Welcome new people. The person who made this post does not speak for us at all. Everything that they mentioned as "absurdities" are totally possible. Do your own research and come to your own conclusions. Dont listen to piers morgan here.
There are indeed lies that circulate here, and like anywhere, discernment is absolutely key.
I agree, but a lie circulating and a lie being pushed as truth without evidence (or with a basis in other lies) are not the same thing.
I believe most people here do not believe in any of the following things... ...Or any such absurdities.
I have seen evidence of all of those things. In some cases the evidence is compelling, even if controversial. In other cases the evidence is not compelling, and I give them a very low probability of being an accurate accounting of reality. In every case my mind is open to new evidence should it present itself.
In other words, I do not believe any of them, but I don't disbelieve any of them either. I think at this point anyone who is honest with themselves would recognize that to grab onto the belief that something isn't true just because the evidence has not met the threshold of "beyond a reasonable doubt" or even "preponderance of evidence" is doing so to appease their own sensibility, and is not allowing for the fact that most of the truth about life, the universe, and everything that has happened on this planet for all of our history has been purposefully hidden from us.
We must remain cognizant of this fact at every moment in our discoveries. Like you said, discernment is key, but it is not the only key. There is also a necessity of constant suspension of disbelief. A person, or a group of investigators cannot get to the truth if they permanently dismiss an idea just because at the time there is insufficient evidence for consensus support of it.
At this point, anything is possible. To deny the evidence of Prince Phillip e.g. is ludicrous, and I quite frankly can't believe you put that one on the list. Chemtrails also have a fair bit of evidence. Indeed, there is zero doubt whatsoever that we do in fact seed our atmosphere with many things and have for decades. The only difference between that and "chemtrails" is one of amount. So in your mind, anyone who believes it happens often, v. those that just think it happens sometimes are crazy. That is a fine line you are choosing to place that may be limiting your ability to listen and discern.
My computer froze last night. . I had to call my son to rescue me. My mouse quit working completely .He came and performed some sort of magic spell involving pressing keys and such and found I had over 30 tabs open . We had a good laugh over that. Him, not so much :)
I'll offer a few subjective criteria the ultimately depend on the exercise of discernment and perspective:
relevance: how relevant is the matter to awakening people to the machinations and lies of the deep state.
plausibility: is it possible that there are "DUMB" tunnels regularly used to traffic children underneath Washington DC? Um, sure, I guess it's possible. But it's far more plausible that yes, there are a few underground passages between buildings, but they aren't veritable child trafficking highways. So I personally believe that the suggestion and discussion of these ideas is unobjectionable and reasonable and fun... but man, the number of vocal presences here that truly take this fringe stuff as a given is alarming.
obsessiveness: some people just pound the same wild-eyed beliefs all. the. time.
correlation with the priorities and communications of a few trusted sources outside of Q, which, for me, include PDJT, Dan Scavino, Gen. Flynn, Mike Pompeo, and, to a lesser degree, as I believe they may have been tasked with some role for disinfo, and are certainly not privy to everything that's going on, folks like Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, Mike Lindell, Jenna Ellis, etc. I'm sure I've left off a few names, and anyone could reasonably quibble on the names I've included. But until I see Mike Pompeo start talking about "quantum med beds", yeah, I can pass.
decency: is it really decent to dance on the grave of a by-all-accounts-honorable person like Prince Phillip? Is this (https://qposts.online/post/100) justification to proclaim that Prince Phillip is a monstrous cabalist? Maybe he was a cabalist mastermind... but a) I really don't think so, and b) if he was, we'll find out soon enough. In the meanwhile, our priority is to highlight the glaring suppressed truth, and not being frenzied, lurching jackholes in the process.
our priority is to highlight the glaring suppressed truth, and not being frenzied, lurching jackholes in the process.
I see very little of that occurring here. So little in fact that I don't know why it needs to be called out at all. There are very few posts that get onto the leaderboard that don't make a good case for something.
Note a "good case" is not proof. It will never be proof. Proof is a decision, it is not anything meaningful outside of the individual that decides something is proof. Instead a good case is evidence (fact, data, etc.) or argument (pathos, logos, or ethos). Even if you can find counter evidence, or present a counter argument doesn't mean the matter is then settled in some way. The majority of posts here fall into these categories, whether you agree with the content or not. From there discussion ensues on the merits of the presentation. This is exactly how things should proceed in investigation, no matter the content or your agreement of it.
An honest investigator is never satisfied and is never wary about any topic of investigation.
I feel that this writer needs to speak for him / her self.There are enough "proofs" known that should not label us as Kooks for our beliefs. Just my opinion.
Chemtrails = government funded geo engineering, weather modification, cloud seeding
Someone hasn’t bothered with the research...
https://www.tdlr.texas.gov/weather/weathermod.htm
https://www.tdlr.texas.gov/weather/summary.htm
https://www.wave3.com/2021/04/09/behind-forecast-can-we-manipulate-weather/
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/mar/23/us-stated-cloud-seeding-weather-modification
https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2021/01/11/bill-gates-backed-climate-solution-gains-traction-but-concerns-linger/
https://theantimedia.com/dangers-of-geoengineering-weather-modification/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program
https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/air-force-bombshell-admits-they-can-control-weather-haarp/
https://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/cat/technologies/weather-modification/
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5069973
http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=10772
https://www.bitchute.com/video/morRTyoQ10lB/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/iiuYkdfFhqoT/
Welcome new people. The person who made this post does not speak for us at all. Everything that they mentioned as "absurdities" are totally possible. Do your own research and come to your own conclusions. Dont listen to piers morgan here.
Prince Philip isnt a cabalist?
Hitler isn’t part of the 13 families? (Assuming you mean families such as the Rockefellers and rothschilds?)
Someone didn’t do his required reading..go watch the fall of the cabal bud and come back here.
I agree, but a lie circulating and a lie being pushed as truth without evidence (or with a basis in other lies) are not the same thing.
I have seen evidence of all of those things. In some cases the evidence is compelling, even if controversial. In other cases the evidence is not compelling, and I give them a very low probability of being an accurate accounting of reality. In every case my mind is open to new evidence should it present itself.
In other words, I do not believe any of them, but I don't disbelieve any of them either. I think at this point anyone who is honest with themselves would recognize that to grab onto the belief that something isn't true just because the evidence has not met the threshold of "beyond a reasonable doubt" or even "preponderance of evidence" is doing so to appease their own sensibility, and is not allowing for the fact that most of the truth about life, the universe, and everything that has happened on this planet for all of our history has been purposefully hidden from us.
We must remain cognizant of this fact at every moment in our discoveries. Like you said, discernment is key, but it is not the only key. There is also a necessity of constant suspension of disbelief. A person, or a group of investigators cannot get to the truth if they permanently dismiss an idea just because at the time there is insufficient evidence for consensus support of it.
At this point, anything is possible. To deny the evidence of Prince Phillip e.g. is ludicrous, and I quite frankly can't believe you put that one on the list. Chemtrails also have a fair bit of evidence. Indeed, there is zero doubt whatsoever that we do in fact seed our atmosphere with many things and have for decades. The only difference between that and "chemtrails" is one of amount. So in your mind, anyone who believes it happens often, v. those that just think it happens sometimes are crazy. That is a fine line you are choosing to place that may be limiting your ability to listen and discern.
Good response. Bravo.
To put stock in any truthful idea you must do research and find thorough evidence.
Haha :)
I always hope people might follow up and take a look themselves.
I put in text notes or I just keep a lot of tabs open ;)
Though some I drop so much I can easily find them again.
My computer froze last night. . I had to call my son to rescue me. My mouse quit working completely .He came and performed some sort of magic spell involving pressing keys and such and found I had over 30 tabs open . We had a good laugh over that. Him, not so much :)
Haha I typically have about 15 windows open with ~20 tabs each
Well that's a great question, handshake!
I'll offer a few subjective criteria the ultimately depend on the exercise of discernment and perspective:
And to close, I'll just leave everyone with this: https://qposts.online/?q=cabal&s=keyword
I see very little of that occurring here. So little in fact that I don't know why it needs to be called out at all. There are very few posts that get onto the leaderboard that don't make a good case for something.
Note a "good case" is not proof. It will never be proof. Proof is a decision, it is not anything meaningful outside of the individual that decides something is proof. Instead a good case is evidence (fact, data, etc.) or argument (pathos, logos, or ethos). Even if you can find counter evidence, or present a counter argument doesn't mean the matter is then settled in some way. The majority of posts here fall into these categories, whether you agree with the content or not. From there discussion ensues on the merits of the presentation. This is exactly how things should proceed in investigation, no matter the content or your agreement of it.
An honest investigator is never satisfied and is never wary about any topic of investigation.
Building 7 . Is that kooky enough for you? Go and watch that day at about 5 in the evening and see what I saw and then get back to me.
I feel that this writer needs to speak for him / her self.There are enough "proofs" known that should not label us as Kooks for our beliefs. Just my opinion.
I'm confused, weren't there 'med beds' in the video DJT made for KJU?