The Mandela Effect is a widespread conspiracy theory that delves into the minds of the world.
According to the Healthline.com, the Mandela Effect describes of remembering something as slightly different in wording or appearance as it originally was, where a large number of people recount the same way of remembering that certain thing. This can be of a favourite childhood memory or a movie scene that you watched many years ago, where you can picture a certain event or dialogue in your head, but in actual fact it doesn’t exist.
Social scientists diagnose the Mandela Effect as ‘collective false memories’ and thus have associated it as a common analogy for ‘confabulation’ of ‘honest lying’. This is where a person creates a false memory without intending to lie or deceive others but fill in gaps in their own memory. Researchers suggest that people use confabulation to ‘remember’ what they feel is the most likely sequence of events. In the real world, this can cause problems for eyewitnesses to a crime or an important cultural event for example.
Speaking in scientific terms, according to Verywellmind.com, the Mandela Effect can be devised into multiple different scientific theories. One theory suggests the Mandela Effect originates from quantum physics and relates to the idea that rather than one timeline of events, it is possible that alternate realities or universes are taking place and mixing with our timeline. However in theory, this would result in groups of people having the same memories because the timeline has been altered as we shift between these different realities.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for time travel and the idea of alternate realities (After watching films and TV series such as Avengers: Endgame, Doctor Who and Back to the Future) and I do believe one day a feat could be accomplished within this, however that is highly unrealistic and some may say people who believe in time travel, are the same people who believe the earth is flat.
The most common theory is ‘false memories’. Using neuroscience as a general process, information is encoded in an area of the brain where memories are stored. This is called the ‘engram’ and the framework in which similar memories are associated with each other is called the ‘schema’. So when people try to recall an event, this sets off neurons close to each other, bringing with it the memory. When memories are recalled, rather than remembered perfectly, they are influenced to the point that they can become incorrect.
In this way, memory is unreliable. Is this true for all ways of life? Partly. Our brain doesn’t remember everything and it is most likely that when you try to recall an event in your brain, it won’t be the same as what you experienced it as being. However, why is it some things I can remember exactly? This I find fascinating because our brains are so powerful. In fact, the brain co-ordinates all your behaviours, the way you think, eat, exercise and talk. It is no wonder why positive mental health and brain exercises are more common in todays world, since humans have finally sourced the root cause as to many problems within peoples life, the powerful mind.
‘Memory-Related Concepts’ are another explanation for the Mandela Effect. For example, confabulation involves your brain filling in gaps that are missing in your memories, remembering details that never happened. Confabulation increases with age. ‘Post-event information’ also describes of Information that you learn after an event that can change your recall of the event.
‘Priming’ are the factors leading up to an event, influencing our response and memory since this can cause errors in remembering certain details, often leading to confusion. Have you ever walked into a room, but you do not know why you did or what for? Well that is because of priming, where you have misled or forgotten information before walking up the stairs or entering the room.
Memories are vulnerable bits of information stored in the brain that can be changed over time. It is very important to practice trying to remember certain events in your past, since often over time, this will uncover the whole story or at least most parts of it. After all, we all want to make good memories and remember the good times in life, so why not do this in your head, rather than through a phone screen?
Sparking widespread debates within the internet community, the Mandela Effect gained huge audiences through a reddit page in 2010. Since it is very easy to share things now across social media and through websites, the relatability of this theory is what drives millions of audiences to venture into it. Common terms to this include “My whole childhood is a lie” or “I swear I remember this happening” and has been applied to events in TV, the Media, Film, Sport and Music. However, the origins of the theory comes from a deeper source.
The origins of the Mandela Effect
The Mandela Effect got its name from Fiona Broome, a self-identified “paranormal consultant,” who detailed how she remembered former South African President Nelson Mandela dying in the 1980s in prison (although Nelson Mandela lived until December 5th, 2013). Broome could describe remembering news coverage of his death and even a speech from his widow about his death. Yet none of it happened.
Fiona Broome, I find is a very interesting person and after doing some research, I found that she is a passionate believer in the pursuit of wonder. She states, “As a child, I stumbled onto ghost hunting, almost literally”. She has written many books on ghost stories including “The Ghosts of Austin, Texas” (and “The Mandela Effect – Major Memories”). She describes her first ghost encounter at a grand old hotel in Wentworth-by-the-Sea.
So in summary, Fiona believes in ghosts and the supernatural. My thoughts? Well I would like to believe that there is something spiritual there in life, however I am not a big believer in ghost stories or paranormal activity. Despite all of this, Fiona started a widespread movement and whether or not you believe in ghosts or not, you can interpret her as just a curious person who wants to find out more about lifes mysteries, that is all.
Bill Kellor, for The New York Times, depicts Nelson Mandela in a positive light. He argues that after whites had systematically humiliated his people, tortured and murdered many of his friends, and cast him into prison for 27 years, he was evidently “free of spite”.
It is noted in this article that Nelson stated “He stays behind the flock,” he continued, “letting the most nimble go out ahead, whereupon the others follow, not realizing that all along they are being directed from behind.” The story of Nelson Mandela is one that can be attributed to a person who remained being positive and forward thinking, despite many things going wrong in his life and not going his way.
Nelson Mandela lived from 18th July 1918 to the 5th December 2013. He was a South African anti-apartheid revolutionary, political leader and philanthropist who served as President of South Africa from 1994 to 1999. He was the country’s first black head of state and the first elected in a fully representative democratic election. Believing in the ideology of nationalism and socialism, he served as the president of the African National Congress (ANC) party from 1991 to 1997. Despite supporting black nationalism in his youth, Nelson Mandela changed the racial policies that tore his country. Deep into a life prison term, he caught the notice of the world as a symbol of opposition to a system of racial abuse that stripped South Africans of their citizenship, fighting for what’s right.
Mandela focused on combating poverty and HIV/AIDS through the charitable ‘Nelson Mandela Foundation‘, founded in 1999. He is regarded as an icon (‘Father of the Nation’) for social justice, and received more than 250 honours throughout his life, including the Nobel Peace Prize.
In light of the recent Black Lives Matters (BLM) protests towards justice for George Floyd and to fight against racial policies, I believe this information is important to understand.
So, now you know some context, let’s dive into some great examples of the Mandela Effect that you may be able to relate to….
1) The Berenstein or Berenstain Bears?
One of the most popular examples of the Mandela Effect is the ‘Berenstain Bears’. Although a UK audience may not understand this one, I will help for you to understand the importance of this one.
The Berenstain Bears is a children’s literature franchise created by Stan and Jan Berenstain and continued by their son, Mike Berenstain. The books feature a family of grizzly bears where the purpose of each story is to learn a moral or safety-related lesson, thus being quite educational for young children. Debuting in 1962, the series has grown to over 300 titles, which have sold approximately 260 million copies. The franchise has also expanded to two television series and a wide variety of other products and licenses.
Many people however recall ‘The Berenstain Bears’ as being called ‘The Berenstein Bears’, insisting that they remember it being spelled with an ‘E’, and one Redditor even found an old VHS tape of the cartoon and the label shows ‘Berenstein’.
This idea is not one without common sense. Think about the amount of ‘Stein’s’ there are throughout history. Albert Einstein, Frankenstein, Jock Stein. It makes perfect sense that hundreds of thousands of people would believe it was spelt with an E, since there are few people who have an A instead of E in ‘Stein’. According to Vice.com, this sparked mainstream attention for the Mandela Effect, thus creating an idea around the Butterfly effect and Parallel Universes. Those who believe it is spelt as ‘Berenstein’ are supposedly from an alternate universe than to those who spell it as ‘Berenstain’. Yes, there are people who actually believe in this.
Someone on Vice.com noted that, “I talked to quite a few people I know, and most of them remember the bears surname being spelled with an E”. “I only realized that ‘A’ reading to my kid about eight months ago”. “That was a disturbing bedtime.”
What’s funny is that even me writing this blog, I have spelt it as ‘Berenstein’ multiple times, only to edit it out.
However, the first time someone noticed this was in 2009 on a forum. A user by the name of Burke posted in “Dreadlock Truth” asking why the pronunciation of his favourite childhood books changed. Some stated that it “sounds Jewish” and the change could’ve been a result of Neo-Nazi aggression. The theory remained stale before arising on the humourist website ‘The Communist Dance Party’ in 2011.
“At some point between the years 1986 and 2011, someone travelled back in time and inadvertently altered the timeline of human history so that the Berenstein Bears somehow became the Berenstain Bears,” he wrote. “This is why everyone remembers the name incorrectly; it was Berenstein when we were kids, but at some point, when we weren’t paying attention, someone went back in time and rippled our life experience ever so slightly.” By suggesting that there are at least two universes, changed at some point in history where two time streams or parallel realities diverged, the Mandela Effect created great conspiracy focus.
According to Vice.com again, Dr. Henry L. Roediger, an expert on false memories, wrote a response. “I’m not sure that misremembering one letter in a long name is a major league false memory”. “My guess is that in this case that “stein” is remembered because it is a common ending of many names—Einstein, Frankenstein, Goldstein, etc.”
Whatever you believe in, this is actually quite freaky. The thing is, people have came out passionately about this subject area, and whilst I’m not qualified to talk about quantum physics or parallel universes, I find it very fascinating how there is an idea of that and how people truly believe in the idea of an alternate timeline. I just also find it very interesting how such a misspelling is so common, almost as if no one remembers it as ‘Berenstein’. Very weird.
2) Looney Toons or Looney Tunes?
I’m a victim of this one, since the Berenstain Bears one I can’t relate to. When planning this blog, I had a quick check for my DVD collection of Looney Tunes cartoons. I haven’t watched them for some 10 years, however you can’t beat Looney Tunes, it’s definitive.
Right, so I searched for my DVD’s. Now, I swear before I found them, in my mind it was ‘Looney Toons’. It has to be. Well how wrong I was. It is in fact Looney Tunes. For a few minutes, I couldn’t believe it. Yes, I understand that it’s only a title of a cartoon series, however I was adamant that it was ‘Looney Toons’. My reason behind this was that there’s consistency in the spelling of both words, being that they’re both spelled with “oo” in between them.
Additionally, it would also be consistent to the genre, being a ‘Cartoon’. I also thought ‘Looney Tunes’ doesn’t have as good as a ring to it. Also, isn’t that more like music? Why would it be Looney Tunes, doesn’t seem right to me. Looney Tunes is an American animated show that aired in 1930 and was produced by Warner Bros. The cartoon aired until 1969 during the golden age of American animation. During this time, they also had a sister series called ‘Merrie Melodies’.
According to the Mandela Effect article by Fiona Broome, she stated, “I’d dismiss that kind of report as a brief and localized issue — usually a print media error, or a typo in a digital TV show listing.” She said it doesn’t help that “Tiny Toons” exists, similar graphics and tone to Looney Tunes.
In another article from the New York Post written by Gavin Fernando, he wrote, “Growing up you probably watched Looney Toons on a Saturday morning, right? Bugs Bunny? Daffy Duck? Many people could probably recall a scene or two, and visualize the Looney Tunes logo perfectly in their head.” Fernando had a plot twist: it is actually spelled “Looney Tunes”, and always has been. It never changed, there is zero evidence to suggest it was spelled any other way, and yet people vehemently believe it’s written as the former”.
Matthew Binder stated that, “It has always been Looney Tunes because there was an emphasis on the music. “Originally, there was no dialogue in the black and white shorts”, similar to “Steamboat Willie” (1928) of Mickey Mouse by Disney, and that the “Purpose was to prove that a story could be told through the music”. He states that, “Looney Tunes exists to teach children how music can affect mood and tone”.
This is fascinating to know and prior to this, I never knew that as the context for the spelling. I always thought it was a running joke. But hey, the more you know I guess. Still, it’s surely ‘Looney Toons’, right?
Furthermore, another common example of the Mandela Effect within film and the media is the famous American film actor and comedian, Sinbad (David Adkins).
This example explains of many people remembering the famous actor appearing in the film “Shazaam” (1994), featured on the Disney channel. According to the actor himself from his Twitter account, featured in an article in the New Statesman, he never starred or filmed for the series!
Although, according to Reddit users, images of the actor on the cover of VHS tapes have been uncovered, showing that he was in the film and several comments on the page have noted that they believe they can remember him being in the film and tv series.
I find this is one very strange. Evidence by the actor himself shows that he obviously wasn’t in the series, and has since joked about the conspiracy. But how is it so many people remember him within it? Very odd.
4) Famous misquotes and misinterpretations in film history
You ever have that favourite childhood film? Where you remember watching it all the time, so much so that you can nearly quote the whole film? Well, upon doing some research for this blog and finding out information about my favourite films, I have found out myself that many of my favourite quotes and scenes in film history I have gotten wrong! Let’s explore some of them…
Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
The most famous example of a misquote in a film is within Star Wars: Empire strikes back. It’s within the scene where (Spoiler: Although you probably know by now) Darth Vader reveals to Luke Skywalker that he is his father. Now, this may all sound straight forward and it seems like simple screenplay, but where the confusion lies is within the writing itself. Star wars fans and movie fans across the world will always say, “Luke I am your father”. In fact, its probably the most parodied, memed and quoted line ever. However, that’s not the line. The line is, “No. I am your father”.
Of course, it’s only a movie line, not really of a lot of importance. It also doesn’t take away from the emotion of the scene, and Darth Vader is addressing Luke anyway, so what’s all the fuss about? I guess the fuss is this is the most important scene in the multi-billion dollar franchise, in what some argue is the best Star Wars film. How has everyone got this wrong for such a long amount of time? Even diehard fans will misquote the scene. I find that very fascinating, although a simple explanation to this would be the fact that in people minds, “Luke I am your father” makes more sense.
Using the collective false memory explanation to this, it would make sense that people have this information stored within their brain, but similar memories (Schema) have set off neurons in close connection to each other.
Maybe it’s from people addressing this line differently online, or people saying it wrong in real life, making the memory be false and be different from what it is. However, this does not mean everyone says it wrong. But I guarantee, ask anyone who has seen the film to say the line, they will get it wrong. Even within the Disney Pixar film, ‘Toy Story 2’, the film misquoted the line, where the scene was a parody.
E.T. : The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
One of the most famous movie lines in history is “ET phone home” but is that the correct line. Well, no. The correct line is “ET home phone”. Yes, this line is said in both ways during the same scene, however ET himself never says phone home during the scene. This line has been parodied many times, including on a BT broadband advertising campaign, yet it is so misquoted. A classic example of a false memory.
A classic film that for me is the combination of tension, suspense and fear. Steven Speilberg’s greatest film, in my opinion, has two lines that stick out to me everytime the film gets mentioned. One of them is “Smile, you son of a b****” and “We’re gonna need a bigger boat”. The latter is once again a quote still very famous in todays media and even within society, where the line depicts going into a situation unprepared and ultimately having a high chance of failure (Where in the film it depicts a Great White Shark attack on a small boat).
Are these lines completely correct? No. According to Imdb.com, the “Smile you son of a b****” line was changed for the Blu-ray re-release of Jaws, which would explain why when I was younger, I did not hear a swearword when watching the film. I find this very funny though, since the film has scenes of gore, yet a swearword had to be censored.
The “We’re gonna need a bigger boat” line is completely false however. The script and film states, “You’re gonna need a bigger boat”, since the scene depicts shark hunter Quint (Robert Shaw) addressing the situation to Martin Brody (Roy Scheider). Despite all of this, everyone says “We’re gonna need a bigger boat”, so it is another example of where we falsely depict the line.
According to Hollywoodreporter.com, This line however was improvised by the actor in a way. Carl Gottlieb (Story Editor) was asked by his friend, a then relatively unknown director at the time, named Steven Spielberg, to give him notes on the script for his movie about a shark.
“[Spielberg] was anxious to do a rewrite before they started shooting — they were about two or three weeks before principal photography,” Gottlieb tells The Hollywood Reporter. “I was sent the script with a memo saying, ‘Eviscerate this.'” After reading Gottlieb’s extensive notes, Spielberg asked if he would join the Jaws production and help to redraft the troubled script adaptation of Peter Benchley’s best-seller. Gottlieb quit his day job. “We shared a house together and spent every waking moment together for the next four months because I was either rewriting or acting in the movie,” where he also played the small onscreen role of Ben Meadows, the town’s newspaper editor, in the film.
The infamous line from Jaws, “You’re gonna need a bigger boat,” No. 3 on Hollywood’s Top 100 Movie Quotes, came about during a rewrite. “It was an overlap of a real-life problem combined with the dilemma of the characters onscreen.”
The real-life problem was a barge (named by the cast and crew), which carried all the lights and camera equipment and craft services, was steadied by a small support boat that was too tiny to manage the job. Gottlieb recalls: “[Richard] Zanuck and [David] Brown were very stingy producers, so everyone kept telling them, ‘You’re gonna need a bigger boat.’ It became a catchphrase for anytime anything went wrong — if lunch was late or the swells were rocking the camera, someone would say, ‘You’re gonna need a bigger boat.'”
Roy Scheider changed the line at different points in his performance throughout filming. But the one reading that made it in to the final cut of the movie was after the suspenseful first look at the great white shark. Gottlieb states, “It was so appropriate and so real and it came at the right moment, thanks to Verna Field’s editing.” So, the rest is history. Yet, everyone gets the line wrong!
Snow White and The Seven Dwarfs (1937)
A Disney classic which features one of the most misquoted lines in history. The famous line, “Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the fairest one of the them all” is another false memory, since it is in fact, “Magic mirror on the wall, who is the fairest one of all?”.
The irony of the line being misquoted is that is one of the most parodied lines in history, even spawning a live action film named “Mirror Mirror” (2012) and has been misquoted in films such as “Shrek” (2001) during the famous Lord Farquaad scene with the Ginger Bread man.
Drake and Josh (2004)
One of my favourite shows as a young kid features a line within the main theme song of the show that still baffles me to this day. This theme song is iconic, catchy and very memorable, yet a certain lyric is always confused with the common audience.
Within the theme song “Found a Way” (performed by Drake Bell), the lyrics go like this, “It’s going to take some time to realise”. Yet, it is infact, “It’s going to take some time to realign”. Listening to the song over and over again, it’s very easy to confuse the two and not hear realign. I guess this one can be down to the American accent of Drake Bell!
Watch this video linked below where Drake Bell addresses a crowd at Ballydoyle in Downers Grove on January 14th, 2017. Here, Drake is aware of the joke, correcting the crowd of the actual lyric, which I find very funny!
Forrest Gump (1994)
The famous film, starring two time Academy Award winning Actor Tom Hanks, known as an American cultural icon, has also a famous misquoted line. Once again, when you think of this film, the quote, “Life is like a box of chocolates”, sticks out to me. The quote is actually, “Life was like a box of chocolates”, thus depicting the line in past tense rather than present tense, since he is speaking from the viewpoint of his mother. Quite a crazy one and I bet if you ask anyone to say the line, they will get it wrong.
James Bond. One of my favourite film franchises as a kid. I can’t lie, I’m a sucker for older films, especially ones that use mostly practical effects. There’s many scenes in this franchise that sticks out to me, particularly within the Sean Connery and Roger Moore era.
However, one scene that sticks out in my mind is the scene with the recurring bond villain, Jaws (Richard Kiel), and his meeting of Dolly, his girlfriend. Now, I’m adamant that Dolly (Blanche Ravalec) had braces when she is smiling within this scene. This is because the scene depicts Jaws, who has giant metal teeth, finding a love interest, yet I believe the whole point of the scene was for them to have a connection and common interest, which would both be metal teeth.
I found it terrifying to see that Dolly doesn’t ever have braces in the film. I couldn’t believe it, since in my mind I picture the scene playing out that way. Also, this scene doesn’t really make sense to me anymore without the braces, since that was meant to be the common interest and be played up for comedic effect. This is one of the most popular forms of the Mandela Effect and it is one that many people find freaky. It’s crazy what the mind can do.
5) Curious George doesn’t have a tail?
Popular book and animated series ‘Curious George’ which also spawned multiple films, depcicts a monkey brought from his home in Africa by ‘The Man with The Yellow Hat’. They become friends and they live together in the city. A common perception is that George has a tail, which makes sense since he is a monkey after all. After doing some research, I found out that he never had a tail at all, which I found was very odd as I remember watching the film and playing the video game as a kid where he was surely swinging from trees using his tail.
Apparently, Forbes.com have found that Curious George is either an Ape or possibly a Barbary macaque (Old World Monkey) since he has no tail. Yet, everyone will think of George being a normal monkey with a tail when you hear the name.
6) Henry VIII is pictured with a turkey leg in one his portraits?
Once more, I am writing about the fascinating figure of Henry VIII. This example of the Mandela Effect I find is both hilarious and weird. According to many people across the internet, people have shared their experiences of seeing Henry VIII in the famous portrait, painted by Hans Holbein, where he is depicted with a turkey leg in his hand.
I cannot relate to this one. It is one I think can be attributed to peoples first experiences of learning about Henry, since most people always thought he was always big in stature and overweight. Many historians will inform you that Henry’s weight gain came quite late in his life, particularly after having a leg wound sustained during a joust that never healed. The accident occurred at a jousting tournament at Greenwich Palace on 24 January 1536 when Henry was 44, in full armour, where he was thrown from his armoured horse, that then fell on top of him. He was unconscious for two hours and was thought at first to have been fatally injured.
Occasionally, it would close over and become infected, nearly dying when that happened, and it would burst open again. Likely, he had a bone splinter that caused repeated infections. Also, many historians note that Henry most likely sustained a head injury during this event, which had an effect on his mood swings and potentially effecting his decisions later on in his reign, such as divorces and the want to go to war against Scotland and France for revenge. Historians also think that Henry had type 2 diabetes, which affected his eating habits.
So Henry had this accident when he was 44, and since he died at the age of 55, it therefore explains that for a large majority of his life, Henry was an athletic and imposing figure, unfortunately remembered for his failures in his life.
Tudor diets for nobles and members of royalty also were very rich. Most foods contained a high amount of protein, fats and sugars and were served in large portions, having the best cooks in the country and servants. Henry therefore is remembered for being an obese king simply because he lost most of his mobility and the ability to do his activities and exercises (Horse riding, jousting, archery and hunting) that he did so often when he was younger and first ascended to throne. Let’s not forget, he is noted as one of the most athletic people at court when he was younger, yet is remembered for being lazy and sedentary.
It’s funny that a lot of kings are depicted like this, drawing inspiration from Henry. For example, King Robert I Baratheon, the ruler of the Seven Kingdoms in the popular TV series ‘Game of Thrones’ (2011 – 2019) and King Foltest of Temeria from the popular Netflix series, ‘The Witcher’ (2019), are examples of the gluttonous stereotype that stick out to me.
The popularity of this example of the Mandela Effect has gained traction from many sources of information about Henry VIII. For example, in the 15th season of ‘The Simpsons’ in the ‘Margical History Tour’ (Season 15, Episode 11), the episode closes with a reference to Henry VIII holding the world turkey leg eating record. Additionally, within the famous film ‘The Private Life of Henry VIII’ (1933), actor Charles Laughton, who won an Academy Award for Best Actor for his portrayal of the famous historical figure, is depicted as devouring a turkey leg from his left hand in the dining scene, which is said to be inspired by the portrait.
Additionally, many artists in the 20th century have drawn Henry eating various birds in the form of a leg and piece of meat. Here are a few examples:
So as you can clearly see, it’s easy to find out how this example gained a large popularity. I’m not denying what people think, however a typical Hans Holbein portrait denotes a serious tone and is meant to show the king as being more imposing and god-like in the portraits to gain prestige and power over other monarchs in Europe at the time. Would holding a turkey leg show this?
7) There was 6 people in the car at the scene of JFK’s assassination?
Another famous example of the Mandela Effect was the amount of people in the car present at American President John Fitzgerald Kennedy (Known as JFK) assassination on 22nd November 1963. The 60s for me is remembered for a period, particularly in American culture, as the height of socialisation and the rise of capitalism. When I think of this period, I think of American diners, men in suits and hats, Ford Mustangs and glass bottles of Coca-Cola. Yet, it birthed one of the most famous conspiracies in history, who actually assassinated Americas 35th President?
The answer to this is one that can’t be answered, since no one knows. Many books and research has been conducted and written on this, and it is mostly noted as Lee Harvey Oswald (October 18, 1939 – November 24, 1963) who was an American Marxist and former U.S. Marine. Interestingly, Oswald was released from duty in the Marine Corps into the reserve and then associated himself to the Soviet Union (At the time under Communist Leader Khrushchev).
Following returning to the United States, Oswald settled in Dallas and thus has been concluded that he shot and killed Kennedy from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository as the President travelled through Dealey Plaza in Dallas at the time to gain support for his upcoming election.
Oswald was eventually charged with the assassination of Kennedy. He denied the accusations, stating that he was a “patsy.” Two days later, Oswald was shot by local nightclub owner Jack Ruby on live television in the basement of Dallas Police Headquarters.
Investigations from the FBI, the Secret Service, and the Dallas Police Department, including forensic, ballistic and eyewitness evidence, support the official findings. However, public opinion polls show a lack of belief in this theory.
The Mandela Effect with this one is that everyone remembers there only being 4 people in the car during Kennedy’s assassination. In actual fact, there was 6 people present in the car. Within the car, driver Agent Bill Greer, SAIC Roy Kellerman, Governor John Connally, Nellie Connally, Jackie Kennedy (JFK’s wife) and JFK were all present. Many people believed that only Kennedy, his wife, Governor Connally and the driver were present.
With 6 people in the car, the common belief and re-enactments of this famous assassination are false. Take a look at some examples of what people believed his assassination would have looked like:
8) The Monopoly guy has a monocle, doesn’t he?
The classic board game, first published by the Parker Brothers in 1935 and then taken over by Hasbro, features a famous example of the Mandela Effect. ‘Rich Uncle Pennybags’, the mascot for the franchise, is normally depicted as having a glass monocle. In actual fact, this is falsely associated with the character as he has never used a monocle on any cover or version of the game (Physical or digital).
Even common associations in pop culture associate a monocle with the character. Take a look:
9) Kit Kat doesn’t have a dash between the name?
Check any Nestle Kit Kat bar (No matter the flavour) and the name does not have a dash between the logo. I always believed that the dash was above the Kit Kat logo on every bar. This one I couldn’t believe and had to check it for myself. The Mandela Effect truly is astonishing.
10) We’re the Champions (Of the World?)
Many people remember the final lyrics of the famous Queen song being “No time for losers, ’cause we are the champions…of the world!” However, there is no “of the world!” The song just ends at “We are the champions”. Yet, if you play the song or hear it at a party, you will automatically be wired to say “Of the world”. There are many examples of where a football team has won a cup and the fans will sing this part of the song at the end of it in stadiums. But check any lyric website or even a music streaming service, and the lyrics aren’t real.
What you can take from the Mandela Effect is that often our assumptions on certain things and the uses of stereotypes are often falsely used. Sometimes we presume something is real (Made up realities in our head) when in actual fact it does not exist. The Mandela Effect provides global support that false memories and to certain beliefs that alternate realities may exist. Could this provide evidence on spirituality? The conspiracies of Ghost stories?.
I hope this article leaves you with a feeling of suspicion and to find your own examples of the Mandela Effect, since there are many out there that are present every day.
Have a great day,