Replies

Ok, let me be more specific for folks who have a difficult time putting things in context. No one has to disprove that the illusive, anonymous, Q exists. The people who are the proponents of that proposition bear that burden.

You've got it backwards, Okey. The facts are that Q exists. We don't have to prove it. That's a given. The proper question is What or Who is Q really and another is he or are they who they purport to be.

Because you have not bothered to really follow the Q drops and do any real research, you are probably totally unaware that Q has provided some extraordinary proofs of his/their authenticity and insider knowledge.

As a result, you've jumped to conclusions about Q and those who are following the questions that Q drops for those followers to find the answers which reveal what is going on. Those answers, which if you are the investigator you imply you are, are discoverable with diligent investigation in the public arena and with the application of common sense, however they do require someone who already "HAS everything already" such as Q to ask them in the first place to cause people to start digging for those answers to direct them where to look. The answers started to make a interconnected and unmistakeable web of relationships which kept growing and getting more and more related.

Occams Razor started to look that it was more and more pointing to the side of conspiracy rather than coincidence while Hanlon's Razor kept tripping over the fact that many of these people were where they were due to their connections yet some due to capabilities, so again not coincidence.

Then there are the repeated lies from these people. . .