rigorousintuition.ca

Can any of these devices take me to a timeline where both "Hillary shimmy" and "Superbowl shuffle" cease to exist? It's OK if there is still "Ninja rap."

anyone remember Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles and their master ,Sinter

dada, im on the floor, like just fell off my chair, you should seriously be a not serious writer, take my money already.......

justdrew » 24 Sep 2016, 22:22 wrote:I propose a scientific game:
1. Pick a famous old movie nobody watches anymore
2. watch it closely for 'iconic' scenes
3. figure out a subtle alteration and post your 'madel(brot)'ed version, with a slick skein of 'evidence. Since we know this is intentional generation, it won't be as convincing, but I think we should be able to still get a sense of how easy it can be to buy a suggestion.

That would be one way. Another would be to ask someone to describe whatever scene in question without planting the slightest suggestion beforehand. I suspect most wouldn't recall much at all, let alone be active in the placement of braces and silver legs -- though you might roundly encounter the misnaming of a title or two. I mean, the insistence that Interview with the Vampire was once Interview with a Vampire is no more fascinating than, conversely, the common usage of "all of the sudden" instead of what is catalogued as the preferred usage "all of a sudden".

To make a tiny point of rhetorical differentiation: I would posit that no one "remembers" braces. They simply bow to someone else's suggestion, not remembering shit, as opposed to misremembering from their own inferences, which involves the overwriting of our actual memory. Either way, unless someone produces their pre-"Mandela effect" journal wherein it is stated that the girl had braces, we cannot rely on either their "memory" or memory.

BTW: Has anyone here ever encountered anyone who had thought Mandela was dead prior to his release? Not me. More likely, they didn't know who Mandela was. As such, we have an aptly named non-effect. In just about every example cited that I have seen so far, I remember it the way those claiming the effect do not. And I know my memory is far from perfect. Still, this apparently means my timeline is being invaded increasingly by people from other realities and it was only a matter of time before at least one of them would lay claim to superior memory. Maybe every night when I go to sleep, my dreams rewrite the realities of countless other human beings, rendering their life's histories to be on par with that of the photo in Marty McFly's guitar neck. Some photographic memory, that.

Does anyone remember like I do that Biff was carrying a copy of Catch 22 in the Rying of Lot 49 in his back pocket? I'd swear I could make it out as he was climbing into the getaway car just after he had pounded that needle into Eric Stolz' chest, freeing him from the future film franchise.

Years ago I watched Close Encounters of the Third Kind on TV. It was probably the third or fourth time I saw it. Instead of the movie ending after Richard Dreyfuss walks up the mothership gangplank surrounded by the small aliens, the movie continues. He goes inside and we get to see the wondrous, immense inside of the craft. I don't know how long it lasted but there were some very cool effects.

Since then I've never seen that ending. A couple of times I've seen the "director's cut" version hoping that was it but, no. Has anyone else seen the extended ending?

On a side note, I found out that Dreyfuss is a 32nd Degree Scottish Rite Mason, for those so inclined to connect those particular dots.

On June 10, 2011, Richard Dreyfuss was made a Master Mason “at sight” by the Grand Master of Masons of the District of Columbia at the Washington DC Scottish Rite building, as well as a 32nd Degree Scottish Rite Mason. That evening he spoke at a banquet celebrating the 200th Anniversary of the Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia, about the Dreyfuss Initiative, a Research Society promoting civics and enlightenment values to be headquarterd in Charleston, WV.

Flumen Luminis

(on edit - link goes to oops but if you type in his name, his page comes up)

Charleston, WV seems a really odd place for the headquarters of a society promoting "enlightenment values."

Oh, and dada, your ship sounds fab but can you create transwarp conduits or are you stuck outside subspace?

I remember clearly that on one of its several theatrical runs over the years, Close Encounters was given the marketing boost of a new "now you go can inside" ending. This was not called director's cut or anything that I remember, possibly "special edition," possibly nothing. (Remember: still the dawn of the video age, you either saw it in the cinema or a year or more later on TV at the scheduled time, only with commercials and no rewind, or you didn't see it). Going inside was very, eh, whatever. Not a millionth the interest of actual sex.

Anyway, we should retitle this "Mandela" problem to convey its true essence, that of cranky old men insisting on the infallibility of their misremembered, mildly nostalgic recollections of mostly trivial public stuff, as if it really matters, as if any inaccuracies in recollection demonstrate something very suspicious and big.

And for anyone who specifically remembers Mandela dying in the 1980s, I am going to have no sympathy whatsoever. Dumb cracker revising history to a wish scenario is going to be my default go-to in such cases (or dumb cracker taking the piss). I'm sure a specimen will promptly roll around to assure us that he mows a disabled gay black veteran neighbor's lawn every day.

We used to have a popular thread on hauntology, which I think was interesting and smart. (Some of you may remember it as boring and dumb, becaue of the tachyonic electrolytes messing with your mandelbrot brain waves.)

Hey, I don't remember starting the "Hauntology" thread myself. Who fucked with my timeline?! Now it's personal!

Non-time and Hauntology.
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... =8&t=32011


Speculations on why socially observable time has stopped
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... =8&t=33770

Okay, Jack, thanks for the info. I guess they only play the regular version on TV. But I do believe you're being a bit harsh with

...that of cranky old men insisting on the infallibility of their misremembered, mildly nostalgic recollections of mostly trivial public stuff, as if it really matters, as if any inaccuracies in recollection demonstrate something very suspicious and big.

1. Why do you assume all posters in this thread are cranky, old or men?
2. Not all are insisting on incorrect things. Not even most.
3. Who are you to determine what is trivial? Geeze, those Hillary and Trump are Dangerous threads get into some pretty absurd minutia.
4. I just posted the Dreyfuss is a Mason stuff because I thought it was interesting. Not implying he is the Devil in charge.

The subtitle of this thread is about a James Bond flick hence my bringing up CEOTTK.

I've seen that extended CE3k movie ending.

Old white and uptight.

Who recalls the The Spuyten Duyvil Railroad Disaster?

Of 1882?



http://myinwood.net/the-spuyten-duyvil- ... r-of-1882/

Blue » Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:36 am wrote:Okay, Jack, thanks for the info. I guess they only play the regular version on TV. But I do believe you're being a bit harsh with

...that of cranky old men insisting on the infallibility of their misremembered, mildly nostalgic recollections of mostly trivial public stuff, as if it really matters, as if any inaccuracies in recollection demonstrate something very suspicious and big.

1. Why do you assume all posters in this thread are cranky, old or men?

Historically speaking, I'm very soon to be a cranky old man myself. I hope I'll have a sense of humor about it.

And yeah, it's mostly trivial public stuff that's treated here. So?

I'm having fun with the general vibe of this "Mandela effect," not condemning or categorizing every single person who wonders why something as they remember it no longer seems to be so - it's a very common experience. Kids have it too!

.

Spiro wrote...

To make a tiny point of rhetorical differentiation: I would posit that no one "remembers" braces. They simply bow to someone else's suggestion, not remembering shit, as opposed to misremembering from their own inferences, which involves the overwriting of our actual memory. Either way, unless someone produces their pre-"Mandela effect" journal wherein it is stated that the girl had braces, we cannot rely on either their "memory" or memory.

Doesn't somebody have a copy of the original movie so this may be settled in a straight forward way?

This seems trivial but I clearly remember braces and would find it quite odd to need to consider that this happened as a matter of suggestion.

While I am quite open to 'suggestion' as a major shaper of our psyches, this case does not seem to fill that bill.

The scene does not even make sense without the braces.

Belligerent Savant says he located his old VHS, no braces at any point in film:

http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... 75#p612305

.

Indeed, and it was quite a trip/shock to my visual senses to view the scene in question, expecting to see the braces glimmer in the light, exposed and overt, and instead viewing only a row of teeth sans the braces that I insisted were there.

I've delayed submitting my findings due to, well, the day-to-day trappings of my life outside this archaic (yet vital!) message board, but will aim to produce the "evidence" by sometime this evening.

Coincidentally -- or not -- Moonraker was on TV this past weekend, on the FX channel, I believe, sandwiched between Goldfinger and You Only Live Twice as part of yet another 'Bond Marathon' banality. I missed the scene in question, but switched back later to watch the scenes towards the end of the film, where she smiles again... with the braces scrubbed from her mouth, because clearly that's the only logical explanation; it cannot be that we collectively 'misremember' the same thing due to a variation of mass-induced holographic skullduggery perpetrated by Prime Movers navigating within 4th dimensional space, outside our limited perspectives, purely for their own trivial amusement.