Okay, folks, I have another possible Mandela Effect victim. This is going to be super obscure, but I hope someone knows what I'm talking about, and may have seen what I'm talking about. Here goes.
There was a type of train built, in the U.K, called the J50 (see pic). I know for a fact I have seen a recent video of one. (in the last 5 years) All the articles I have found on this engine suggest that none of these engines made it into preservation. That is to say, they were all destroyed in the 1960s/70s when the U.K modernised to diesel and electric traction.
Now I have SEEN a video of this engine. It was years ago, though. I distinctly remember the scene was taken from a platform, with a brick retaining wall on the other side of the track, with a bridge over the line, right of shot. It was in LNER green, and it was on a heritage line. So one must have made it into preservation. Yet everywhere says they were all scrapped.
The thing is, I know other much older railfans, too. All of them say that some survived, but I can no longer find the video of it, and all relevant sites have nothing. I might be looking in the wrong places, but I doubt it.
Tell us some of the shit you've found that personally resonates with you.
>>19218152
Yeah, all video cameras were invented after the 60s and no footage previous to that decade exists. This is totally about Magick dude! There's just no other explanation.
>>19218159
I think even a troglodyte can tell the difference between old footage and modern footage. This video was recent. I've watched a lot of old train footage, the video was in colour and the engine was in LNER livery, which was dropped after 1948 during the Nationalisation of the railways, into British Rail, which would have meant it would be in black with red and white lining.
Station periods are also a massive give away, too. I can categorically say this footage was after 2000.
>>19218152
Photorealistic video of trains isn't that hard to generate, and the J50 isn't that obscure. You probably saw a simulation.
>>19218228
Got any examples of that? Like the best you can find. Because even the best CG is distinguishable as being CG. It's also a lot of effort to make it look like amateur footage, and a lot of effort for something there's plenty of vintage footage of.
>>19218245
I play economy-focused train simulators. I've seen the J50 in those. The graphics would never be mistaken for real in the kind of train sim I play, but I figure there's no other appeal but the visual in the other kind of train simulations, so they're probably much better. And what movie studios would have would be better still. That matters, because the #1 reason someone would fake up vid of the J50 is educational purposes. That'd result in top-quality work right there. The #2 reason would be a period piece, where again it'd be judged on accuracy. So that's my read. You're thinking of either a documentary or a period piece. Plenty of excuses in the modern world for there to be video of all kinds of things.
>>19218312
I play train sim, too.
The thing about the video was it was being shunted. So I dunno. I'm damn sure it wasn't CG. I wish I could find the damn video, but I can't. It was before Hornby and Train Sim rolled theirs out. Ergh. Rather frustrating, I actually wanted to go see the real one.
>>19218312
Kys faggot; quit derailing my thread
>>19218489
Well that was rather rude.
>>19218152
I know for a fact that Mandela effect is real.
>>19218152
I thought I was Mandela'd because Pamela Anderson was still alive, turns out I forgot all about fat ass Anna Nicole Smith, got them mixed up
>>19218152
Anyone else remember the time that President Freddie Mercury rode the kraken to liberate Atlantis from the Greys?
>>19220727
Oh, yeah, that was pretty rad.