No, we don’t believe that. Q’s posts have inherent value as assembled text. All you have to do is read the posts and consider them with an open mind and the narrative Q paints provides the reader with a new way of looking at the world, drawing connections between news stories and other data points (historical events) that has value in and of itself to provide direction for additional research and further questions to be asked. Q is a guide of sorts in this way, and who he is specifically is not super important to us (notice it is the Q skeptics and Q haters who bring this up more than we do).
Further, Q has already told us who he is: a military team of less than 10 people. Beyond that, we are encouraged by the proofs connecting Q to Trump because they add legitimacy, but Q’s posts as simply text on a screen were already fascinating before those confirmations. I mean, even if Q was a straight up LARP, his posts still have value because nobody has really achieved a LARP like this. The biggest would have been John Titor, and Q is already far more elaborate than Titor, and people still read and enjoy Titor. You don’t have to get super attached to this stuff. Think of it as a thought experiment. “If I consider this lens, do world events now make MORE sense or LESS sense?” Repeatedly for those who have been following since 2017, the lens Q provided has consistently made world events make more sense, not less. That has been its own form of confirmation as well.
Would Trump coming forward and saying, “Q is real” help people to believe? Probably, but I think the Q haters would be able to ignore even that. At any rate, one of the important things to understand about Q is that plausible deniability has been embedded throughout this entire operation. I think that was done for two, possibly three reasons. One, to avoid breaking certain classification rules. Two, to undermine the media’s ability to report on Q without sounding crazy. And three, to allow skeptics a choice to disbelieve truths that they aren’t ready to handle (e.g., like the possibility that Hitler wasn’t killed in the bunker). So when someone points to plausible deniability, that doesn’t debunk anything to us, we just see that as an option the military has given you to maintain your psychological stability.
The other thing is we don’t really care what you think about Q. YOU are the ones trying to convince US. YOU are the ones invested in our thoughts and what we think. You are the ones making documentaries about US. If you don’t believe in Q, fine. We aren’t going to go and make a documentary about you. If you don’t want to read the posts, fine. If you want to go complain to your buddies about us, go for it. We don’t really think about what you guys think. Think whatever you want. Meanwhile we will continue to research and talk.
No, we don’t believe that. Q’s posts have inherent value as assembled text. All you have to do is read the posts and consider them with an open mind and the narrative Q paints provides the reader with a new way of looking at the world, drawing connections between news stories and other data points (historical events) that has value in and of itself to provide direction for additional research and further questions to be asked. Q is a guide of sorts in this way, and who he is specifically is not super important to us (notice it is the Q skeptics and Q haters who bring this up more than we do).
Further, Q has already told us who he is: a military team of less than 10 people. Beyond that, we are encouraged by the proofs connecting Q to Trump because they add legitimacy, but Q’s posts as simply text on a screen were already fascinating before those confirmations. I mean, even if Q was a straight up LARP, his posts still have value because nobody has really achieved a LARP like this. The biggest would have been John Titor, and Q is already far more elaborate than Titor, and people still read and enjoy Titor. You don’t have to get super attached to this stuff. Think of it as a thought experiment. “If I consider this lens, do world events now make MORE sense or LESS sense?” Repeatedly for those who have been following since 2017, the lens Q provided has consistently made world events make more sense, not less. That has been its own form of confirmation as well.
Would Trump coming forward and saying, “Q is real” help people to believe? Probably, but I think the Q haters would be able to ignore even that. At any rate, one of the important things to understand about Q is that plausible deniability has been embedded throughout this entire operation. I think that was done for two, possibly three reasons. One, to avoid breaking certain classification rules. Two, to undermine the media’s ability to report on Q without sounding crazy. And three, to allow skeptics a choice to disbelieve truths that they aren’t ready to handle (e.g., like the possibility that Hitler wasn’t killed in the bunker). So when someone points to plausible deniability, that doesn’t debunk anything to us, we just see that as an option the military has given you to maintain your psychological stability.
The other thing is we don’t really care what you think about Q. YOU are the ones trying to convince US. YOU are the ones invested in our thoughts and what we think. You are the ones making documentaries about US. If you don’t believe in Q, fine. We aren’t going to go and make a documentary about you. If you don’t want to read the posts, fine. If you want to go complain to your buddies about us, go for it. We don’t really think about what you guys think. Think whatever you want. Meanwhile we will continue to research and talk.