Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The great Q wager. Are you in?

Posted on 01/25/2018 8:46:49 AM PST by MNDude

As we have seen, it seems like freerepublic has been divided into the two denominations. The Q Believers, and the Q disbelievers. Based on the claims that he made, I believe he will very shortly be either be proved or disproved. I think it would be fun to make a wager based off of this.

We can establish several specific things that he said would happen. For example, the undeleted text messages would reveal in assassination plot against President Trump or his family with the help of a foreign National Ally. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will be arrested and will be proved to be part of a child trafficking, child sacrificing, satanic ring. Hundreds of those who we're involved will be arrested around the country and the world. Something like that.

If certain events do not happen by a certain date, like let's say May 1st or something, although I feel confident they'll happen much sooner, the Believers will be proved wrong. The believer would then have to make the following post on Free Republic. " I MNDude (or whoever) a tinfoil hat wearing kook. I believe silly Anonymous posters on the internet."

If it is proved to be true, then the disbelievers would have to post the following. I Caww or whoever) am a MSM follower. I only get my news from Anderson Cooper.

The loser would then have to change their tagline to say "I was wrong" and keep it there for 1 week.

I think I am ready to put my chips on the table. Are you game?


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: allqallthetime; chat; q; qanon; qrepublic; russianpropagandists; russianpuppets; russianstooges; russiasucks; shutins
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 221-239 next last
To: Fantasywriter
Actually I took the time to verify that the posts I have been attributing to Q were authentically his. For some reason that sent you into ad hominem overdrive. You react to facts the way a vampire reacts to garlic.

Here's a clue, kid.

When disputing a topic, you need more than your second unsubstantiated assertion in your own favor, to prove that you have verified your first unsubstantiated assertion.

Are you bright enough to follow that sentence, or do I need to parse it for you?

121 posted on 01/28/2018 1:13:47 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Name-calling in a debate is called Ad Hominem (Personal Attack). The first person to use it automatically forfeits the debate.

Just because someone ignores or doesn’t respond in the vein you want does not mean they’re trolling, they’re choosing not to respond at that juncture in the way you might prefer that they do....so I stand on the following already stated....

.....”Are you that ‘unsure’ your view/position ‘can prevail’ in the open market place of opinions that you resort to calling people ‘trolls’ who disagree with you?”....obviously it didn’t.


122 posted on 01/28/2018 1:15:26 PM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Evidently you have no idea how to validate Q posts. It only takes a matter of seconds if you know how to do it.

All three of the posts I cited are verified in the primary source as being Q’s. You were entirely wrong about their inauthenticity.

These are things you should have known to begin with. If you don’t know how to verify a Q post, you need to learn ASAP.


123 posted on 01/28/2018 1:19:42 PM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

The real world is where assertions are backed up with evidence, not rumors, innuendos, logical fallacies and other roadblocks against critical thinking.


124 posted on 01/28/2018 1:22:53 PM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: caww

+1


125 posted on 01/28/2018 1:24:58 PM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: caww
Name-calling in a debate is called Ad Hominem (Personal Attack). The first person to use it automatically forfeits the debate.

Thank you, Jeb, for your considered insight into the matter.

It doesn't work like that in the real world.

And trolls forfeit the presumption of innocence, and the courtesy of being taken in good faith.

Just because someone ignores or doesn’t respond in the vein you want does not mean they’re trolling, they’re choosing not to respond at that juncture in the way you might prefer that they do....so I stand on the following already stated....

No, but someone lying, after being repeatedly called on, *is* trolling.

.....”Are you that ‘unsure’ your view/position ‘can prevail’ in the open market place of opinions that you resort to calling people ‘trolls’ who disagree with you?”....obviously it didn’t.

See the prior question. Fantasywriter lied, got caught on it, and the pulled the whole 'point and shriek' and called in fellow flying monkeys for reinforcement.

126 posted on 01/28/2018 1:28:33 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
Laughing in your face, dear.

But keep it up, it's a whole week until the Super Bowl.

And I'm probably boycotting that anyway.

127 posted on 01/28/2018 1:30:30 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: caww
The real world is where assertions are backed up with evidence, not rumors, innuendos, logical fallacies and other roadblocks against critical thinking.

You obviously don't visit there very often. SJWs always *project*.

128 posted on 01/28/2018 1:31:41 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: MNDude
.

Dr. Pieczenik: Trump Has Officially Destroyed the Deep State (Part 1)

Dr. Pieczenik: Trump Has Officially Destroyed the Deep State (Part 2)

Dr. Pieczenik: Trump Has Officially Destroyed the Deep State (Part 3)

.

129 posted on 01/28/2018 1:34:00 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Sad.

Sad for you, that is.


130 posted on 01/28/2018 1:41:28 PM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: All

.
Sorry for the commercials!


131 posted on 01/28/2018 1:43:28 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
Sad.

Sad for you, that is.

Sorry, your attempt at channeling The Donald needs work.

Probably because he's a successful billionaire married to a supermodel in real life, and is now President, and you're not.

132 posted on 01/28/2018 1:43:55 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

I am sincerely sad for you.


133 posted on 01/28/2018 1:47:40 PM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
I am sincerely sad for you.


134 posted on 01/28/2018 1:53:13 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Blessings.


135 posted on 01/28/2018 1:55:09 PM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
Blessings.

You should have *started* with that one.

136 posted on 01/28/2018 1:56:33 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

I started by praying for you.


137 posted on 01/28/2018 1:59:18 PM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: MNDude
I prefer to be Q agnostic.

I like to keep tabs on what Q is saying and I get a kick out of his cypher coding style but I neither buy into it or reject it out of hand.

Even if events play out where the Deep State is taken down, it will still be uncertain whether Q was a prophet or if he was riding the wave of what many of us thought might happen anyhow.

So Q may always be a mystery. Many, many years ago, back when I wore short pants and drove a tricycle around the block in dress shoes and white socks, a band called ? and The Mysterians had a hit with "96 Tears."

Many at the time swore that the voice in the song was that of Mick Jagger and despite the fact that some guy named Rodriguez came forward as Question Mark, there were those who never moved away from the fact that Mick Jagger was the studio vocalist.

Over 50 years later, we are still debating who Question Mark really was and so 50 years from now, I will be sitting in some futuristic bar, over 100 years old, hopefully, clutching my beer and telling some whippersnappers about the days of Q.


138 posted on 01/28/2018 2:00:24 PM PST by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

Q? I have no idea what that is.


139 posted on 01/28/2018 2:00:49 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
I started by praying for you.

Don't bother with me. Pray for the President's success in uprooting the Deep State. And our country's protection and restoration.

140 posted on 01/28/2018 2:02:15 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 221-239 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson