So legit question what proves that QAnon is actually real? I've not seen anything that Q has said come to pass. The month of the December will likely be no different. Or will it? Explain.
EDIT: Also, why are some of you saying there's no proof needed while others are trying your hardest to provide just that? Which is it?
Hey, ive read a few comment responses and just wanted to keep it simple. I know you came here for some proofs, and Q has gone through a phase of posting what you may call proofs in different forms such as timestamps within impossible deltas(before a whitehouse/Potus post), photos from places neckbeards dont operate, and some uncanny predictions that most anons probably didnt catch until after the event "news unlocks previous posts. etc.
My point is, instead of having some arguments here with people who probably cant mash 4 years of details that are readily available for you, just go through the posts and see what you think. Your opinion would be interesting to hear vs claiming here to people that saw it there was no attempts from Q to prove he is "connected".
Its not easy for most people to digest half of Q, like some have said not all posts are for anons/public. My best advice is to realize most of what Q posts makes no sense at first read, but time unlocks its meaning which gives most credence to the posts. Good luck, its alot of sleepless nights and rabbitholes but you may find its not breeding radicals, but breeding people who think for themselves.
Be skeptical, even anons get it wrong too, this is the way.
I really have read a lot of the posts and I'm not convinced. I'm here to hear it from Q believers, who should be able to provide reasons of why they believe this. This is not some sort of personal journey, it's something that can be proven or disproven. So the fact that Q believers cannot provide their reasons for following says more about QAnon than Q could ever say.
I would say that people calling for the U.S. military to be deployed on U.S. soil is fairly radical, just saying. Listening to Q is not thinking for yourself, rather it's following an alternative narrative.
I would say to that, look at Q less like some information source, giving some kind of orders to his followers. Look at him more like someone doing the opposite. The point of his posts over the four years prepares people to just disect the media and what they are told. He never asks for you to believe what he/they post. Thats not the point of it. Anons are just people who dig past the narrative, and Q has shown a huge contrast between what information is being supressed over the last 4 years. Its like a headache remembering every debunked or false story. Its like a wakeup call to do your own research.
I have a feeling you think Q is the predictor and all he says must come true, but he doesnt predict, he questions which leads Anons to dig. Im not sure if thats nefarioust to some, but to me its made me go from believing everything i hear and parroting it to, watching hours of comittees and comparing to the media spin. THAT is the purpose of Q. Do you need proof he has succeeded?
to be fair it wasnt Q who had me thinking there are satanic pedophiles in the world, thats not exactly a new development, but your missing the point, PROOF was never a part of the deal of following Q. If thats what you want, the best youll find is proof Q has some connection to Trumps team, whether hes right about things is for either time to tell or you to discern through digging.
I like talking to people who dont believe Q and the same trend is that they heard about Qanon from the media or someone elses opinion and want to look at it through that angle that Q is a leaker.
Leaking would be pretty illegal for a Q intel wouldnt it? So what other methods to bypass media are necessary. Socrates was a smart dude. I believe intel is buried in the complexity of Qposts however, on the surface all it is, is breadcrumbs of mostly public info, pointing out areas that people who do the digging will focus on. Then the digs surface through various supressed means.\
Questions with no answers, thats not leaking info. Understanding the purpose of Q- and the anon process will better your understanding of Q. Rather then saying he must prove info cuz some radical follower predicts something incorrect.
"Disinformation was necessary" was an early Qpost I never forgot, dont trust everything Q posts, the only proof is what you discover to be true.