learning of the Effect or experiencing it for themselves for the first time but rather that the reporting of new Effects that are recognized and shared by a large group of people has fallen dramatically in recent weeks.

What if I told you there might be a reason for that?

First, a little bit of context.

The last two reported Effects that seemed to affect a large number of people and seemed to be new at the time to many of them from my perspective were “Shaggy’s missing Adam’s Apple” and “Kurt Cobain’s missing feather/fluffy jacket” both reported about two months ago.

Disclaimer: I am an acting moderator here on this subreddit and the opinions I am putting forward here in this theory are my own as a user and in no way reflect the opinions and positions of the moderation team.

Now, the easy skeptical explanation would be that there are only so many things that can be easily confused or misremembered and that after several years of people reporting them, they have pretty much all been discovered, reported, theorized about, and elaborated on.

Those who know anything about my posting history are surely already aware that this is NOT the path I’m going to take with this.

I’ve been working on kind of a grand unification theory (like a lot of people) for an explanation for the Mandela Effect and this is just one facet of it and by no means a conclusion.

We are the unwitting participants in a long term study about the validity and usefulness of Memetic Engineering

Ask yourself; when was the first time you heard the word meme?

It’s used all the time nowadays, but really… when did it become so commonplace?

The word was originally coined by author and famous Atheist Richard Dawkins in his 1976 book The Selfish Gene and spawned the study of Memetics.

Basically, the idea is that a meme acts like a gene and is passed on and propagated by like minded individuals and contributes to forming an inherent trait that can be passed on if it proves to be a successful adaptation.

Personally, I don’t recall hearing the word much until the advent of Social Media and not really taking off till somewhere around 2010 or so – but that’s just me.

There was actually quite a bit of excitement about this idea in scientific circles even after Mr. Dawkins somewhat distanced himself from the notion in later works.

This really has a lot to do with the notion of Social Engineering and the kinds of studies carried on by organizations like the Tavistock Institute in my opinion (a rabbit hole in itself).

There is an excellent article from 1996 in Wired Magazine that explains some of the ideas about what can be accomplished with Memetic Engineering – here is a brief excerpt:

The objectives of this research, breathtaking in their implications, were described by the investigators in Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up, a project monograph: The broad aim of this research is to begin the development of a more unified social science, one that embeds evolutionary processes in a computational environment that simulates demographics, the transmission of culture, conflict, economics, disease, the emergence of groups, and co-adaptation with the environment, all from the bottom up. Research initiatives like the 2050 Project hold out the prospect of such a new kind of social science, as well as the possibility of a new science of memetic engineering. While predictions about the pace of scientific innovation are notoriously risky, my guess is that by the beginning of the 21st century the embryonic field of computer-based memetic studies either will reveal itself as an intellectual dry hole or will prove to be a technology of extraordinary power. If the second scenario comes to pass, what are the long-term implications for our self-image as a species – endowed as we are with at least the illusion of free will and blessed, perhaps uniquely among the creatures of this earth, with the baffling gift of conscious thought?

First the dark scenario. Memes might come to be viewed explicitly as the primary actors in the drama of human history, exerting an iron-fisted control precisely analogous to that of Richard Dawkins’s “selfish genes” in the pageant of biological evolution. This is the disquieting vision that Daniel Dennett proffered – the human mind as a mere meat computer, conscious human beings as puppets dancing to the blind watchmaker’s hidden melodies. But is this a fair reading of the philosophical implications of memes? Perhaps not. If we consider the matter carefully, we can glimpse a subtler message lurking between the lines of this emerging discipline. It is the same message implicit in the new science of evolutionary psychology, articulated by Robert Wright in The Moral Animal: Understanding the often unconscious nature of genetic control is the first step toward understanding that we’re all puppets, and our best hope for even partial liberation is to try to decipher the logic of the puppeteer.

What I (Epic Journeyman) am proposing is that this test has gone live and we may be unwitting participants in it.

This is actually more probable than it may at first sound when you consider the sheer volume of “Terms and Conditions” that we all agree to every time we download a new App, update the operating systems of our electronic devices, join a Social Media platform, or partake in the Beta testing of software or a “free” game.

Facebook caught a lot of flak for treating users as human guinea pigs a few years back by trying to alter their moods with targeted news feeds and articles to track how their posting habits changed and affected others in their social media circle.

The truth is that this still goes on all the time and things like Psychographics are used by advertisers and political activists to sway public opinion and manipulate the masses.

What I’m suggesting here though is a little bit different and was inspired by two events that are something of iconic moments in the history of Mandela Effect reporting:

  • The Apollo 13 Flip-Flop

  • Fiona Broom reporting that she had been approached by a group who told her to stop promoting/reporting the Mandela Effect phenomenon in around April of 2016

I am not really a follower or fan of Fiona Broom and really wish she could have come up with a better name than “Mandela Effect” but the fact that she was supposedly approached by people claiming that they were doing important research and asked her to lay off commenting about it is something that if true, is really interesting and ties in to the Apollo 13 flip-flop in a way that makes the whole thing make a little bit more rational sense.

For those who don’t know, the Apollo 13 flip-flop is where experiencers witness a clip from the movie where the line is said “had” instead of “have” and it then seems to magically change back to the iconic “Houston we have a problem”.

What’s the big deal? many may ask…

The big deal is that this has been witnessed by many people, myself included, and was extensively researched using all accessible media online at the time as well as supposedly on peoples’ personal media/DVD’s at home over the span of days to weeks.

Even more strange, people continue to have their own experiences with this at completely different times.

I had my experience somewhere around August of 2016 and can absolutely attest to the fact that all available media online said the famous quote as “had” and that the camera angle in some of the clips was slightly different – I cannot vouch for the separate testimonies that claimed the movies users had at home changed since I obviously couldn’t witness it for myself…but for the span of somewhere around a week or so every clip that I brought up online to view had the alternate dialogue and when it changed back, they all did.

Occams Razor is overused in this forum sometimes but seems appropriate here:

If something supernatural is not the explanation, and the witnesses are of sound mind, really the only rational explanation is that the clips were deliberately changed and targeted to a specific group as part of some kind of test or research project.

…and if that’s true, a likely reason behind it would be as part of the testing of Memetic Engineering techniques.

Are we just being used as human Guinea pigs in a long term test that is nearing completion?

ALL SOURCE LINKS…

The Sinbad Genie Movie – complete analysisCLICK HERE!

The movie that doesn’t exist and the Redditors who think it doesCLICK HERE!

BBC – The Digital HumanCLICK HERE!

The April Fools Joke – We Found Sinbad’s SHAZAAM MovieCLICK HERE!

Don’t call it a PsyOp…Let’s call it Memetic EngineeringCLICK HERE!

MemeticsCLICK HERE!

Analog learning is the source of Mandela Effects?…and maybe it was revealed with the Pokémon Shock event?CLICK HERE!

How Weaponized Psychology could be using the Mandela Effect to test it’s effectiveness on a large sample group under controlled conditions without them being aware of itCLICK HERE!

Seeing is believing…but what if what we see isn’t real?CLICK HERE!

The “Leprechaun Effect”CLICK HERE!

Big Bang vs Big BounceCLICK HERE!

LHC Creates Matter From LightCLICK HERE!

About Author

Leave A Reply