Where the Hell is Svalbard?
If you look at this map, you can see, way north of Norway, on a line with northern Greenland, is a place called Svalbard. Yes, people live there, and yes, battles have been fought over it. The FAQ is here.
posted by Anonymous at 10:19 PM
17 Comments:
Never saw this place in my entire life on any map, ever, until recently. Where did it come from, and when?
The BBC is on the case...
Svalbard. Got to love it. If you ever get a straight answer beyond "it's always been there," or someone redirecting the conversation to Sex and the City vs. Sex in the City; or better yet, some troll derailing your observation by suggesting aliens, astral projection, multiuniverses, faulty memories, Cern, or conspiracy theories, I will fall off my chair. Good luck with that. My suggestion is, if you find a new continent named Quackland, just go with it. It will obviously always have been there and you just have simply missed it.
If we can assume even for a moment, these global observations have merit and are not based solely on faulty maps and faulty observations, then I propose the following be considered -
- taken from an episode of Star Trek:
"Fascinating. It did not function. But it must function. It is a scientific fact. But if the tranquilizer does not function which is clearly impossible, than a radical alteration of our thought patterns must be in order. Physical laws simply cannot be ignored. Existence cannot be without being. We are faced with a staggering contradiction. Physical reality is consistent with Universal laws. Where the laws do not operate there is no reality. All of this is unreal. We judge reality by the response of our senses. Once we are convinced of the reality of a given situation, we abide by its rules."
Mr. Spock, Star Trek, Spectre of a gun.
If you had asked me yesterday about the applicability of Spock's thought to Svalbard, I would have denied its relevance, flatly and without caveat. I see now I was wrong. Thank you.
For some around the world, yesterday meant Hitler had brown eyes, CERN had not invented the Internet, and the Rock of Gilbraltar was an island in the middle of the straight contested by the Spanish and English. People tend to cling to the fantastical when faced with the fantastic. It is more palatable to consider gliding through a parallel universe on a celestial skateboard while sipping a cup of time travel - dismiss charted and photographed global maps as designed only for the elite - or even stuck in some liquefied container in a virtual matrix, than the alternative. I respectfully acknowledge the personal journey of discovery.
"I don't remember yesterday. Today it rained." - Three Days of the Condor
“Who am I going to believe, 7.125 billion people, or you?”
Logic must stand in and of itself, independent of general consensus. If it does not, then we are using conjecture as a basis of argument, not logic. At one point in history, the general consensus was the earth was flat and the center of the known universe. The fact is, 7.125 billion people can be wrong. When we can no longer re-evaluate our own perpective, we become slave to our own knowledge.
Let us suppose for just a moment there is a different frame of reference in connection with these global observations (changes in land mass, changes in historical events).
Applying logic as independent of consensus, we are left with two conflicting accounts.
Using the example of a basketball player who is walking and bouncing the ball off the ground:
If you are standing still and observing the player, per your frame of reference (and perspective) the basketball would be traveling at an angle.
If walking alongside the player, the observer would clearly see the ball bouncing vertically – not at an angle.
Thus the observer who travelled alongside the player clearly observed no angle to the ball, while the observer who stood still and apart from the player observed the ball bouncing at an angle.
Which observation is correct?
It is dependent on the frame of reference.
Those in sync, regardless of how erratic or dramatic changes occur, may have no cognition of any change – as per their perspective there hasn’t been any change. The ball is bouncing vertically you idiot! To put it another way, as individuals move in sync with an event - per their frame of reference they may not observe the event as skewed at all.
Example:
Monday: All cars are red
Tuesday: All cars are green
Wednesday: All cars have always been green.
Individuals out of sync will observe events as skewed:
Example:
Monday: All cars are red
Tuesday: All cars are green
Wednesday: No! On Monday, all cars were red!
Both observations may be correct and both may be accurately observed. The difference being, both have a different frame of reference.
I've tried several times and failed to write a note about sub-equilibria, when a subsystem within a much larger system feels stable, until disrupted by the larger system. e.g., England until disrupted by Continental events in Napoleonic times, WW1, WW2. I suspect this was one of the appeals of Antarctic exploration - the relative isolation and stability at the destination. Imagine Shackleton's men, upon their return, learning that the world was at war and millions were dying.
And Svalbard in 1941, satisfied in its isolation, suddenly forced to evacuate in the face a threat originating a thousand miles away.
Sorry, did I mis-remember that again?
Let’s assume “some” of these events may have merit, and are not, as some mainstream psychologist proclaim - the product of global mis-remembering.
I mean really, if I go out to my car to go to work in the morning and all of a sudden my car is a different color, did I just mis-remember it? What if my friend mis-remembered something, and I recall what she mis-remembered, but then later she un-mis-remembered it? Is this a case of me mis-remembering that she mis-remembered, but later un-mis-remembered what she now remembers?
So, let’s get back to logic and table this “mis-remembering” as simply a distraction.
Using the previous example of Red, Green, Green (RGG), and applying it to a case scenario, you have the following example -
Monday: A McDonalds sits on the corner of Broadway and Maddison
Tuesday: A Burger King now sits where McDonalds was, on the corner of Broadway and Maddison
Wednesday: Burger King has always been on the corner of Broadway and Maddison. Customers have been coming to the restaurant for the past five years, with their children, grandchildren and school outings. There are details of when the building was built at the city building commission. Individuals who actually built the Burger King will readily testify they built the site with their own two hands. The mayor eats there with his children after church. Anyone claiming it was never there before Tuesday will have to come between the mayor and his burger. The mayor is over 6 feet tall and a former football player.
Now we have a dilemma (or dilemna): The non-mis-remembering (RGG) majority/authority on Wednesday clearly recall years of history; whereas the mis-remembering minority recall only a vague short passage of time with dramatic event changes.
Time itself may be suspect.
What represents a detailed history for one, equally may represent only a short passage of time with detailed alternate history for the other. We simply cannot determine actual length of “linear time” of events occurring on Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday (again, if we assume the event has merit), without an independent point of reference.
Sometimes it is easier to narrow down what something is by determining what it is not.
These “Mandela effects” or what I prefer to call anomalies are not a result of:
1. Time travel
Reason: changes in land mass. You can zip around in time all you want and it’s not going to change land mass (by even 3 inches).
2. Quantum physics (parallel universe)
Reason: specific recent spikes in google search demonstrate this is not a naturally occurring quantum effect.
3. Mis-remembering
Reason: unless you have difficulty with basic recall, I think we can safely put this to rest. (I hate it when I misremember where the kitchen is! Is it to the left or to the right? Gosh, there I go mis-remembering again! Oh memory. So typical. So completely understandable. Such a faulty thing memory is nowadays - just ask the experts).
4. Planet X – Nibiru
Reason: a mystical planet may be whirling toward your bedroom window at light speed as we speak, and it still won’t change a single historical event on this planet.
5. Memory residue (from an alternate universe)
Reason: only a minority are affected (unless you are a superhero of course, then it’s completely understandable you would be the one to remember how things really were)
6. CERN
Reason: unless they have created island eating mites, I think we can safely say it’s not CERN. Atoms have been smashed prior to CERN and it never changed the color of my socks. I’m not saying this would be a bad thing, just bad form.
7. Aliens
Reason: these events have no cognizant impact, only recollections. To put it simply, if a bunch of undocumented aliens invaded this planet, why would they waste their time secretly changing land mass? So we would have a confusing time planning our next vacation? Possible. The tourism trade is highly competitive.
8. Global Confusion
Reason: I would actually go with this one if it were not for the fact that paid shills and trolls spend a consider amount of time spinning a reporter into a state of confusion. If these reports are completely baseless, then why do these paid shills gather around a report like sharks at a feeding frenzy? Wouldn’t it be pointless? Therefore, the sheer number of paid shills are confirmation it is anything but confusion. Somebody is taking notice.
9. The government
Reason: If you’ve ever worked for the government you would realize getting consensus would be easier than changing major historical events.
10. The Illuminati
Reason: If they’ve mastered time, space, events and control over land mass, then why haven’t they left this planet?
A major problem with these anomalies appears to be they are unpredictable, sporadic and leave no trace of any original state of being – leaving only a few standing around looking like idiots.
We need a frame of reference, and a means to accurately predict the next anomaly. What we need is, an unfair advantage.
The game is afoot -
Those are good points.
Reporter: Well, now I am reeling. I can’t believe it! There is no “play it again, Sam,” in Casablanca?” What is the world coming to?
Paid Shill 1: I heard that as well. Pretty weird.
Paid Shill 2: Weird is an understatement! I watched that movie a hundred times. I know Humphrey Bogart said, “Play it,” in the movie. I’m sure of it!
Paid Shill 1: Well, I just watched the movie. The piano player is named, Sam, so I can see how you might be mistaken.
Reporter: But I watched this movie 200 times. That was my favorite part of the movie. I’ve seen this scene so many times I can barely count.
Paid Shill 2: Memory is pretty strange stuff. Studies have been done at Yale that say we learn from association. The piano player is named, Sam – he is playing the piano – put the 2 together and you have a mis-memory. It happens. I thought it was “life is like a box of chocolates” until I re-watched the movie. That’s like this collective memory that never happened of Tom Cruise jumping on Oprah’s couch. These things are just simply not happening.
Reporter: But I could have sworn. My head is reeling!
Paid Shill 1: I know that Elizabeth Loftus, a psychologist and professor of psychology at UC Irvine demonstrated several times how false memories could easily be implanted in people. Talk about strange!
Paid Shill 2: Yeah, I remember reading about her.
Paid Shill 1: Dude, did you try watching the movie again?
Reporter: Just went back and watched it. Now it’s changed. Humphrey Bogart doesn’t say, “Play it again, Sam.”
Paid Shill 2: Well, there’s your answer. No offense, but maybe you just watched it too many times and remembering what you want to hear.
Reporter: I guess I got it mixed up. But I could have sworn. I mean, I watched the move 200 times. There must be something wrong with me!
Paid Shill 1: nothing wrong with you. I thought he said, “Roll it,” in the movie, but I looked at Wikipedia which says it’s “play it.” It is an old film. There could be other versions out there. Maybe some uncut versions that say something different. Who knows?
Paid Shill 2: yeah, maybe it was just “play it,” now that I think of it.
Reporter: You’re probably right. I don’t want to think any more.
Isolate – confuse – turn – repeat
A thought a poem may be fitting. I hope you enjoy it as much as I.
Narwhal, Narwhal, you magically-alive-whale with such a long unicorn,
Swimming in icy waters, giving your siblings the high-five.
Passing through the Southern Ocean, and onto Nunavut – but you will have none of it. You continue your journey past Hells Gate, Svalbard and over the top and round again.
Your long unicorns glimmering under the two moons of mars.
Squeezing your way between Russia and Alaska, you make your way to Japan, off the coast of Russia, and finally to Papua New Guinea and its close neighbor, Australia
Under the white rays of an ever changing sun you swim, ever pressing on,
You seek solace near the many islands of New Zealand, then off again you glide toward America on the coast of Canada.
Oh Narwhal, Narwhal, you who have witnessed the blue steely eyes of a fuhrer and the making of Mongolia, yet you glide ever peacefully onward - your journey never to end.
-I get choked up every time I read it.
Pig: Well, I am really shocked. The Lion Rock’s eyes turning red, in Hong Kong? That’s pretty strange.
Duck: Pareidoloa.
Pig: Para-para…what?
Duck: Pareidoloa. You see what you want to see. See?
Pig: But it was caught on film.
Duck: Film had pareidoloa. Check your exposure.
Pig: Well, then how do you explain changes in continents, islands mysteriously appearing, others disappearing, and a lake in Tunisia mysteriously appearing in the middle of a desert from no-where, and-and the list goes on.
Duck: Mercator projection. Everyone unfortunately was taught incorrectly in school. Very common.
Pig: Okay, then how do you explain cities hovering in the clouds in china?
Duck: Fata morgana
Pig: Fata-fata...what? But it also appeared in Hastings, England.
Duck: Super-duper Fata morgana. It’s related to hot air.
Pig: Yeah, well gosh...how do you explain major changes in historical events? The “Lion will lay down with the lamb,” is now “The wolf will lay down with the lamb.”
Duck: Misremembering. You may be misremembering this conversation at this very moment. A year from now, it’s almost guaranteed it will be misremembered. Very common.
Pig: Well, I would like to mis-remember it back to the “lion will lay down with the lamb.” I’m allergic to wolves.
Duck: Listen buster, you can’t mess with reality! Science deals with cold hard facts. Sometimes up to the minute facts – depending on the facts.
Pig: I’m confused.
Duck: That’s because I represent science. You represent moron. Science. Moron. Science. Moron.
Pig: Well, gosh, I mean…I mean…sorry, which one are you?
Duck: Sheesh, what’s a little continent. Get over yourself.
This will be my final entry. I want to thank the moderator for tolerating my rantings and wild exploitations while keeping this post shill free. I have now identified a frame of reference, and am in process of developing a working hypothesis in reference to the misnamed Mandela Effect.
I believe this is an actual phenomenon, and believe I can prove that is so.
What disturbs me most is not the reports of changes in land mass – major historical changes – changes in lyrics, titles of books and movies, reports of the dead now living, changes in names of colors and changes in photos etc. What disturbs me most is the lack of intelligent dialogue regarding these event(s).
Unless I am mistaken, there are reports coming in from all over the globe. I am reminded there is spirited academic dialogue regarding string theory. However, when considering this Mandela Effect the primary focus remains on the spelling of the Bernstein Bears. That should be sufficient proof we are not in Kansas anymore.
I believe this constitutes one of the most significant events in all of human history. Science, beyond dismissing this as mental insufficiency, is strangely quiet on the subject. Junk science has no fundamental argument beyond quantum physics sprinkled with the fantastical.
“You dirty rat” – James Cagney
I've never been able to spell that right...
After All This research here is my thoughts. All this Mandela effect stuff has no substance. Just way too much time on my hands. Life is good. Don't miss what is around you.
Post a Comment
<< Home