Just for an outside perspective...

Q's teachings largely focus on the notion that mostly everyone in authority is not only lying to you, but doing so in a coordinated fashion to shape a false reality in a very drastic way.

However, Q was pretty light on applying those principles to any specific situations. Q followers will take Q's philosophy and try to apply it far beyond what Q ever did.

For instance, Q never really mentioned vaccines, at least not in such a way as to indicate how enormous COVID and the vaccination situation would become. He never directed you to believe that COVID and the vaccination was some sort of Deep State plan, or that Trump's position was somehow a 5D chess move designed to thwart said plan. Q never mentioned anything about vaccines or a virus when describing the Plan.

So all those vaccine and COVID theories that make up the bulk of the posts here?

That was almost all you guys. That was you applying the "trust nobody in authority, all information is compromised, there is a secret war and we have a convoluted 5D plan to win it" philosophy to a situation that Q never really talked about. You took a lesson and applied it to a novel situation.

Doesn't it make sense that different people would try to apply those principles to different established facts from different authorities? That perhaps some people will reject different evidence than you reject in following Q's teaching?

Many times when I talk here, the evidence I provide is dismissed as compromised or part of some black hat disinformation campaign. The information came from the authorities, so it's obviously a lie.

Flat Earthers think the same thing about the concept of photographs "proving" the roundness of the Earth.

Believers in the adrenochrome theories think the same thing about any chemical analysis of real adrenochrome.

Chemtrail believers think the same thing about any chemical examination or natural explanation of contrails.

9/11 truthers think the same thing about any mainstream analysis of the wreckage.

And so on and so forth. Some of you reject some evidence, and others reject other evidence.

Which is why I suspect there are so many different variations of Q followers out there. GAW is definitely the biggest I'm aware of (at least that's organized, unlike 8kun), but in groups isolated from here, you see different sorts of evidence accepted and rejected (such as the JFK crowd in Texas). Every Q group that believes wildly different things is still justifying it by saying that everyone is lying, and there are almost no established facts that you can trust.

So I suppose the question would be this: Does this board enforce Q's philosophy, or does this board believe that Q endorses a certain set of facts that lead to only a few different alternate theories of reality?

Just for an outside perspective...

Q's teachings largely focus on the notion that mostly everyone in authority is not only lying to you, but doing so in a coordinated way to shape a false reality in a very drastic way.

However, Q was pretty light on applying those principles to any specific situations. Q followers will take Q's philosophy and try to apply it far beyond what Q ever did.

For instance, Q never really mentioned vaccines, at least not in such a way as to indicate how enormous COVID and the vaccination situation would become. He never directed you to believe that COVID and the vaccination was some sort of Deep State plan, or that Trump's position was somehow a 5D chess move designed to thwart said plan. Q never mentioned anything about vaccines or a virus when describing the Plan.

So all those vaccine and COVID theories that make up the bulk of the posts here?

That was almost all you guys. That was you applying the "trust nobody in authority, all information is compromised, there is a secret war and we have a convoluted 5D plan to win it" philosophy to a situation that Q never really talked about. You took a lesson and applied it to a novel situation.

Doesn't it make sense that different people would try to apply those principles to different established facts from different authorities? That perhaps some people will reject different evidence than you reject in following Q's teaching?

Many times when I talk here, the evidence I provide is dismissed as compromised or part of some black hat disinformation campaign. The information came from the authorities, so it's obviously a lie.

Flat Earthers think the same thing about the concept of photographs "proving" the roundness of the Earth.

Believers in the adrenochrome theories think the same thing about any chemical analysis of real adrenochrome.

Chemtrail believers think the same thing about any chemical examination or natural explanation of contrails.

9/11 truthers think the same thing about any mainstream analysis of the wreckage.

And so on and so forth. Some of you reject some evidence, and others reject other evidence.

Which is why I suspect there are so many different variations of Q followers out there. GAW is definitely the biggest I'm aware of (at least that's organized, unlike 8kun), but in groups isolated from here, you see different sorts of evidence accepted and rejected (such as the JFK crowd in Texas). Every Q group that believes wildly different things is still justifying it by saying that everyone is lying, and there are almost no established facts that you can trust.

So I suppose the question would be this: Does this board enforce Q's philosophy, or does this board believe that Q endorses a certain set of facts that lead to only a few different alternate theories of reality?

Just for an outside perspective...

Q's teachings largely focus on the notion that mostly everyone in authority is not only lying to you, but doing so in a coordinated way to shape a false reality in a very drastic way.

However, Q was pretty light on applying those principles to any specific situations. Q followers will take Q's philosophy and try to apply it far beyond what Q ever did.

For instance, Q never really mentioned vaccines, at least not in such a way as to indicate how enormous COVID and the vaccination situation would become. He never directed you to believe that COVID and the vaccination was some sort of Deep State plan, or that Trump's position was somehow a 5D chess move designed to thwart said plan. Q never mentioned anything about vaccines or a virus when describing the Plan.

So all those vaccine and COVID theories that make up the bulk of the posts here?

That was almost all you guys. That was you applying the "trust nobody in authority, all information is compromised, there is a secret war and we have a convoluted 5D plan to win it" philosophy to a situation that Q never really talked about. You took a lesson and applied it to a novel situation.

Doesn't it make sense that different people would try to apply those principles to different established facts from different authorities? That perhaps some people will reject different evidence than you reject in following Q's teaching?

Many times when I talk here, the evidence I provide is dismissed as compromised or part of some black hat disinformation campaign. The information came from the authorities, so it's obviously a lie.

Flat Earthers think the same thing about the concept of photographs "proving" the roundness of the Earth.

Believers in the adrenochrome theories think the same thing about any chemical analysis of real adrenochrome.

Chemtrail believers think the same thing about any chemical examination or natural explanation of contrails.

9/11 truthers think the same thing about any mainstream analysis of the wreckage.

And so on and so forth. Some of you reject some evidence, and others reject other evidence.

Which is why I suspect there are so many different variations of Q followers out there. GAW is definitely the biggest I'm aware of (at least that's organized, unlike 8kun), but in groups isolated from here, you see different sorts of evidence accepted and rejected (such as the JFK crowd in Texas).

So I suppose the question would be this: Does this board enforce Q's philosophy, or does this board believe that Q endorses a certain set of facts that lead to only a few different alternate theories of reality?

Just for an outside perspective...

Q's teachings largely focus on the notion that mostly everyone in authority is not only lying to you, but doing so in a coordinated way to shape a false reality in a very drastic way.

However, Q was pretty light on applying those principles to any specific situations. Q followers will take Q's philosophy and try to apply it far beyond what Q ever did.

For instance, Q never really mentioned vaccines, at least not in such a way as to indicate how enormous COVID and the vaccination situation would become. He never directed you to believe that COVID and the vaccination was some sort of Deep State plan, or that Trump's position was somehow a 5D chess move designed to thwart said plan. Q never mentioned anything about vaccines or a virus when describing the Plan.

So all those vaccine and COVID theories that make up the bulk of the posts here?

That was almost all you guys. That was you applying the "trust nobody in authority, all information is compromised, there is a secret war and we have a convoluted 5D plan to win it" philosophy to a situation that Q never really talked about. You took a lesson and applied it to a novel situation.

Doesn't it make sense that different people would try to apply those principles to different established facts from different authorities? That perhaps some people will reject different evidence than you reject in following Q's teaching?

Many times when I talk here, the evidence I provide is dismissed as compromised or part of some black hat disinformation campaign. The information came from the authorities, so it's obviously a lie.

Flat Earthers think the same thing about the concept of photographs "proving" the roundness of the Earth.

Believers in the adrenochrome theories think the same thing about any chemical analysis of real adrenochrome.

Chemtrail believers think the same thing about any chemical examination or natural explanation of contrails.

9/11 truthers think the same thing about any mainstream analysis of the wreckage.

And so on and so forth. Some of you reject some evidence, and others reject other evidence.

Which is why I suspect there are so many different variations of Q followers out there. GAW is definitely the biggest I'm aware of (at least that's organized, unlike 8kun), but in groups isolated from here, you see different sorts of evidence accepted and rejected (such as the JFK crowd in Texas).

So I suppose the question would be this: Does this board enforce Q's philosophy, or does this board believe that Q endorses a certain set of facts that lead to only a few different alternate theories of reality?