Sometimes President Trump does delete posts. I think this is because it is sensative information and he only wants those who closely follow him to get this information, which is why I always have my notifications turned on for whenever he posts. And yes, of course. Now, we can't always take what he says at face value, but the underlying message is true, we just have to interpret it. Q has always talked about the value of comms and deception. President Trump has proved himself over and over again. I don't think it is asking much at all to trust him, even when it seems to contradict what we see in reality. If this was easy, then we would already have overthrown the elites and had the Great Awakening.
Did you see my posts earlier about how much of this type of thing is simply wish casting?
You acknowledge that there is no credible evidence to support things you have strong opinions/beliefs about and that we can just interpret anything President Trump says/does to match those wishes.
This isn't us just deciding to what is and isn't true. It is statistically impossible that some many people could reach the same conclusions about so many things. That's the evidence right there. You can see how the time stamps of posts align with the Q clock that this has to be true. For this all to be based on coincidenes or wishful thinking is so statistically unlikely that it isn't even worth considering. The elite cabal has worked hard to shape the way we think, which is why they're so heavily invested in the education system. Q is teaching us a new way to think, a new way to validate information that doesn't depend on third party data which is easily corruptable. When President Trump talks, I often have a feeling that confirms what he is saying is true. For the trickier comms, I often can come up with plausible explanations for the information he is hiding. This isn't some special ability, I just have listened to Q and been able to tune my gut instinct to correclty figure out what is true.
I get where you're coming from, and I respect the dedication to digging deep. But we have to be careful here.
Statistical alignment on timestamps and "gut feelings" confirming what we already want to believe isn't the same as solid evidence.
That's exactly how confirmation bias works, we notice the hits and downplay the misses. The elite cabal angle doesn't magically make physics optional or turn interpretation into proof.
Real red pilling has always been stronger when we stick to things we can verify and show normies without them rolling their eyes. When we lean too hard on "tuned instincts" and comms that need special decoding, it becomes harder to bring people in, not easier.
We should keep questioning everything, including our own interpretations. That's how we actually stay ahead of the narrative, not by trusting the feeling more than the observable reality. Hope isn't the problem, letting hope override scrutiny is.
Especially when it comes to things like hard science, such as the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
Confusing a scientific law with a legal law as you've done repeatedly here, and arguing with or in front of normies that we can change scientific laws with a vote from Congress absolutely undermines our credibility and severely damages our chances of red pilling them.
He also deleted those posts, I believe.
Do you think something is 100% true because President Trump posted about it?
Sometimes President Trump does delete posts. I think this is because it is sensative information and he only wants those who closely follow him to get this information, which is why I always have my notifications turned on for whenever he posts. And yes, of course. Now, we can't always take what he says at face value, but the underlying message is true, we just have to interpret it. Q has always talked about the value of comms and deception. President Trump has proved himself over and over again. I don't think it is asking much at all to trust him, even when it seems to contradict what we see in reality. If this was easy, then we would already have overthrown the elites and had the Great Awakening.
Did you see my posts earlier about how much of this type of thing is simply wish casting?
You acknowledge that there is no credible evidence to support things you have strong opinions/beliefs about and that we can just interpret anything President Trump says/does to match those wishes.
This isn't us just deciding to what is and isn't true. It is statistically impossible that some many people could reach the same conclusions about so many things. That's the evidence right there. You can see how the time stamps of posts align with the Q clock that this has to be true. For this all to be based on coincidenes or wishful thinking is so statistically unlikely that it isn't even worth considering. The elite cabal has worked hard to shape the way we think, which is why they're so heavily invested in the education system. Q is teaching us a new way to think, a new way to validate information that doesn't depend on third party data which is easily corruptable. When President Trump talks, I often have a feeling that confirms what he is saying is true. For the trickier comms, I often can come up with plausible explanations for the information he is hiding. This isn't some special ability, I just have listened to Q and been able to tune my gut instinct to correclty figure out what is true.
I get where you're coming from, and I respect the dedication to digging deep. But we have to be careful here.
Statistical alignment on timestamps and "gut feelings" confirming what we already want to believe isn't the same as solid evidence.
That's exactly how confirmation bias works, we notice the hits and downplay the misses. The elite cabal angle doesn't magically make physics optional or turn interpretation into proof.
Real red pilling has always been stronger when we stick to things we can verify and show normies without them rolling their eyes. When we lean too hard on "tuned instincts" and comms that need special decoding, it becomes harder to bring people in, not easier.
We should keep questioning everything, including our own interpretations. That's how we actually stay ahead of the narrative, not by trusting the feeling more than the observable reality. Hope isn't the problem, letting hope override scrutiny is.
Especially when it comes to things like hard science, such as the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
Confusing a scientific law with a legal law as you've done repeatedly here, and arguing with or in front of normies that we can change scientific laws with a vote from Congress absolutely undermines our credibility and severely damages our chances of red pilling them.