Posted on 05/03/2018 8:06:25 PM PDT by Beave Meister
This is just my take on the entire Q Anon situation. I attempt to break down what Q Anon is, who created and who took it over.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
I have looked at LOTS of alleged “evidence” and many many times found it wanting.
No, I do not have to live full time amidst Q-world (or Scientology, numerology, astrology, spirit cooking, etc.) to make a reasonable, provisional judgment about whether something is worth pursuing a lot further.
EVERY group, EVERY view ever propounded can say “you have to devote months/years to our studies before you can have any opinion at all about whether this could be worthwhile.” “you have to look at ALL our claimed evidence before you can have any judgment at all.” etc.
I am viewing a ***certain amount*** of what has often been put forward as important Q-evidence and/or understandings. Then I am simply asking whether I think it is worth pursuing a lot further. I am not trying to have opinions about particle physics or something that is already recognized as deserving many years of close study in order to form any good judgments.
The Q stuff is not meeting my minimal threshold for “deserves a great deal more investigation.” I’m sorry that I have higher standards than you guys, ha haaa. Sorry.
Yea, but that's now what you said and you know it. This is what you said, remember?
(though I continue to affirm that I just don’t follow it all closely enough to reach any firm conclusion).
I love watching you dance like an organ griner's minkey.
Your words are wind.
So whaddya think about the article? Did you read it?
I have an informal, slowly developing method.... method to this madness, yes. Nothing scientific, nothing too rigorous, just impressionistic.
I look at stuff and think about whether it makes enough sense to pursue it further. That is what we ALL have to do with everything on the internet and in life most of all. There is such a vast amount of “stuff” out there and no one can spend time on every bit of you.
So, yeah, we all have to pick and choose, and I am sharing a little bit of how I “pick and choose” while enjoying (some of) the responses to it. That is called a discussion.
You guys don’t really like discussion, you seem to prefer either mocking, ridiculing, or trying to bludgeon people into submission. I like to discuss.
rofl, you have torn the latter statement out of context, as I just explained to you. You are consumed with your stupid gung fu crap or whatever it is that Q trolls like to do.
I am actually thinking, hard as that is for you to accept.
‘though some trolls seem to wilfully willingly eagerly try to misunderstand me at every turn.’
I’ve been trying to tell you they’re not MENSA. Isn’t there a saying along the lines of, never attribute to malice what may only be lack of smarts?
The trolls have plenty of malice, no question. Even taking that out of the picture, though, they’re going to misunderstand quite a bit. That’s just the sad reality.
I read the “article” and I was struck about how right I was about Corsi.
And I’m going to be right about Q as well. Time will prove me right. This Q business will be wrapped up soon. November the very latest, but I bet much sooner.
Actually, it didn't. The Corsi implosion has been building ever since Q talked about people using the Q movement for personal gain (Corsi's book) and "be careful of who you follow."
The fatass didn't much like that Q drop.
Corsi's words are wind, much like Enchante's.
Also, Fantifa. If you weren't such a troll, you would know the Corsi situation hasn't "escalated quickly.
"Double also; read the Reddit article that goodman Carloada posted (and I repeated). Scroll up to educate your ignorant troll self.
Here is the list:
Five main possibilities cover the spectrum:
1, Q is an individual or group just having fun [4chan/8chan, where the posts appear, has a history of this kind of thing].
2, Q is a current or former Trump insider who has Trump’s best interests at heart.
3, Q is a current or former insider who does not have Trump’s best interests at heart.
4, Q is a Deep State psyops/disinformation campaign.
5. Q is an AI program that searches the Net for current topics, linguistically turns the gleanings into Q-speak and is specifically programmed to hook its followers and keep them addicted.
The 4th option would explain the why Q hypes Sessions and Wray despite their not having lifted a finger to help POTUS, and ‘the plan’ only working well for the Deep State/the Mueller coup attempt. Three and Five are also options.
yes, one version is “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”.... there is also, “don’t assume malice when it may be incompetence” or something like that.
Top ten stupidest things you've ever posted. And the competition is vast.
Words....wind....blah blah blah.
Enchante is debunked. I have a list of options about the Enchante program.
a.) Enchante is a lart. A fat pimply kid with a thesaurus in his mom's basement having a goof.
b.) A deep state psyop devised to protect the Deep State and thwart MAGA and President Trump.
c.) A.I. (Heavy on the Artificial and light on the Intelligence.)
Choose.
YOU LIE. My words are reasonably clear if (always) imperfect.
I say there is not sufficient reason(s) to believe Q is what he is claimed to be.
That does NOT imply that I know “What Q really truly is” — only that I (claim to know pretty well) what Q is NOT.
You really need a course in basic logic and reasoning.
Hmmmm you trolls really do feel threatened by me, even though I am just one-offing very casual thoughts and impressions. If I ever decide to go into some serious debunking of this crap you will truly never recover. ha ha...
With all due respect, Enchante, you lie. You are right about one thing. Your words ARE reasonably clear;
(though I continue to affirm that I just don’t follow it all closely enough to reach any firm conclusion).
I say there is not sufficient reason(s) to believe Q is what he is claimed to be.
You may have said that, but you also said the above, which in and of itself as a stand-alone statement, disqualifies you from speaking on the topic with any authority. I repeat: You are debunked.
You really need a course in basic logic and reasoning.
Well, somebody does anyway.
I am just one-offing very casual thoughts and impressions.
One-offing,eh? Well, now know that your one-offing very casual thoughts are wind and not to be considered by serious scholars or lesser Oracles.
If I ever decide to go into some serious debunking of this crap you will truly never recover. ha ha...
Scary.
:)
Did RBG go “A Bridge to Far”?
You continue to lie. Or are you really illiterate?
(1) no sufficient reason(s) to accept that Q is what is claimed.
(2) that does not mean we know ***what Q really is***
Those two statements are perfectly compatible.
The fact that you cannot seem to grasp that (or wilfully ignore it) means that you are either incompetent or lying.
Yeah, we already know you are illiterate and incompetent. Everything is beyond your feeble grasp.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.