"There are a lot of colours in Pokémon so if memories were bad, then, at least some people should be so-called «mis-remembering» the tail-colour as blue or red or orange or maybe even not having a tail at all"

No. Pikachu's ears have a black tip. The brain is applying the same logic to the tail. That's a pattern that speaks for misremembering, not against it.

"the Mandela-Effect phenomena also includes what is known as «Residual-Evidence»"

But residual evidence speaks against the changing timeline theory. If a timeline is changed, there should be no residual evidence.

I know that most people are not scientific. I see the possibility that the Mandela effect is a real thing, but I also see that 99% of what is circulating the internet about it seems to be just misremembering that can be explained.

See, what if the Mandela effect is real and some people who know about it muddy the waters with a big disinfo psyop? The goal being to discredit the phenomenon itself and stifle scientific research.

I find it to be a fascinating topic. There are people who claim whole neighborhoods where they grew up changed over night. I saw a video of a woman who is convinced that the color of her electric sockets in her house changed over night. That's the interesting stuff. Focusing on commercial logos and movies is a distraction, because they are not important.

The phenomena is more about what I call Time-Pockets rather than whole entire Time-Lines; and whole entire neighbourhoods completely disappearing or even whole entire buildings no longer being where they are are actually NOT «minor» changes; it's quite significant for whole entire entities to have disappeared (e.g. : the movie Shazam).

I also find that people from your younger generations seem to be more-likely to not have noticed that anything has actually changed since it's not like your generations have had that many years of going through the major LHC-Acceleration-Announcements (and, amongst the first time I had experienced such an effect, was from as far back as the early 1990s, before the term «Mandela-Effect» even ever came into existence; see, I had recorded a particular song that I really liked and was looking for, but, playing the cassette-tape the next day in order to get to its track resulted in the whole entire thing seemingly having vanished from existence entirely).

And your examples are trying to make A Priori assumptions that the Butterfly Effect MUST have people who «can't remember the Eiffel Tower» which is EXTREMELY SIMILAR to when the materialist pseudo-skeptics assume that anybody who claims to be a «psychic» should have known what the winning lottery numbers were IF they were indeed real and genuine psychics with any real or genuine so-called psychic-ability; this is called an A Priori Assumption (a Logical-Fallacy).

And I also ALREADY addressed this «mis-remembering» claim by pointing out the FACT that in EVERY case of ANY «Mandela-Effect» there are only TWO (not more than two) and JUST TWO «histories» that people are said to so-called «mis-remember» and if you're claiming that people are just «mis-remembering» then you are IMPLYING that their «memory» is a FAULTY one; IF the phenomena was indeed due to «faulty» memory then WHERE are the people who «mis-remember» the «Luke, I am your father» (versus the «No, I am your father») iconic (ICONIC) line as «Bastard, I am your father» or «Brat, I am your father» or «Fool, I am your father» or ANY other word OTHER than either «Luke» or «No» ? And I already brought up the Lion versus Lamb example (and there are also numerous other ones with bible-verses; which, by the way, is NOT a _solely_ «American» phenomenon, but, affects people world-wide, due to how much influence that book has over so many people and their religions). Another passage is so-called «mis-remember» as being EITHER «wineskins» or «bottles» and NOT MORE than EITHER of the TWO.

Go ahead, see IF you can find ANY examples of large swathes of people «mis-remembering» ANY of the Mandela-Effects as something OTHER THAN one out of TWO different «history» versions; and, remember, the key word here is «large swathes» but if you DO happen to find people who DO claim to have a memory of history that is OTHER THAN one of the TWO versions, ESPECIALLY if they have photographic-memory and/or were always Straight-A Students, make sure to reference the source so that we can set-up Remote-Viewing Targets in order to determine whether the claimant was genuinely speaking truthfully or if they even exist (rather than having been A.I. Generated).

"and whole entire neighbourhoods completely disappearing or even whole entire buildings no longer being where they are are actually NOT «minor» changes;"

It's minor in the sense that it seems to affect very few people. My observation is that the more people are affected, the more likely it's just misremembering a brand or logo. The examples where bigger things change affect less people and are reported less often. Why is that?

"And your examples are trying to make A Priori assumptions that the Butterfly Effect MUST have people who «can't remember the Eiffel Tower»"

No, I don't assume that there must be these things. I ask why they are not there. It's not a rhetorical question. There could be a reasonable explanation for it.

"IF the phenomena was indeed due to «faulty» memory then WHERE are the people who «mis-remember» the «Luke, I am your father» (versus the «No, I am your father») iconic (ICONIC) line as «Bastard, I am your father» or «Brat, I am your father» or «Fool, I am your father» or ANY other word OTHER than either «Luke» or «No» ?"

So you're now making the exact same argument I made with the Eiffel Tower. It's a good question, isn't it? 😉

Regarding that quote from Star Wars, my observation is that people who watched the movie in English experience that Mandela effect disproportionally more often than people who watched it in German. A simple explanation would be that "No" and "Luke" sound more similar than "Nein" and "Luke", which is why Germans don't remember the Luke-version so often.

The next thing is that so called "residue" has a more simple explanation. Let's take this clip from the Simpsons as an example:

Could it be that the writer of that episode simply misremembered because in his ears "No" sounded like "Luke", and then all the people who watched the Simpsons remember this instead? It's like Queen's "We are the champions of the world". The album version doesn't have it, but the 1985 Live Aid version has it indeed, and it was all over MTV, so people remember that.

"And I also ALREADY addressed this «mis-remembering» claim by pointing out the FACT that in EVERY case of ANY «Mandela-Effect» there are only TWO (not more than two) and JUST TWO «histories» that people are said to so-called «mis-remember»"

But that's actually supporting the misremember theory. I already explained it:

The simple explanation is that people remember words they know. They even see them. My theory is that the brain doesn't look at reality like a computer, but uses its faculty of imagination to be more efficient at pattern recognition. You hear Penney, but your brain makes it Penny because it's a known term.

So, in case of this "pattern correction" occuring in the brain, there will be always two options: The correct one, which is deviating from a known word or name by just one letter or so, and the one people think it is because it's more common.

"And I already brought up the Lion versus Lamb example (and there are also numerous other ones with bible-verses; which, by the way, is NOT a _solely_ «American» phenomenon, but, affects people world-wide"

The bible changes belong to the 1% of changes I find puzzling, too.

Re : «Could it be that the writer of that episode simply misremembered because in his ears "No" sounded like "Luke", and than all the people who watched the Simpsons remember this instead? It's like Queen's "We are the champions of the world". The album version doesn't have it, but the 1985 Live Aid version has it indeed, and it was all over MTV, so people remember that.»

No, that is extremely unlikely, and, sounds a lot like how when a fundamentalist (or materialist) goes about doing weird things with semantics to the point of playing gymnastics with it in order to maintain a belief in some «mainstream» or «conventional» narrative, rather than even considering the possibility that there is actual evidence for para-normal phenomena.

And I grew up with MTV and that was NOT a common nor widely played nor frequently played nor perhaps even EVER played on MTV (not during my time-line). And I literally GREW UP WITH MTV and had that channel on each and every single day; there was NO instance of «We are the Champions» EVER having been played throughout ALL of those years (yes YEARS) that I had tuned into MTV on practically a DAILY basis; therefore «It was on MTV and therefore it was popular» is NOT a good nor valid «explanation» pointing to so-called mis-remembering.

And we can even CONTRAST that to a VERY FAMOUS comedian by the name of George Carlin; see, just about ANY video on YT (or anywhere else) of George Carlin is typically going to have a LOT of views (and even comments that are also often very recent). You have also heard of the term «Conspiracy Theory/Theorist» and George Carlin also DID do a segment on that term/word/phrase; with as COMMON and POPULAR the phrase/word/term «Conspiracy Theory/Theorist» is WORLD-WIDE, and, COMBINED with the FACT that George Carlin is ALSO a VERY POPULAR historic-figure, the «statistics» SHOULD make it so that LOTS of «George Carlin + Conspiracy Theory» videos (and VIEWS of them) abounds, but, THEY ARE PRACTICALLY NON-EXISTENT IN THIS TIME-LINE!!! O_O (Well, more specifically, anything to do with George Carlin and Conspiracy Theory gets far less views and far less attention, nor does he even mention it on-stage during this time-line, even though he most-certainly did during my origin-time-line, whilst the rest of the videos on George Carlin typically have over a whole entire million views on nearly every other George Carlin video)

So I have therefore THROUGHLY «de-bunked» the «memory from popularity» argument

"sounds a lot like how when a fundamentalist (or materialist) goes about doing weird things with semantics"

I'm just playing with ideas so I get an understanding of the different possibilities. I don't believe anything regarding the Mandela effect, because I don't know enough about it. Maybe there are exactly two timelines and people remember the other one. Could be true. But then I want to know: Why do the timelines differ mostly in unimportant stuff like brands and logos? What is the reason for that?

"And I grew up with MTV and that was NOT a common nor widely played nor frequently played nor perhaps even EVER played on MTV (not during my time-line)."

Freddy Mercury's legendary Live Aid performance has been everywhere.

"therefore «It was on MTV and therefore it was popular» is NOT a good nor valid «explanation» pointing to so-called mis-remembering."

So you're telling me just because of how you remember it, that must be the truth and everybody else is wrong. Now you're going fundamentalist.

"the «statistics» SHOULD make it so that LOTS of «George Carlin + Conspiracy Theory» videos (and VIEWS of them) abounds"

685K+ views. Are you even living in my timeline now? (which indeed is an interesting question 🤔)

Re : 685K+ views

Dude, look at its comments-section, then, compare that comments-section to ALL of the OTHER George Carlin videos that DON'T have «Conspiracy» anywhere in the title. There is NO way in hell that that linked video actually has anywhere near more than half-a-million views. Why are there BARELY ANY comments if it's actually been viewed so many times ?

(And even the «685K+» count itself can be «debunked» knowing that we factually know that Google and You-Tube results can and even actually have been manipulated)

The whole point of this «exercise» is that we are trying to «look deeper» into things rather than simply accepting the «surface-logic» such as assuming that the current search-results that come up on top in any of the search-engines (especially if they point to Wikipedia or LeadStories or PolitiFact or FactCheck or Snopes or other artificially ratings inflated sources) is indeed and in fact the «organic» result that would truly happen even if one's search-term has absolutely nothing to do with looking for information claimed by any of those five very highly questionable soruces.

And let's even play some «Devil's Advocate» here and go and look into the «skeptics» who insist that the whole entire Mandela-Effect is nothing more than mis-remembering...

...then read through its comments-section. Try explaining THAT one (the comments-section) away as to WHY there are SO MANY people who DON'T «buy into» the «mis-remembering» oft-promoted «narrative» and even in fact «de-bunk the debunkers» themselves...

Memory and / or perception tampering facilitated through the use of tech is indeed plausible. Hollywood gave us a glimpse of it with the neurolyzer pens in Men in Black.

Tom Delonge has said human brains are transducers which are essentially antennas. It's not outside the realm of possibility to think that the Earth prison administrators are beaming unwanted thoughts / ideas to our heads to force the prisoner population to conform to ideals complimentary to their programming / script.

The technology for mind-alteration certainly does exist and I have also brought that up in the past by bringing attention to the works of Bryan Kofron who tried to expose the Mind-Manipulation Scalar-Wave Vortex-Technologies (used on what are called : Targeted Individuals), how-ever, just like in my previous response prior to the mention of the to the «666K» Je--, err, ahem, I mean, 666K+ Views, WHEN it comes to the «weirdoes» who watch the SAME movie all of their lives growing up (and, rest-assured, a LOT of people from MY time-line DID grow up as Star-Wars «Fanatics» such to the point that the Boomers and Generation-X do in fact have people who've watched it over and over and over and over and over SO MANY times that they can literally recite each and every single line of the whole ENTIRE movie... ACCURATELY !), I won't be buying into the «mis-remembering» claim when they are ACCURATELY remembering the «details» of the REST of the WHOLE ENTIRE song or movie or script or whatever, yet, they somehow «can't seem to remember correctly» the MOST-FAMOUS lines or titles of them all ?

When it comes to STRONG memories (such as when one is the literal singer of the song who has memorised the whole entire song by heart and has been singing it very frequently for many years and years and years), I am also reminded of the works of Dr. Ian Stevenson, who would «test» the children who've made claims of being the personality of a past-life-existence; he even went so far as to try to «trick» the children into showing/demonstrating «flawed memories» or that they were «making things up» such as having a different friend or relative claim to be their past-life aunt or just a friend or cousin of some certain relative and other such things that don't match the history, but, the children would always point out, accurately, who had which relationship to whom (that was not the aunt of ABC but of XYZ or that she wasn't even an aunt yet since she had not gotten married or that no it was that other man who was the father rather than this man, etc).

And, compared to technology that can wipe & alter memories, versus technology to just «re-holodeck» the whole entire damn system, memories are things that we KNOW that we CAN «recover» (this has been PROVEN through the meticulous-works of researchers of past-lives-hypnotic-regression-therapy), and, that «memory wiping» also requires EXTREMELY HIGH VOLTAGES of electricity (one of the more intellectually astute regulars to the P&R Discord-Server did also tell me about this one woman in Canada who was «experimented» upon by the Canadian-government, who literally «wiped» her memories by subjecting her to EXTREMELY HIGH-VOLTAGES of Electricity, that, some-how, she managed to miraculously recover from, then, eventually later on even successfully sued the Canadian-government for what they did). The technology from the Scalar-Wave Targeted Individuals side alters minds in a way to be able to induce experiences that only LOOK like a so-called «mental-illness» or are altering their emotions, and, whilst extremely advanced, being «microwaved» isn't really quite the same thing as being «zapped» with EXTREMELY HIGH VOLTAGES of Electricity (both still obviously very uncomfortable none-the-less). Targeted Individuals, especially once they learn about the «Targeted Individuals» phenomena, KNOW that they ARE being «targeted» and AREN'T «full of amnesia» nor «mis-remembering» the TORTURES that they have experienced & endured (even if it LOOKS like a «mental-illness» to those who simply buy into scams like psychiatry due to their insistence on «following the programming» of the «main-stream/conventional-narratives» that come out of MSM & promoters of allopathic-medications).

So if you accept that mass-mind-manipulation technologies exist...?
Then what makes you NOT accept that time-altering technology does or even CAN ?

"So if you accept that mass-mind-manipulation technologies exist...?
Then what makes you NOT accept that time-altering technology does or even CAN ?"

1. I don't believe that time-altering technology cannot exist.

2. Time-altering technology wouldn't leave residues.

It doesn't work like in the Back to the Future movies, where you remove a person from history and the person vanishes in real time from the photograph twenty years later, leaving a picture behind that doesn't make sense. If the person died before the photo was taken, the photo will either never be taken at all, or at least not look the same. There won't be a blank spot where the missing person was, because the person never has been there in the first place.

So, when a timeline is altered, everything after that point in time will change consistently. Residue doesn't make any sense. It's a childish way of thinking how time works.

Some things look like they need to be back-tracked and have their «semantics» clarified; when I gave the examples of there only being TWO possible «versions of histories» the whole entire point of it was to actually DEBUNK the notion that the memories are «faulty» like receiving a random BSOD (Blue Screen of Death) Error-Message. See, when a computer component is faulty, you get ALL kinds of possible results, rather than only one out of only two; if people had such «bad memories» then there SHOULD be people whose «memories» are SO BAD that «Lion» or «Wolf» was «mis-remembered» as cat or dog or sheep or goat or zebra or giraffe or tree or radio or car or truck or fence or anything OTHER THAN «Lion» or «Wolf» from the Isaiah 11:6 passage.

I don't know if you've used computers much, but, for those of us who have, and, have encountered the BSOD-Errors, they can range anywhere from being due to a Hardware-Failure, Component-Failure, Attempting to Access Invalid-RAM, some .DLL Module Caused the Crash, some .sys file caused the crash, some Page-Fault Error, something here, something there, and, various other things from here and there and everywhere. The point being that «faulty memory» should give ALL KINDS of «mis-rememberings» (like random BSOD-Errors) RATHER THAN it being EITHER Wave OR the Photon (pulling from the Double-Slit Experiment as this metaphoric-reference).

Re : «Time-altering technology wouldn't leave residues.»
And why not ? What makes you the «authority» on how time-alterations work ?

Re : «It doesn't work like in the Back to the Future movies, where you remove a person from history and the person vanishes in real time from the photograph twenty years later, leaving a picture behind that doesn't make sense.»
So if I took a picture of the Eiffel-Tower and there was a «someone» standing there in the picture, even though I was really just taking a picture of the Eiffel-Tower, rather than a «someone» with an Eiffel-Tower that just happened to be behind them, but, a time-alteration occurred where said «someone» either no longer exists or simply wasn't there at the Eiffel-Tower at the «time» that I took a photo or picture of said tower, that, the photo or picture would just simply cease to exist altogether ? And exactly why would it cease to exist altogether rather than the person just no longer being a part of the photo since it was the Eiffel-Tower that I was choosing to photograph as opposed to the person ?

Finally, I want you to try something, assuming that you have the ability to gain access to the necessary tool(s)/equipment/technology/etc.; get the details from what I am asking you to do from this video...

Whilst I did manage to locate one of my old cameras that was manufactured from before the specified year that this is said to supposed to be able to work, for some reason, even with full-charged batteries, this camera of mine seems to be non-functional; may require getting some form of a smart-phone that was manufactured PRIOR to the year specified in the video in order to be able to test it out for ourselves (anybody and everybody who watches it for themselves should also attempt to give it a try for the sake of being «scientific» and doing actual field-tests rather than just being book-learned or regurgitating from Wikipedia or other such similar things where the «knowledge» remains entirely academic and not obtained from actual real-world experimentation or real-world observation).

It's not as old as I thought.

But that's a perfect example of why it's so important to collect the evidence yourself: That video above still could be fake. How? By manipulating the old phone's screen in post video editing. That's a lot of work and must look perfect, but it's doable.

So here's a question I have: If the above video is real, it means we see a monopoly guy without a monocle when we look at the game in reality. There's a monocle, but our brain is filtering it out. How does the old phone undo that? We should see him without a monocle even on the old phone's screen, because the filtering happens in the brain, not in the phone.

Also, can't we just use old cameras instead of a phone? What makes the old phones special?

From the comments section:

"Well it IS edited. And very well so. I even have the 100% proof right there:
Go to 1:57 (adjust video speed to 0.25 if necessary) and press pause at the exact right moment and you see the monocle disappear from the phone screen. Ta-da."

So I looked there and can confirm that the monocle disappears on the old phone's screen from one frame to the next. This means the video has been manipulated in post editing.

That is not video-editing or image-manipulation; that's just blurry; it happens when the focus blurs; that has to do with how cameras and image-rendering works rather than editing.

I have found that the people in this «time-line» are apparently «buying into the "how memory works"» narrative without realising that the whole ENTIRE «how memory works & fills in the gaps» NARRATIVE is just that... a «narrative» so it MUST BE ASKED as to WHY you BELIEVE that «memory» works that way ? What is your evidence or are you just «parroting» the pseudo-skeptics & debunkers who INSIST that there is NO such thing as the «existence of the para-normal» but that it's ALL just «memory manipulation» or «mis-remembering» and that it has more to do with «how memory works» rather than because there IS something «para-normal» going on ?

By the way, the «memory filling in the gaps» NARRATIVE actually HAS been «ruled out» because there HAVE been scientific-studies done with ACTUAL «Mandected» people who've had their «brain-imaging» mapped in real-time; you know, the whole entire MRI-stuff, checking to see if their brains were indeed revealing any patterns where they were just filling in gaps; may be a while before I can find the reference or video to this, but, regardless, this «mis-remembering» NARRATIVE is NOT «convincing» because there are MANY other details about history that people DO remember VERY ACCURATELY (once more, it's like when someone recites ALL of the Lyrics to a WHOLE ENTIRE SONG and they ARE 100% ACCURATE yet, some-how, they are «mis-remembering» the MOST FAMOUS line of the WHOLE ENTIRE SONG??? REALLY???).

What is actually even MORE INTERESTING is to look into the «psychology» of people who CANNOT ACCEPT even the POSSIBILITY that ANY sort of «para-normal» phenomena even exists and will go to great lengths to play gymnastics-with-semantics to INSIST that it MUST be something OTHER THAN ANYTHING that MIGHT be Psi-related (or in the case of the Mandela-Effect : Time-Alteration-Related). Although the origin-article seems to no longer exist, one of the articles thoroughly goes through several examples and cites the sources to this particular psychological-phenomenon, regarding the so-called skeptics (pseudo-skeptics) and debunkers, fortunately, remaining mirrored on a few other sources... https://jockbrocas.blogspot.com/2022/02/how-skeptics-lost-their-minds-over.html (Origin Article-Title : «How the Skeptics Lost Their Minds Over a Precognition Experiment» but even when the origin web-site existed its EXACT search-term-result was also still buried way down there on the second or third page instead of being the first result which SHOULD be the case IF the Search-Engine Algorithms returned actually honest or «organic» results)

You're debating a straw man.

I made clear that I look at all the possibilities, not believing anything of it to be true because I have not enough information. But you keep going on as if I'm saying what I'm not saying. It's getting boring.

"that's just blurry"

No, it's not. You can even see the left eye where the monocle should be.

All of these «possibilities» (at least in regards to whether people are just «mis-remembering» things or not) have already been looked at & ruled out; as for advanced technologies being involved, something is definitely going on that affects «reality» at the literal quantum-levels, but, Occam's Razor points towards Time-Travel or something along the lines of Time-Shift phenomena, once «mis-remembering» has been ruled out; in regards to «replacing memories» that never existed, sure, that would work on and with NPCs & video-game characters, who don't have any real «consciousness» so-to-speak, but, emotions are very much a very significant-part of spiritual-existence, and, without any spirit, NPCs have no genuine emotions (due to having no spirit). And there are people who say that they learned about what a «Cornucopia» even WAS because they had to ask their mother (or parents) what that thing was on the Fruit-of-the-Loom Logo (and children tend to tell the truth when they know they aren't going to be scolded or punished).

People also do exist who have studied & examined the phenomena for over eight whole entire years... some of those compilations are presented here... https://odysee.com/@briansstaveley:5/More-Than-Memory---Mandela-Effect-And-The-Reality-Residuals:f (mis-remembering is ultimately ruled out as an invalid explanation for the various reasons that this guy goes over in great detail)

And, yes, the image IS a «blurry» image... I even took the liberty to take those very screen-shots and blow them up in order to SHOW that it's BLURRED which is EXACTLY how a video-rendering SHOULD occur when out-of-focus...

Does the thumb appear clearly in the blur...? No.
Does the cane-handle show up as a loop in the blur...? No.
Can you even SEE that his left hand is HOLDING the cane in the blur...? Not really; for all we know it even looks like his hand is in FRONT of the cane ENTIRELY.
The pattern on his hat ? The low-resolution rendering makes it look triangularish.

Go ahead, prove me wrong that this ISN'T how low-resolution-cameras «render» an image by getting a Monocle-Eyed (or anything else) that you can zoom in and out (turn off auto-focus of course) and de-focus the image in a similar manner at a similar angle and the results being significantly different from what has been presented in that video despite «blurring» similarly... I have a LOT of experience with knowing how to take good pictures, camera-work, determining what the best lighting is for clarity, etc.

Re : «Also, can't we just use old cameras instead of a phone? What makes the old phones special?»
IF you can even FIND a WORKING one then be my guest; I have an old camera-model that was manufactured PRIOR to 2009 (I think) and I simply can't get it to power up at all even with full-charged batteries. I do have an old laptop that was manufactured prior to 2009, but, I need to fix it before I can even get it to boot (had a ribbon come loose as I was trying to do some trouble-shooting & upgrading & haven't been able to turn it on since over a decade and a half ago by now). And there have been plenty of places that I came across with a whole entire «donate your old phones here» collection-bin (now why in the world would they be collecting phones, and, ONLY PHONES, rather than ALL of the OTHER stuff & materials or even computers & laptops & cameras that need to be or at least should be recycled instead of just phones...? What makes phones so damn special...?)

If I can ever get that old laptop to work again, I will be sure to field-test with it, but, until then, the only real «leads» we have are trying to get ahold of any of those old camera-enabled cell-phones...

People «mis-remember» things when they are things that they've only witnessed ONCE or only gone through ONCE or very FEW times in their lives; if it's something that they've done literally HUNDREDS or even THOUSANDS of times and then notice that there was some anomaly even when they were specifically looking for the thing just yesterday then «mis-remembering» is NOT a valid-explanation when there are MILLIONS of people around the world who are being gas-lighted as so-called mis-remembering;

And even the whole entire «people are just mis-remembering all of these EXTREMELY FAMOUS logos/lyrics/etc.» is also absurd because not 100% of all Logos or Lyrics or Movie-Titles or Song-Titles in all of history with similar configurations are being «mis-remembered» and also because of the fact that this whole ENTIRE «mis-remembering» *narrative* also did NOT start to become a «phenomenon» until shortly after 2015CE; where are all of the cases and «analyses» of «mis-remembering» published from PRIOR to 2015CE or 2012CE ? (Although this very term didn't even exist until 2009CE according to current time-configuration history) Why does the so-called «Mandela-Effect» NOT have a bunch of publications or videos and such PRIOR to those years (regardless of what any sort of «Mandela-Effect» may have been called prior to 2009CE) about «millions of people mis-remembering» so many plethora of phenomena ?

And, also once having lived at Australia myself, DST was indeed called Daylight Savings (Plural) Time, not Daylight Saving (Singular) Time, and, like I said, people don't «mis-remember» things that they've done or heard year after year after year after year, day after day after day after day for the whole entire damn month for year after year after year after year; that's just as ABSURD as claiming that someone who's «rehearsed a song» for thousands (THOUSANDS) of times just «isn't getting this particular line or this particular word» right (and the guy in the More-Than-Mis-Remembering video DOES give and provide specific EXAMPLES of whole ENTIRE groups of people, EVEN IN GERMAN, singing lyrics, that are SPECIFICALLY the way that people are said to be «mis-remembering» things).

It's one thing if people have been «exposed» to the thing only ONCE or maybe twice in their life, from long ago, especially if it happened very fast to the point where they couldn't quite pick up on various little details, BUT, in a Court-of-Law (not that there are any real court-systems that aren't just kangaroo-courts these days), IF you have literally MILLIONS of people «eye-witness» the same car-accident, and, they ALL say the EXACT SAME THING about some particular (potentially obscure) «detail» (because «traumatic-memories» are actually VERY DIFFICULT for people to «mis-remember» since those are things that are often just replayed over & over & over in their minds until they some-how manage to repress or suppress or just out-right bury the memory/memories or because it is just some-how blocked out due to being too traumatic to keep re-living), especially when they are reporting INDEPENDENTLY of what ANYBODY ELSE said (not even ever having heard the answers of any of the other witnesses), then, claiming that they «got it from some other witness» or «misremembered because of some really obscure publication that nobody has ever even heard about that was published from way back in the 1800s» is really stretching it and definitely NOT «simplifying» the explanation (but more like going out of one's way to find even the most REMOTE possible link in where someone may have gotten some information from from publications that even they have never even heard of before).

Then there are whole entire movies or whole entire entities that people «remember» from somewhere, such as that Shazam movie (although, apparently, in the current time-line-configuration, some sources say that it's now called Kazaam something like that), not that I was ever big into watching movies. All of these «memories» of these «non-existent» things would have to come from SOMEWHERE... also, related to my OWN memories & recollections of my ORIGIN-Time-Line, from where exactly did I get my VIVID-MEMORY of George Carlin once having performed ON-STAGE the whole ENTIRE «Conspiracy Theory» skit...? I can tell you for a FACT that, when I FIRST watched his performance on the HBO-Channel back around early 1994CE, I watched it with the neighbour, and, there was a specific segment where I do remember his expressions and how he spoke about it VERY CLEARLY (even the way that he moved on-stage), and, was part of the ORIGINAL-Version of his «Euphemisms» section where he went on to say it in specifically this manner...: «The limits of debate in this country are established long before the debate even begins, and everyone is marginalised, made to seem either communist, or /some/ sort of dis-loyal person... kook, /there's/ a word, and now, it's _conspiracy_; see? They've made /that/, something that can't be entertained for *even a moment* that POWERFUL PEOPLE _/*MIGHT*/_ get together... and have a PLAN!!! (This was when he did the «O_O» looking expression whilst facing the audience) _/*DOESN'T HAPPEN!!!*/_ (yes he was indeed yelling out this part) You're a *kook*... you're a /conspiracy buff...!/ (his pronounciation of «Conspiracy Buff» was slowed down) Y'know...» because I sure as HELL did NOT get this «memory» from the «interview» version that exists now. Feel free to go ahead and set-up a Remote-Viewing target and have which-ever remote-viewers go ahead and Remote-View this if you think I'm making this up or «mis-remembering» such details (in fact, I looked high and low for where the hell this particular clip was, that once in fact, DID exist, not finding it anywhere, even going so far as to buy DVDs of George Carlin in order to see if I could find it on the origin-publications, this was before I learned about the Mandela-Effect phenomena, before eventually figuring out that something is VERY WRONG WITH «REALITY» ITSELF). I also plan to «re-enact» this myself & upload it eventually when I can set-up my microphone & have enough space to move around on a stage-like platform (and wearing similar grey-coloured clothing that he did) & video-record it so that I can move the way that he did or similarly enough and how he held his microphone whilst going through this particular skit/segment & have it uploaded eventually. Look forward to it ! Just like I am one of the few people who recovered and retained very vividly detailed memories of even my pre-earth-life existence (even pre-this-whole-entire-universe for that matter), memories which would have to come from somewhere, but, are so different than this earth-life that there are literally NO earth-life-equivalent metaphors for me to be able to describe it accurately without needing to layer maybe around 400 pages of metaphoric-information, the claim cannot be made that I am «mis-remembering» this or even got it from any «earthly» sources (Jesus himself also said that his «kingdom» was not an «earthly» one).

And I don't expect you to go through the whole entire (more-than-just-mis-remembering) video in a day; for long videos like that, such as the Lacerta-Interview, even I don't go through them only once, but, typically need at least a couple of dozen passes in order to absorb sufficient-detail (depending on the amount of detail). The Lacerta-Interview was certainly quite detailed so it was necessary for me to go through it for at least a few dozen passes; Mandela-Effect often has repeat-examples so it shouldn't need to be re-passed more than a couple of dozen or maybe even a dozen repeats (should be possible to complete before the end of a week or two whether with full-attention or listening in the back-ground whilst multi-tasking).

And why I DON'T accept «mis-remembering» as a valid-explanation for the FAMOUS stuff ? (Perhaps the more-obscure stuff, that people have only come across ONCE, sure, even I am going to «mis-remember» stuff that I've only seen or done maybe once or twice or only a handful of times in my life, but NOT for things that there have been DAILY exposure to ALL DAY LONG for weeks on end or months on end or constant-reminders for things that are common-place from year to year after year after year, etc) Perhaps it's not-so-obvious for people who were born as Millennials or anybody who didn't become a teenager by the time the year 2000 came around, but, for those who've «been around the block» as would be expressed from the Boomer-generation before my generation, the anomalies are going to be very obvious since people from my generation and prior do have experience with what existed prior to the post-2015CE «mass-misremembering» time-line-alteration phenomena whilst those of you who never grew up with those old Saturday Morning Cartoons are of course only going to have any experience with the current time-line-reality that wasn't identified as The Mandela-Effect until some time around the year 2009CE and the whole entire «mis-remembering» phenomena not even becoming that «popular» nor well-known until after around 2015CE (hardly ANY «mass-misremembering» publications exist PRIOR to those years).

And, speaking of Remote-Viewing and the Mandela-Effect, that has apparently also been done by other groups or at least this one other group, although, unfortunately, I am currently over-budget or over-extended on budget (should just be temporarily... hopefully) so it is not something that I can subscribe to in order to see what they have to say or present about it right now, but, you can look at what other Remote-Viewers have researched about the Mandela-Effect for yourself if you have the time and budget for it here... https://rise.tv/episode/project-looking-glass-technology-remote-viewing-the-mandela-effect-multiverse-part-4/

If the monocle disappears from one frame to the next, this means that the monocle has been put there for all frames but one, which is the last one before cut. It's a signature for the people who pay attention. People who are just watching the video in normal speed won't notice anything. That's how he's mocking you.

If you go to timestamp 6:12, there's the example of the 2 note from the Monopoly Junior game. As I explained, this note has a monocle on it in reality, so he didn't add it on the phone, but instead removed it from the note above. It's not that complicated if you know what you're doing.

A remote viewing target would have to be worded in such a way that the viewer will see what really happened for both cases. If the video was edited, the viewer should see a guy on the computer, and if it was a more complex technology changing time itself, the viewer should see that technology instead.

So are you going to prove your claims via Remote-Viewing or not ? You made the claim that someone manipulated the video post-editing (on a computer). You have to provide the evidence for it beyond more than just look at this frame and look at that frame because I have plenty of experience doing camera-work and that's really just a normal result of the «focus» of the camera being unable to pick up on «thin lines» when unfocused.

If it was just the focus, you would still see the white color of the monocle extending beyond the border of the head, and you wouldn't see a blurred left eye.

I already have it in my target collection. Do you know any remote viewers who are willing to participate?

This debate has become a religious dispute, as you're obviously unable to hold different possibilities in your mind at the same time and continue to ignore what I'm saying. The target will be viewed at some point in time. Until then, there's no need to "debate" any further, as there's no new information.

There's no «religion» going on here; either you're old enough to have experienced and witnessed this phenomena for yourself or you're not; you're clearly amongst one of the younger generations and no I've not ignored anything that I have been «quoting» directly from you; I am literally addressing it & asking for the proof/evidence that the monocle was indeed manipulated post-editing in the video which you literally yourself say IS indeed the case; when you have /that/ strong of a conviction, and, you cannot fathom the idea that it /wasn't/ video-edited, but, due to other phenomena that has nothing to do with video-editing on a computer or laptop or video-editing app on a mobile-device, then, what exactly do you call that other than «unable to hold different possibility in your mind» _other than_ it /was/ «video-edited» ? Why are you unable to accept the possibility that the video actually /wasn't/ «manipulated» (via manual video-editing or even some A.I. software causing said manipulation) and instead that it is really just how a camera actually focuses & blurs images when rendering ?

I have a few old cameras around so I will even go so far as to draw up a similar (or maybe print out a Monocle-eyed) Monopoly Man then do zoom-ins & zoom-outs just to demonstrate after I find where those cameras are & get them set-up for such purpose...