OK. Hang on.
Thank you for adding "IMO", because of course, we're dealing with opinion and interpretation.
You're expressing your interpretation here, although the first two sentences above gave me the impression that you are treating your interpretation as a fact (which of course it isn't). So yeah, IMO is important.
In any case, I disagree. Why? The following three points are what I consider uppermost.
- Consider the context. If I recall correctly, Q provided a direct context to this by referring to a clip from the film "the Day the Earth Stood Still".
In that film, the precipice = humanity facing self-destruction and annihilation. I'm not certain if Q posted the clip or referenced it as a reply to a post by an anon. Clip
- In addition, Q themselves write:
ONLY AT THE PRECIPICE [moment of destruction] WILL PEOPLE FIND THE WILL TO CHANGE.
Here, Q directly defines the precipice as "moment of destruction".
- Finally, what is a precipice? "a very steep rock face or cliff, especially a tall one."
A precipice is a place where, if you lose your balance and step over a particular line, you fall down, usually to one's death.
(You might do an image search for "precipice") https://whatonomy.files.wordpress.com/2018/11/img_0754.jpg
For these reasons, my view is that Q is talking about a state of teetering on the edge of disaster and destruction. (I believe that is in sync with what most people normies and anons alike, associate with the precipice. Threat of imminent destruction. Not just someone being upset or angry.)
Are we there? The answer to that question is opinion, and it really depends heavily on one's scale of thinking, scale of context. In other words, the perspective you choose to adopt.
In my view, I think humanity has been at the precipice (or destruction) for many decades, certainly when enough nuclear weapons were built to annihilate all sentient life on earth.
OK. Hang on.
Thank you for adding "IMO", because of course, we're dealing with opinion and interpretation.
You're expressing your interpretation here, although the first two sentences above gave me the impression that you are treating your interpretation as a fact (which of course it isn't). So yeah, IMO is important.
In any case, I disagree. Why? The following three points are what I consider uppermost.
- Consider the context. If I recall correctly, Q provided a direct context to this by referring to a clip from the film "the Day the Earth Stood Still".
In that film, the precipice = humanity facing self-destruction and annihilation. I'm not certain if Q posted the clip or referenced it as a reply to a post by an anon. Clip
In addition, Q themselves write:
ONLY AT THE PRECIPICE [moment of destruction] WILL PEOPLE FIND THE WILL TO CHANGE.
Here, Q directly defines the precipice as "moment of destruction".
Finally, what is a precipice? "a very steep rock face or cliff, especially a tall one."
A precipice is a place where, if you lose your balance and step over a particular line, you fall down, and is usually used in the context of a severe and sheer cliff over which one can fall to death (destruction). That's what a precipice is.
For these reasons, my view is that Q is talking about a state of teetering on the edge of disaster and destruction. (I believe that is in sync with what most people normies and anons alike, associate with the precipice. Not someone being upset or angry.)
Are we there? The answer to that question is opinion, and it really depends heavily on one's scale of thinking, scale of context. In other words, the perspective you choose to adopt.
In my view, I think humanity has been at the precipice (or destruction) for many decades, certainly when enough nuclear weapons were built to annihilate all sentient life on earth.