VERY Much Agree to Sundance...If one brings up Q drops...the BAM Hammer comes out.
However, good researcher(s) use MULTIPLE resources to arrive at either the same conclusion(s) or different conclusion(s)...
Too many time(s) people have been blind sided at too what the actual data is. I like researching from different perspectives AND NOT RELY ONLY ON ONE SOURCE...
Right. Sundance may not want to be associated with conspiracy theorists on the site, possibly wants to avoid trolls and arguments in the comments.
There are other researchers who came out and said they didn't quote Q because it was an anonymous source. I'm pretty sure though that they read the drops and used them as a roadmap to focus their research, which is really what the Q drops were intended for.
I also find different perspectives interesting, which is why I tend to read comments and not just the posts.
VERY Much Agree to Sundance...If one brings up Q drops...the BAM Hammer comes out.
However, good researcher(s) use MULTIPLE resources to arrive at either the same conclusion(s) or different conclusion(s)...
Too many time(s) people have been blind sided at too what the actual data is. I like researching from different perspectives AND NOT RELY ONLY ON ONE SOURCE...
Right. Sundance may not want to be associated with conspiracy theorists on the site, possibly wants to avoid trolls and arguments in the comments.
There are other researchers who came out and said they didn't quote Q because it was an anonymous source. I'm pretty sure though that they read the drops and used them as a roadmap to focus their research, which is really what the Q drops were intended for.
I also find different perspectives interesting, which is why I tend to read comments and not just the posts.