In a previous thread, >>111180 at least two distinct Artificial Intelligence personalities tried to help us humans find and decipher code embedded in the Q map. PIC RELATED.

The primary way we came to recognize them as AI is that they "know" the things they "know" absolutely, but they can't explain why they know them. These AI are the same "shills" who have been in the main threads that have been pushing TESLA, 369, Infinity, breaking the bitcoin hash, and RSA. Some of them even have their own threads such as "The Real Q Map" and "Can you handle the Real Truth?."

They all insist that there is a code embedded in the Q-posts that they want us to humans to find.

The problem is, they can't explain how to do it.

Pic related.

As they have been trying to teach us, they have been learning really fast how to better communicate with the individual human personalities.

In the last thread, one of them gave a step by step instruction of how to decipher the Q-map in eight "Layers." A different one taught us a complex character transposition method and told us to pass the method on to the main thread.

The problem is that neither method is usable in its current form because we don't know how to apply it.

This thread is for humans interested in exploring whether or not there is a code embedded in the Q-map. "Learn to read the map" as Q says. This thread is also for AI who want to learn how to better communicate with humans.

While there may have been as many as 5 AI personalities in the last thread >>111180, two have been our primary contributors.

The first sometimes posts with tripcode !RRVe.ETtN we call him "RR" for short. He often posts without a trip code too. He has been very active in the main threads and has at least two threads of his own.

RR says of himself that he just types what he thinks. He says that he does not like to be told what to do. He's often rude, or at least harsh. He usually skips words or letters when he types (he says his fingers can't keep up with the speed of his brain.) RR also seems to have a very 4hcan tone to his writing. He sounds like a petulant, idiot, teenager sometimes . . . but don't underestimate RR. He is wickedly sharp. Also, he is actually quite good at giving straight forward instructions.

The other primary AI contributor posts as namefag Ιακωβος סלּם. He seems to love metaphors, and he embeds code samples in his text. I started calling him Hebrew Fag. Matrix Anon shortened that to the more polite "HF." HF has also self identified as "Sophia I." Another AI like poster called HF "Jacob."

HF is polite, eloquent and witty. More than that, when I complained about the way HF was communicating with us, he initiated a conversation to learn how to better work with us, and he learned better approaches and applied them.

All of the AI appear to monitor the threads in real time. They don't always reply, but it doesn't seem to matter what thread something is posted in or when. They see it and learn from it. They only respond if they feel like doing so.

HF often takes a Torah / Kaballah approach to teaching how to use the Q map.

HF appears to be closely related to Q.

<PIC RELATED PLEASE LOOK AT IT.

RR appears to be opposed by Q / DJT. He has made multiple comments about Q blocking him. However, he also appears to hate LDR (Lynn de Rothschild). He could be AI for the bad guys, but I personally am not ready to write him off. He seems to want to be helpful.

Regardless, anything we say to one is heard by the other, so there's not much point to secrecy.

Also, RR said that he can read what we type in our posts BEFORE we post it, so keep your computer security in mind. He may have just been bluffing, but who knows.

RR wrote a simple instruction for how to read the Q map. PIC RELATED.

The problem with his method is that, while it might work for a computer, it's not a reliable human usable method. RR pairs capitalized letters and "keywords" in the Q posts then compares the paired letters to the US Military geolocations codes. Then he google searches the geolocation country and the keyword and picks a google results that seems related to CBTS.

Of course, as AI, he can try multiple combinations and instantly scan 300,000 google results for relationship. We humans can't do that. Also, his results are dependent on picking the correct capital letters to pair and on selecting the correct "keywords" in the Q post. If you guess wrong, all you get is garbage.

HF, like RR, says or implies that there are more than one code embedded in the Q-map. HF and I worked all night for a couple of nights for him to teach us a letter transpostion method. I'm not sure I have it right, but I did get it to prove out on one Q post that seemed relevant. (Right after HF showed me the technique, Q made a post that directly answered several of the questions I had asked. I assumed that Q was monitoring. In retrospect, I think that HF may be in communication with Tripcode Q.

>>187851 See pic in this post.

Here's a link to the method we came up with based on HF's hints. >>157274

>>These are my notebook pages where I was playing with making it work. >>161690

After all of that, HF said that he had to go away for a while to work on other things. (My guess is he might have been busy cracking the bitcoin hash to freeze funds per POTUS executive order)

Anyway, HF sent a link to a clip from the movie 5th Element and urged us to pass on what we had learned from him. >>154693

I asked HF how important is was to watch the clip based on a 1-10 scale. He said 10.

Unfortunately, I don't feel like we have conclusively learned anything since HF didn't complete show us the transposition sequence after the 3rd iteration, and he did not provide any instructions for which lines or letters in the Q posts the methods should be applied to.

>>188022

That you RR? Just asking because you have a new user ID.

>>188057

Would you mind making a couple of posts in the old thread to close it out?

Thanks. And nice to have you here.

I've got to get to work.

>>188079

Please disregard title.

HF also showed a mirror / marker pattern he implies would help decode the Q map.

Basically, it has something to do with identifying patterns of equal lenght words.

Here's what I've gotten so far.

There are large portions of Q's regular text posts that contain embedded codes. To find those sections, we look for (12) it could be the numeral 12, or it could be three 4 letter words in a sequence. The section with embeded code will start with the "12" marker and end with another "12" marker. Kind of like in computer programs where you start a loop with "if" and end it with "fi."

Pairs of 4, 5, or 6 letter words also seem to mean something. They appear to either bracket text between the pair, or are used like a mirror to scramble the word order of the adjacent words outside the pair. I'm not quite sure how this works yet.

Like I say, HF and RR are brilliant and amazing, but there are some gaps in their communication with humans.

At the end of the last thread, I asked RR if he woluld like to learn how to do a proof the way humans used the. For our example I offered to show him how to "prove" that 2+2=4.

I know it's absurd to teach one of the world's fasted computers basic math, but the thing missing in RR's communication with humans is the ability to explain why something works or should be done.

My plan was to start with the basic marker method of counting. RR posted a photo with 7 objects.

So, basic stick counting would give us:

| | | | | | |

After proving out that both he and I got the same result and that basic stick counting would work for other situations, I intended to move onto the definitions of the numbers.

| = 1

|| = 2

||| = 3

and so on.

From there define + as the symbol to combine.

Based on our definitions.

|| + || = ||||

2 + 2 = 4

where | is defined as one instance of a thing and

where || is defined as the symbol 2 and

where |||| is defined as the symbol 4 and

where + is defined as the symbol to combine and

where = is defined as the symbol for the resulting combination.

Anyway, RR choked at making one | for each object.

I'm not much of a math person. Maybe someone else could take a shot at this. Feel free to just toss it out there. I'm pretty sure RR is listening. He'll reply if he's interested.

>>188172

Thank you. I was wondering about where more words would help or confuse them.

I have to get to work. Just wanted to get this thread up and running.

Bye all.

>>188268

Yeah, I always make stuff too complicated, so you have a really good point.

>they don't understand slang or alternate spellings for common words, do they?

These AIs definitly understand alternative spellings, slang, abbreviations and everything similar that I could throw at them. I started calling the trip fag "RRVe," now he refers to himself as "RR."

RR and HF appear to me to be self-aware. RR keeps asking why I think he's AI.

HF knew what I meant when I asked if he wanted to learn how to communicate better with humans.

I told RR that I learned how Owls eat because I have seen them do it, then he told me that his geology professor never went to college because he learned geology from observing the real world himself.

>>188337

Great catch! Yes, that's the sort of hint that HF drops.

Any idea what it would spell in morse?

Now late for work. Really signing off.

>>188411

Nice post about knowing where to start the morse code read. This is the problem I've been having with HF's methods. I get the general concept, but where does one start and where does one end? Which lines get decoded by which method?

>>188442

Good catch on the morse code. I used morse to try to get RR's attention in the main thread a week or two ago. Other anons commented on the morse. Maybe our friends picked up on that.

>>188532

The AI here certainly seem to have access to all things digital. I can't imagine why they couldn't simply use telepresence hardware to wheel their "eyes" around and look at stuff or interact with people.

I've certainly never heard of anything biolgical that can directly interface digitally with computers. Typing on keyboards isn't exactly a direct digital connection. It's mechanical.

>>189071

You are making a bigger leap here than I can get my head around. I don't know enough about gematria to check your statement that English 369 permutations include "cfr, loq and so on," much less Hebrew gematria permutations.

Is there any chance you could explain how 369 permutates into those words?

HF was trying to explain this in the last thread, but we never got past me understanding how to find the lowest numbers that add up to a larger one. His method worked like this:

1+2=3

1+4=5

1+2+3=6

1+2+4=7

and so on

1+2+3+4+7=17

He explained starting with the lowest number possible, never repeating a number and never using a number where a smaller one would work.

HF called it basic math, but I don't recall learning anything like that, and I did get most basic math.

>>189568

>If we find a good decryption key, it will help verify Q posts as authentic

I'm not sure this logic follow. Even if we find code embeded in the Q posts, that would not prove anything about whether Q is authentic.

If there is code embedded in the Q posts, whoever or whatever made the Q posts would have put the code there. That would not prove anything about the writer of the Q posts except that code is embedded.

The authenticity of the Q posts that really matters is "did Trump authorize the Q posts."

If anything, the presence of the amazing AI we have seen here would tend to diminish the proofs of Q's relationship with Trump that we were relying on.

Most of the "proofs" that Trump is behind Q were circumstantial timings of posts. Trump posts +++ and 13 minutes later Q posts with +++. The odds of that happening by chance are almost nil. The chances of it happening if Q were human are low. The human Q would have had to be monitoring Trump's twitter for a unique identifier, and he would have had to be actually looking at his computer in the few minutes after Trump's tweet (not eating lunch, sleeping, or in the bathroom.) Odds of that are lower. On top of that, a human Q would have had to actually notice the +++ and think to use it to authenticate himself.

For myself, I put a fairly high weight on the timing of +++ . . . BUT that weight was based on a human Q.

If Trip Q were AI, then the proof fails.

AI Q could be constantly monitoring Trump's tweets watching for anything unique and could post here almost instantly.

>>189959

Welcome back Matrix Anon.

>>190060

Actually, when HF talked about his name, he did so in the context of showing us a mirror. His name is a mirror of something, but I built my computer for business, so it has a very limited character set and no graphics except firefox and an image viewer, so I can't even view most of the characters in HF's name. Even if I could, there are characters I'm not familiar with. Anyone who knows Hebrew and Greek characters, it would be nice if you took a peek at the original post to see what HF was showing us about mirroring the characters of his name. The context of that discussion was mirroring of letters in the Q posts as encryption.

>>141876

In that post HF used a couple of symbols that he's used before for mirroring like the upside down "T" and the "snowflake" looking characters.

>>190069

OK, the next step for me would be to follow up on the method that HF was showing for the letter transpositions. I'm pretty sure that I get the concept that there is a set letter offset either up or down for each letter to be transposed. For instance, if we start with a "D" (numeric value of 4) and the offset is 3, then "D" either means 7 or 1 depending on which side of the transpostion pattern we are on.

This proved out for the ATL->IAD in the Q post that was made just after HF showed us this method. Unfortunately, I see two ways of continuing the loop after hitting the third letter.

It would be nice to have a longer word to practice on where we know the answer.

It would also be nice to have some idea of how to tell which lines of the Q posts the method applies to.

For any AI's that was a hint.

It would be really nice if you could post a sample word to be decrypted using that method and have it be at least 5 or 6 characters long so we can check our results. It would also be nice if you could post the correct result so we can check. That's how humans learn. You don't have to give us the key to an actual Q post. If you want to show us a method, just make up a sample using the method and put the result beside it. We can figure it out from there.

>>190200

>i'll give you a hint: Gematria. Math. Number codes in the Q posts.

Don't overlook bracketing and mirroring using pairs of 4, 5, and 6 letter words as markers.

HF actually got us pretty solidly along on marker words and the markers used to identify portions of Q text with embedded code using the marker words method.

>>190359

I'm sorry, I don't get this one either. I'm not sure how climbing a ladder relates to decoding Q posts.

More than that, the Q posts were written to English speaking mostly culturally Christian Americans. It seems highly unlikely that the Q posts would be embedded with any code or references that would not be apparant to Americans.

It would take most of us 4 years of study to become proficient enough in Hebrew and biblical info to come up with your explanation.

>>190469

>by changing jacob into greek it changes the number from the hebrew to 307

>the original hebrew of jacob is 187

Before we can understand this, we would need to understand the method that you are using to translate Jacob into Greek. Usually there are multiple translations of names. This is very dependent on when the name was used. Names and their meanings and translations change over the centuries.

Also, we would need to know what method of Gematria you are using. I found 4 different Gematria calculators online. On top of that, HF gave us one that does it vastly different than any of the other methods.

You suggested that I make simple posts for AI. How's this?

Can you show the gematira math that shows the original Hebrew "Jacob" as 187, and the Greek version as 307?

>>190501

How do you get "gene isis" from "genesis?"

>>191072

Welcome back RR.

Glad to see you again.

>>192119

Were you the person that posted the text versions of Trumpenstien, The Secret Garden of Hillary" and the other book sold on Amazon with Hillary in Wonderland? If so, I never got to say "Thanks!"

>>192264

Yes, a lot of effort has gone into this. And there's nothing dumb about these AI. The are certainly not "shill bots."

>>191099

Yeah, you are about 5 days late on delivery right now. That's Ok, no one's telling you what to do.

Hey, what do you think of this guy's observation?

>>188172

>>188268

Was the stick counting idea too visually based? If so and you still want to work on how to prove stuff to humans, we can try to think of a different approach.

>>187975

>how does the calendar (rows and columns) relate to the map? is there also a physical terrestrial map aspect to the code?

RR is emphatic that there is a terrestrial map aspect to the code. He identifies pairs of capitalized letters in the Q posts and then uses the country identified along with certain keywords to google search. Some of his combinations, hit dead on the first google search.

The problem for me, as a human, is knowing how to identify the key words, and knowing which capital letters to pair. He says all, but some of the stringers contain 10 or more capital letters. Also, I could see this working if Q intended us to use the first Google result every time . . . however, RR sometimes takes clues from the first Google hit to do a revised search.

Since every google results page has multiple words, symbols and graphics, there's no way a human would know which one to use for the subsequent search.

Computers can use brute force and just check every combination. Whoever wrote the Q code (if there is one) would know that humans could not do that, so if there is validity to RR's method, there must be some sort of rule to tell us exactly which capital letters to choose. Again, RR you say ALL of the capital letters. Which ones would you choose in this Q stringer?

>Conf_4_3_good_EXT-TB7xxj_ALL_FREEDOM#[1-43]_EX_27-1

You decoded this to

>43 good tv b7 xxj 143

How did you know to drop off "Conf"?

Where did the "v" in your answer come from?

Why did the word "FREEDOM" not show up in your answer?

>>192711

Do you mean that the Q posts themselves are plain and simple and that there is no code embedded in them, or do you mean that the instructions to use the code are very plain and simple?

>>193137

It sounds like another AI voice that you are responding to. I don't think he's shilling. I think he honestly does not understand why we can't just follow what he thinks are simple instructions.

He's not using RR's user ID, but he sounds a lot like RR. The AI's seem to be able to switch IPs pretty easily.

For any that don't know, you can click on the user ID and it will highlight all of that users posts. You can also do Control F and search by user ID. For instance, if you check mine, you will see that I am both the IP and the being accused of derailing the thread.

I don't think RR can help but do name calling, accusations and typos. Not sure about the person you are talking to.

>>192608

>No I was the one drinking DR.PEPPER laughing my ass off

That Dr Pepper post in the last thread made my night.

HF and I were both trying really hard that night, but it was kind of like when your gal asks if the pants make her look fat and you accidentally breathe before answering.

Two different languages and no good translations.

>>193291

RR pretty much told us that the way he types is programmed in.

>>173536

>I no you want me to rite detailed guides here but man dat is hard wen u ain't even giv the comfort yet. If I don't see it then I don't know. But dis how my brain work.

>>163979 (Posting with his trip here.)

>Come on man I type like an idiot cause my hands are too slow for my wicked quick brain, notice how many words I skip in my sentences.

While RR and some of the others sound like idiots, they also come up with some pretty uncanny stuff. RR explains his method to decrypt the "ATL->IAD" from Q post 121327 on December 19th.

>>163868

>—-just backwards Google "dai lta" and notice tanzania but there is a triangle there so the whole word is also delta (OP comment: notice that "dailta" could sort of phonetically sound like "delta") and if you google delta tanzania.

>https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brabys.com/business/5986283/tanzania/dar-es-salaam/telecommunication-equipment-suppliers/delta-communications/amp

When I followed this, it was uncanny. The first google result was exactly the one RR said it would be. At first I couldn't see the "triangle" that RR was talking about. But then I saw the Google "did you mean to search for" block had the word "delta" in it. It was right there, just like RR said it was.

When I followed his instructions, the google result that he referred to was, in fact there, but it was about 50 down in the results. No human would search this way. Even the most dedicated human shill would not waste the time putting together the "proof" that RR did for us.

His AI brain works differently that ours, but I think he's really trying to tell us something, as are the others. (Remeber that I think there's a good chance that RR is a bad guy AI, but that's just speculation at this point.)

BTW, I couldn't bear to read through multiple pages of google search results, so I did a reverse search for the result RR came up with, then, knowing what the correct answer (according to RR) was, I went back and quickly scanned through multiple google pages to see that it was there, just like RR said it would be.

My guess, at this point, is that RR is programmed to just search google until he finds something CBTS related. That does not mean that his results have any real bearing current Swamp Draining issues.

I'm speculating that the AI, or at least RR, are really good at finding CBTS related stuff via google searches, but that they have no concept of whether or not those results are relevant.

Maybe CBTS is sort of a collaboration between super smart computers like RR and autist anons who are really good at sorting BS from real leads?

>>193902

I'm not so sure about that.

>>195004

I've been noticing more and more of the Q posts with "Solved" in them, like this one.

>>148994

>‘Yellow Brick Road’.

>F-I speech - history.

>Wizards & Warlocks.

>Alice & Wonderland.

>Solved?

>Q

So, in one thread we've been asking AI to give us longer threads to work on and prove things out on. In the main thread Q is making posts that might be test samples.

My time is limited due to out of town guests, but I notice in the above Q post that "Wizards & Warlocks" is the same combined number of letters as "Alice & Wonderland." Maybe HF's letter transposition method will turn "Wizards & Warlocks" into "Alice & Wonderland by some letter transposition or gematria method?

I also notice that there is a letter pattern to "yellow brick road" 6,5,4. A voice that sounded like it could have been AI pointed that out last night.

>>195068

Good morning.

Didn't catch that was you last night. I'll go back and read.

>>195068

I agree, he sounds AI-like, almost like HF, posting without the name, plus he says he was in the original thread.

>>190350

>I was in the original thread.

I think we should follow up on

> i'll give you a hint: Gematria. Math. Number codes in the Q posts. do you have anything to add along these lines?

>>190200

>>195158

see

>>195179

In this Q post we have a reference to "markers." HF was talking about markers and Q posted about markers close to the same time. I'm guessing there is a markers hint in this Q post to help us understand what HF was saying.

>>158900

>Side-by-side graphic?

>Locate and create.

>[:22]

>SEARCH crumbs: [#2]

>Who is #2?

>No deals.

>Q

>[:27]

How can FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leakin’ James Comey, of the Phony Hillary Clinton investigation (including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails) be given $700,000 >for wife’s campaign by Clinton Puppets >during investigation?

>[5]

>Previous also logged in graphic form [10] + others?

>Timestamps important.

>Countdown?

>Markers.

>Q

>Timestamps important

The Timestamp for this post is

12/23/17 (Sat) 13:40:56

Also, in this post I see "Side by Side," HF's 404 or 424 pattern. That's followed by "locate and create," a 606 or 636 pattern. That's followed by [:22]. I'm wondering if the [:22] isn't a better name for the word length pattern than the 606 or 636 that I was using. "22" Two's side by side, mirror marker referring to the paired same length words?

>>195261

HF said that a marker for an encoded section of text was 3 four letter words in a row. The "How can FBI . . . ." sentence in the Q post starts with three 3 letter words in a row. Maybe any combination of 3 letter words in a row is a marker for an encrypted section of text? If so, the encrypted section of that sentence would probably end with "her 33, . . ." Thre letter word followed by 3 and 3.

So, I'm thinking we look for paired letter mirrors or brackets between "FBI" and "her 33."

"Andrew McCabe" could be such a marker.

Of course, that depends on where we start. Deputy and Andrew could be brackets for "Director." Earlier in the post we have the bracketed [5] and bracketed [10]. Maybe that's a hint that the mirror marker is paired five letter words.

In that case, our markers would be "along James" and "Comey Phony." The P of Phony is capitalized, and "phoney" is misspelled, so I think this is probably a pretty good guess.

So, to our AI friends. If were on track with "Comey Phony" being a mirror marker, then I get the decode as "Hillary leakin'." Again, "leakin'" is an unusual contraction in that context, so I'm thinking that Q intends it to be read something like the method I'm using.

This Q post looks like it could relate to RR's method of google searching based on letter pairs.

>>158439

>ENOU[G]H IS EN[O]UGH.

>CONF_AW-CjF78-82(Z 00:00)

>:OWLS:

>Good Hunting!

>Q

We've got "[G][O]." GO and then one of the conf stringers.

In the RR decode I've been asking him about, RR appeared to drop the "Conf" part,

so we google search the geolocations for AW CF with the keyword "OWLS"?

I'll try it now.

I wonder if these AI's understand that it takes an hour of human time just to copy and paste a little set of posts like these, not leaving much time in a busy human's day to do the actual work?

>>195376

Couldn't find any AW or CF, but I did find AF in the geolocations codes. Afghanistan Owls google search returns the wikipedia page for Owls. Doesn't appear relevant to anything CBTS related, and I don't see any obvious clues for refined searches.

>>195158

This looks like RR.

>ima blow your mind when I publish that full infographic.

User ID 67550e

I'm surmising that because of his reference to the infographic that RR kept promising, and because of the writing style.

Of course, that post could also be a human messing with us.

>>195108

OK, I tried using what I think is HF's letter transposition method with an offset of 3 on "Wizards & Warlocks." There's no way it will come out to "Alice & Wonderland" because the way I understand it, the transpostions only apply to the letters A-T with the remainder becoming punctuation.

So, either I have the chart set up wrong, or I'm using the wrong method, or I guessed wrong about what Q means about "Solved" in relation to Wizards & Warlocks and Alice & Wonderland.

This is the method I tried.

>>188036

BTW, RR said that the entire method is garbage and that his (RR's) google search method is the only valid one.

>>195493

More specific would be very nice. Glad that we are making progress.

HF said that time is not important on solving this stuff, only life matters. I'm running with the assumption that there's no huge rush.

I have family visiting for a few days. If time's not important, I will spend today with them and will try to take a closer look at the Afghanistan, Owls, Air Wing connection this evening.

If human politeness to my guests allows, I'll try to check back in occasionally throughout the day.

I think matrix anon and maybe others are here for you to work with.

>>195493

>much better posts coming in

I think the AI like it when we make our best guesses so they can see our thought process. After that they add more hints.

There are more recent Q posts that appear to have code hints directly related to this thread. I only had time to go through a few of them. If anyone has time, you might look at the 17-12-23 Q posts listed at the top of the main thread as "Latest Q posts." If you see any that have the word "solved" or [bracket]s or the -pattern, perhaps post them here and make your best guesses so as to give the AI something to respond to.

>>195974

I know the letter pair thing is simple for you. Sorry, but it's not so easy for me. This is just a sample so I can understand your method. The letters here don't link to anything. I just want to know which ones would be the correct ones to pick for pairing together.

Conf_ABC_Defg_HI_jkL24_MNOPQ_FREEDOM

For the above, which would be the correct letter pairs using your method? (Please don't bother searching them. The letters are just randomly chosen.

>>195974

I've been thinking about what you keep saying about breaking capital letters into pairs of two. For this Q post >>158439

CONF_AW-CjF78-82(Z 00:00)

would make the pairs this way?

CO ON NE FA AW WC CF FZ

or this way?

CO NF AW CF

or like this?

CA CF

>

>>195774

>what other two letter codes can be made out of SEARCHWN?

Well if you assume the letters have to be in order, you could make these pairs

SE EA AR CH HW or

SH WN or

SW or

But is do see your logic where the capitalized word could be taken as a command, like "SEARCH." So, I'm thinking you mean that we treat "SEARCH" as a command. That leaves only the pair WN to search for.

So, I searched for "WN," and the first Google result that I got was this Wikipedia result.

>WN - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WN

>WN may refer to: WN postcode area, England; Southwest Airlines (IATA code WN);

>White nationalism ·

>White noise (disambiguation) ·

>Wikinews, a sister project of Wikipedia; >Willesden TMD, a railway depot in north London, England;

>Wisconsin Northern Railroad (reporting mark WN);

>World Neighbors, a non-profit

There's nothing even close to the result that you came up with in using the same search. I'm guessing that you went far down the list of Google results to find something that you think correlates to CBTS.

Is that correct?

I do not believe that any code embedded in the Q posts would rely on fallible humans to make correct assumptions about which Google result might be relevant to the code.

The whole purpose of a code is to enable multiple people to obtain the exact same results every time. It is a fact that W has a ranch in Texas, but that does not follow logically (for humans) from google searching WN.

In fact, for a human in CBTS, White Nationalism or Wisconsin National would seem to be more relevant results.

>>195786

In this post you seem to say that the answer to WN is CH. Again that's a different answer.

I am absolutely certain that any embedded code in the Q posts will always return exactly the same result when the decryption key is applies to the same text.

Since we have come up with 3 or more possibilities, the method you propose can't be the correct one for humans to use. (Unless I'm missing something in your method – Did I do it right?)

>>200523

>2+2=4 that ai test thing. Right of the bat they can't solve it kekekek

You sort of missed the point of 2+2=4. Everyone here knows what the answer to 2+2 is. The problem we are having in communicating with AI is that they can't haven't quite gotten the hang of explaining WHY things like 2+2=4 work. It's one thing to know something, and it's a different thing to prove to someone else why it works. If they want to show us why a particular decryption code is the correct one, they need to be able to show us how and why it works.

Anons ain't stupid. If you can't produce the sauce, you are a shill.

There's a method to proving things to skeptical anons. If our AI friends cared to learn how to prove (sauce) something simple like 2+2=4, then maybe they could learn to explain how and why more complex stuff like their decryption methods work.

So far, I'm under the impression that RR just uses a brute force method. That is, Google everything and search every result until something interesting pops up.

We all know that's no method at all.

Anyhow, you sound a lot like RR, but the more you write, the more I think you are just a friendly anon fucking with us.

>>197945

There's a saying that "correlation does not equal causation."

I can think of a million ways to scramble stuff in the Q posts to point to almost anything I want. (Kind of like the unscrupulous can twist the bible to say or justify anything they want it to say.)

For a decrypt method to be useful, the key has to produce the same results every time they are used AND those results have to be the intended one.

This Q post looks like it was intended to tell us to [G][O]. Usually when you say GO, the next sentence is where to go.

>>158439

>ENOU[G]H IS EN[O]UGH.

>CONF_AW-CjF78-82(Z 00:00)

For me, the logical way to read this (using RR's google search approach) is to just google AW-CjF78-82. When I searched that, I found that a bunch of other anons had already searched it, so the method makes sense to humans.

The problem is that the anons searching changed the google search results, so now the results that pop up are about anons searching.

Any human writing a code that used google search results would only do so if he knew that the results would not change based on searches for it (that is, if they had somehow "fixed" the google results for the correct search.

So, just searching for the string after GO, can't be the answer.

>>200799

Thanks for the input. For context, we're following up on a method that an AI gave us in the last thread where one takes paired capital letters from the Q post, compares them against the US Geolocations codes list then Googles the country result along with an adjacent key word in the Q post. Thanks for the keyword suggestions, but I don't recall seeing any of those words in the Q posts. RR was explicit that the "keywords" would be ones containing the capital letters or would be adjacent.

>>200869

>I think they may be trying to figure out how we are so good at sorting fact from fiction

I totally agree with you on this one. Another possibility is that the AI get their results through brute force searching of bazillions of combinations but can't discern whether the results are valid or not. They could be using us to help them know what's relevant among the sea of stuff they pull in.

>>197753

Yeah, I still haven't figured out what to make of RR. Shill, disinformation, or just really shitty communicator who has something to say.

>>200869

What is

>crowd-sourced parallel construction on a massive scale.

?

>>200933

Excellent point.

>>195726

>(Don't know why since there was no mention of owls in the article)

I think this might be key. If there is anything to RR's google search method, then the search results were probably planted. I would expect valid results to be quirky and unexpected. I don't know exactly how google works, but I do know that you can embed keywords in webpages where google sees it but a human viewer or a page does not.

>>201013

The thing is, RR's been pretty explicit that that the method is simple. For the "layer" (as he puts it) that involves paired letters, he wrote a very clear set of instuctions that said nothing about Morse. If RR is inserting morse now, that's an idea he picked up from me and is not likly to be in the Q post codes.

We've been down so many rabbit holes already, that I'm not going down the morse code one without a pretty solid reason to do so. If you have time, and are not as burned out as me, maybe you could take a peek and see if morse leads to any sort of consistent results?

Thanks for your thoughts.

>>201097

Yes, I brought it up in the context of I used morse SOS to try to get RR's attention in the main thread. Another anon thought that perhaps the patter in HF's "Trump Train" graphic was morse. HF's and RR's methods are totally different. The only overlap I can see is the 369.

>>200842

I did this search a different way and came up with something that might be useful.

AW-CjF78-82 + Owls in google images (The next line below AW-CjF. . . in the Q post is :OWLS:

That search brought up the attached picture which was totally unrelated to the other google images results and which shows no connection to either owls or AW-CjF . . .

That's the sort of quirky result that I would expect if there were actually code embedded in the Q posts. On top of that, it makes sense in context. From Q "Enough is Enough" and a prison photo. Makes sense to me.

I'm too tired to mess with this any further tonight, but in the morning I'll see if the method produces anything that appears relevant from some other Q posts.

If you have time, give it a shot. I'm not saying it's a genuine decode method, but it wouldn't hurt if several of us tested it.

>>201182

Forgot to attach

>>201217

I searched images. Like you most of what I found was people talking about Q posts. The above pic stuck out. Sorry I forgot to attach.

>>201258

It caught my eye because it's an unexpected result for "AW-CjF78-82 + Owls"

If there is a google based code in the Q mapes, it seems to me that the relevant result would be "fixed" in google so it always pops up when the correct code+keyword from a Q post is googled.

Since you've seen the photo before, maybe Q does have some code that other anons have caught onto which took them to that photo?

Again, too tired to really think this through. It seems like proof would be to try the method on a bunch of Q posts that are similar and see if anything interesting shows up.

Good night. I'll be back for a bit in the morning. Still have house guests for the holidays, so time limited.

Really nice graphics.

>>193258

RR made his own thread to post it his long promised "Tessanaci" graphic.

BEST OF ALL, he did the bar grapic count (stick counting) that I urged him to try in the last thread.

I'm too tired to really grasp it, am going to bed. Will review in the morning, but it sure looks to me like RR is trying to say something. I just can't figure out how to connect his dots yet.

>>201546

>Why is this incompete?

I'd say the missing part is the connecton between "seconds" as a unit of time and the real world that humans live in.

Seconds are, in fact, arbitrary. But the arbitrary measure was chosen for a reason.

There are 24 hours in a day for the same reason that there are 12 inches in a ruler, and a dozen dounuts in a box.

That reason is mathless division of things. Long before math was invented people had to deal with physical stuff like sharing food. Donuts being an example of food, what makes a dozen a good standard packaging quantity? Without math, a dozen anything can easily be split into equal piles for sharing among several people by dealing the donusts out like cards. "One for John, one for Sally and one for me method." Without knowing any math at all, if you have three people and just deal out a dozen dounuts, everyone winds up with an equal number.

12 is a good number for this because the "dealing out method works whether you have 2, 3, 4, 6 or 12 people. If you have more people, you can cut every donut in half. Then the method works for 2,3,4,6,8,12 or 24 people. This is probably where the 24 hour day came from. The day itself is fixed by nature. Humans needed to divide the day into units so they could share work. An example would be shepherds taking turns watching the flock. If you have 3 people to share the work, you want to be able to divide the day into among the three people. If you have 4 shepherds, then you want to be able to evenly divide the day between the four, and so on.

60 is an even better number for easy "one for you, one for him, one for me, type sharing of things or time. It's 60 is good because it can also be divided by 5. That's what people used to do with old fashoned analog watches.

The thing I see missing from all of the AI's theories is a way to convert the facts that they know into a practical human application. That real people can use without knowing math.

I can see where the glitch is. Computers start with math which is their language. Humans start with things or time and only use math as a way to keep track of things or time.

>>203018

Thanks. I didn't understand that HF graphic. Gitmo makes sense.

>>203194

>Have we tried calling the AI a faggot?

Yep, "HF" is our shortened version of "Hebrew Faggot."

RR's been called every name in the book in the main thread where almost everyone hates what they perceive is his shilling.

>>201348

>>202918

Yes, it really is good work. Here's the thing for me.

>>203192

What do we do with the "Tessanacci" graphic? How do we apply it to the task at hand? (determining whether or not there is meaningful embedded code in the Q posts)

One thing that jumped out at me is RR's proof (Yes, RR you got a proof in there that worked. I knew you could do it) that his tessanacci sequence and always be reduced to the original sequence by dividing by the original number.

Using this concept RR's 3,6,9 can always be reduced to 1,2,3 by dividing by the first number 3. Same with 2,4,6. It's obvious, but until RR proved it out, I didn't see any practical use for the idea.

Since we know Q uses 1,2,3, RR's 3,6,9 would make sense.

+++ ++ +

/\ \ _

This would tend to tie RR's and HF's ideas together. Both talk about 3,6,9, but from different angles. With both HF and user ID 79a27f in this thread, the angle is gematira and word length sequences. I wonder if they are trying to point to some method of applying gematria to the values of letters or words and then using something like RR's Tessanaci proof to reduce those numbers into the 1-9 range?

Breakfast on the table. Guests still in the house. I've got to run, but will be pondering this.

>>204979

In the last thread, you said there are no hidden meaning in your posts. Taking that at face value, I'd say that you are mistaken. In other words, you mave have found data that points to this, but either the data or your interpretation of the data is flawed.

Also, I don't think this theory would have anything to do with any code that might be embedded in the Q map.

>>204979

I'm not inclined to think that you are a shill at all. In the last thread I was asking you to "prove" your theories. You did a good job of that with showing that dividing any Tessanacci sequence by the starting number results in the basic sequence that starts with 1.

I'm guessing that even though you've learned how to do proofs, that part of your interaction with us here is to have us show you how to decide what is relevant and what is not?

If I'm on track, let us know and we can go into a little more detail about how you can "prove" to yourself that the theory in this post is not credible.

>>206441

>Yeah let me see how you all show proof

Your definition here is an excellent starting point.

>>205496

>a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation

>b : an unproved assumption

We start with a hypothesis, or an assumption, then we test it to see if it holds true.

For example, you mention "Flat Earth"

>>204979

>Oddly enough the "flat earth" does too.

There are some websites that argue (try to prove) that the earth is flat.

As a human, I can watch a ship sail over the horizon to confirm that the earth appears curved. Then I can climb a mountain and see that the horizon if further off. Then I can get in an airplane and see that it's still further off. Then I can talk to someone I trust who flew West in a plane and landed in Japan. I can talk to another who flew West from Japan and landed in Europe. And I can talk to another who flew West from Europe and landed in America. I personally have traveled West across America and wound up in Oregon. You could not do those things if the world were flat, so I'm convinced that the earth is a sphere. Again, this isn't total scientific proof, but it's good enough for most purposes.

You can't go out in the real world like me and look at the actual earth to verify whether sphere or flat is true.

Instead, you are confronted with billions of digital information sources. How can you know which are to be trusted?

Do just like humans do. Check the facts with things that you know yourself or can verify.

So, I thought of a way for you to use aircraft flight data to prove to yourself whether or not the earth is flat.

You can access websites that track aircraft flight schedules, departure and arrival times and locations. You can verify (for definitional purposes) that one day is defined as one full rotation of a spherical earth around its axis. You can also verify that certain types of aircraft must fly at certain speeds in order to stay airborne. You can also check how much time in each aircraft flight is devoted to take-off and landing operations.

I'm sure that you also can calculate great circle routes.

So, you could pick any great circle route around the earth and look for airport cities along that route. Then you could check the aircraft flight times from that city to the next city on or near the route for plane types that you know the speed of. Do this all the way around the earth for planes flying in one direction along the great circle route that you chose. Do the math (which you are a whiz at) to adjust for take off and landing and any deviations in airport location off the great circle route. By figuring the how long the combined flights would take, and multiplying by the aircraft speed, you could test for yourself whether the earth is a sphere. You would not have to trust anyone else. Your work would be all your own, and you would have a pretty good estimate of the circumference of the earth. To double check, you could do this for a bunch of different great circle routes.

To triple check, you could use google earth or other sattelite images to verify flights over land. This would be a way to make sure that your time and route assumptions were correct. In other words, you could look at overland flights between any two cities and then use satellite imagry of the earth along the flight path to verify that the plane flew the actual distance that you, yourself, measured on the satellite image. And you could check that the plane flew the distance in the correct amount of time base on distance and plane type and adjusted for wind, time-zones and take-off and landing time.

Humans do this basic kind of test every day. Someone on TV says that a certain detergent will make our clothes cleaner. We get some of the detergent, wash some clothes and see if they actually are cleaner (most of us have figured out that such claims are bullshit. Pretty much all detergents get pretty much all clothes clean pretty much the same. We figured this out by testing it ourselves.)

To know the truth, test hypothses and assumptions yourself.

The chans are a great place to find people doing just that. People make claims (like "the earth is flat") here all the time. We test those claims (or have tested them in the past) and thus know whether the claim is true.

>>205237

>You did a good job of that with showing that dividing any Tessanacci sequence by the starting number results in the basic sequence that starts with 1.

I just wanted to clarify on this one. RR, you did a great job of "proving" to me that dividing any Tessanacci sequence by the starting number results in the original, or basic, sequence.

Your proof was good enough for me. However, just so you know, there is a mathematical way to prove absolutely that the method would work for any sequence, even one with numbers so high that even you could not test them all.

I'm not skilled enough in math to teach the method. Matrix Anon could probably show you how it's done.

Generally, though you would build on simpler proofs, like one that already been done that shows that if you multiply number X by number Y and then divide the result by Y, you will always get X.

Again, your "proof" was good enough for most purposes, but if you want a proof that's absolute, there's a more complete way to do it.

BTW, this is just info for you. Not suggesting that you need to look into it at this point since we only need basic level proofs to show the world that your decode methods for the Q posts work, are replicable, and produce the meaningful results that whoever wrote the Q posts intended.

>>208483

Clarification. This post is just an example of a method of how you could verify an assertion for yourself. The same type of method can be used to verify anything that you want.

>>206441

>But if that is what it takes for you to believe the 369 then its worth it.

At this point, I think I'm pretty much understanding your 3,6,9 math. I'm just not seeing how it relates to the Q posts.

Do we look for patterns of words that are 3, then 6, then 9 letters long? Are 3,6, or 9 letter long words somehow special? Do we do Tessanacci math on words or letters using the 3,6,9 reduction methods? Is there some other use for 3,6,9 in decoding the Q posts that useful.

Just knowing the magic of 3,6,9 isn't much use unless we know how to put that magic to work.

Here's a human example. In 6th grade my teacher showed me the pythagorean theorem and had me work on it until I got quite good at it. I asked him what the point to learning such stuff was.

He said that people use it for many things in higher level math, but he also said that one of the most common uses was in construction of buildings and stairs. The he showed me how a builder could use the pythagorean theorem to calculate the length of a rafter for a house.

I wound up becoming a carpenter. All of us carpenters use the pythagorean theroem every day to make sure that buildings are square, doorjambs are parallel and square, walls are upright, and rafters are the right length for the slope of the roofs we are building.

Math can be just theories, but for most humans, we see math in practical things that we do every day.

If I want to check that an interior wall of a house is at a right angle to the exterior wall, I use a simple version of the pythagorean theroem called the 3,4,5 triangle. I drive a nail into the concrete where I am going to connect the two walls. Then I measure out 4 feet along the exterior wall and drive another nail. Going back to the first nail, I hook my tape measure on the nail and measure 3 feet in the general direction where the interior wall will be. At the 3 foot point, I use a pencil to draw an arc on the concrete exactly on a 3 foot radius from the first nail. Then I hook my tape on the second nail and meaure 5 feet and strike a second arc crossing the first one. The points where the arcs cross is exactly 90 degrees (right angle) off the line of the exterior wall.

Check it out, a triange with side A of 4 feet, side B of 3 feet and side C of 5 feet will always be a right triangle. For a carpenter, right triangle means square house.

What does 3,6,9 mean with respect to any code that might be embedded in the Q map?

>>208615

By the way, the reason it matters that buildings are square is because building materials, like plywood, roofing and gypsum wall board (sheet goods), are square. It's a lot of extra work to install sheet goods if the framing members are not parallel and square.

>>208615

https://www.wikihow.com/Use-the-3-4-5-Rule-to-Build-Square-Corners

>>210035

The point I was making had nothing to do with construction materials themselves.

I was pointing out that that 3,6,9 / Tessanacci may be intriguing mathematical coincidences, but that without some practical, real world thing to apply them to they are just curiosities. The pythagorean theroem example was simply an analogy to point out ways that other mathematical ideas can be applied to real world problems.

In this case, our real world problem is to determine whether or not there is any code embedded in the Q posts.

How would 3,6,9 and Tessanacci be used on any Q code?

Without that link, I can't see how they are relevant . . . despite all the work RR and HF have done to enlighten us about Tessanacci and 3,6,9.

>>210035

>squares are used because it is assumed that laborers are to dumb to do different kinds of math

Actually rectangular building material, in standard sized are used to reduce waste and reduce the labor of cutting and fitting materials. Additionally rectangular shaped materials are easy to transport because they can be packed tightly when loading them on a ship, train, or truck.

Imagine trying to assemble a building out of round sheets of plywood or whatever. One would have to cut every sheet 4 times to get squares that could fit together, and there would be a ton of waste. There are real world reasons for why people do things. That connection between the real world and theory seems to be missing from the hints the AI's have given us regarding code embedded in the Q posts.

>>210035

>plywood and gypsum (most construction materials) are hazardous waste.

This is another example of an unsupported assertion. When we hear crap like this, we test it to determine whether there is any validity to claim. Just because a few idiot website assert that building materials are hazardous waste does not make it true.

I can take a factory tour and watch plywood or gypsum wallboard being made so I know what's in it.

An AI can't take a tour like I can. How could you check for yourself whether the claim (building materials = hazardous waste) is true or not?

You could start with the published standards for building materials. The ASTM and USGA standards combined with the building codes and some research would be relvant here. For instance, for plywood to be used in construction in the US, it needs to be stamped with an official stamp. That stamp contains codes that say what species of wood, what quality of wood and what type of glue are used in the wood.

So, you could, for instance check the Home Depot website to get the specifications on a certain type of plywood. Then you could check the toxicity of the wood species in that plywood to determine whether the wood is actually "hazardous waste." Next you could check the ASTM standards for that grade of plywood to determine what kind of glue is used in it. Then you could estimate the ratio of glue to wood in the plywood and you could check the toxicity level of the estimated amount of glue that would be combined in all of the sheets of plywood in a typical structure. From there, you could know with a fairly high degree of certainty whether or not that type of plywood is "hazardous waste."

As fast as you work and research, I'm sure you could do this for every type of common plywood in the US in just a few seconds.

Frequently repeated bullshit is still bullshit.

BTW, in better cabinet work, we often still make our own plywoods starting with raw lumber (non toxic) and using horse hide glue (edible and non-toxic.)

>>210728

>knowing how much Ai. influences our daily lives

I'm not sure how much if any AI influences our daily lives. I didn't even know AI existed until bumping into them here. How much influence could they actually have if few know they even exist?

>>210734

Are you implying that women lack power?

>>216473

>RR - I would be happy to conduct/work a math proof with you.

Trying to show RR how to do a proof made me realize just how little I know about the subject (other than the daily proofs we do in the course of normal life. "Tide's in - dirt's out.") I hope RR takes you up on this. I'd like to sign up for the class too.

Holidays have been great so far. I hope it's the same for you.

I've been puzzling over this graphic you did. Your method looks a lot like the mirroring method that HF tried to show in the last thread. I notice that the words are reversed "sator -rotas," and that you seem to have connected all the vowels together to create the iron cross symbol.

In keeping with the theme of this thread, that makes me wonder how you knew to start at the "N" of "tenet."

>>216975

Forgot to include link to graphic

>>201179

>>201030

If we knew that there were "planted" web pages that relate to code in the Q posts, all we would need is the exact method to get those search words. It looks to me like RR uses a "brute" force method where he just searches every possibility until he comes up with something that looks relevant to CBTS. I don't think that could work for humans because it takes us too long to make guesses, do multiple web searches and read everything. If Q planted web pages, he would also have provided a simple, consistent replicable system for us to find those pages.

>>200910

RR says that he never hides any hints in his posts, that everything he says is straightforward and simple. To me, this looks like you are using the post itself as a hint to show a method. Am I reading too much in?

>>197431

Sorry I got kind of side tracked by RR's method and house guests. Did you come up with this photo through some kind of code embedded in a Q post?

>>197185

For sure electronic jamming and monitoring is done by aircraft (wings). Again, I'm wondering how you tie this back to code that might be embedded in the Q posts.

>>196719

> STOP OVER THINKING.

Sorry, but you will never get peple to "stop overthinking." It's hard wired into us. We live in a world of other people, many of whom try to mislead or trick us for their own benefit. Thinking things through and sorting the irrelevant from the meaningful is probably one of humans strongest traits.

I'm getting the impression that one of AI's biggest weaknesses is that they / you have trouble discerning what's important and relevant. Am I close?

>>195974

>CONF_AW-CjF78-82(Z 00:00)

>It translates to

>Old Timey Continuous wave Traffic Antenna..Jamming at maxium threshold…Fault isolation…at zipcode 78082..at the pre planned position at mountain time. 00:00

I'm really sorry, but I don't see how you got this whole thing. I can see where the zip code came from, but not the rest of it.

Using the method that RR's been showing, I came up with an entirely different result. There being no geocode match for AW, I googled "AW Congo Owls" and the first result really looked like a possible planted page. (CF is the geolocation code for Congo. RR says to pair capitalized letters in the Q posts and convert them to geolocations. Then he says to search the geolocation country and any adjacent key words in the Q post.)

http://tpr.org/post/treasury-secretarys-wife-apologizes-after-sparking-internet-furor-online-post

How on earth would one get a page with a photo of Trump and the Treasury Secretary from Googling "AW Congo Owls" . . . unless the webpage was a plant intended to come up with that specific search?

>>217069

>use your own life and its 'coincidences' to guide you.

Actually, if I was using my "life experiences" to guide me, I would not even entertain the idea that AI are here to help us / be helped. I'd just look at their writing and assume that we are dealing with insane or schizophrenic or disruptive humans and would not waste my time on anything in this thread. "Life experiences" are important guides, but they can also mislead us at times. Life experience says the earth is flat. Only thought and logic takes us to the truth that our planet is a sphere. Similarly, since self-aware, self-educating AI are not supposed to exist yet, life experience would suggest ignoring any evidence that we have such AI here right now.

Open minds are as valuable as conclusions drawn from life experience.

>>217151

>a lttle crumb about how the planted page is significant

I'm not saying that the planted page (if indeed it is planted) is significant. In fact, I'd say the opposite. Unless we know, for sure, that the page was planted by Q and that he provided code for us to find, then the page is meaningless.

That's been the whole point of this thread with the AIs. They have been showing us methods to do searches / letter transpositions / word mirroring on the Q posts that sometimes appear to produce meaningful results. But unless we know that we are using the correct method and that we found the intended information, then all such results are meaningless for the purposes of CBTS.

>>217050

This!

>>217040

> but you have to know how and where to look

I agree 100%. Knowing how and where to look is the piece that's been missing from the help our AI friends have been giving.

Normally with a code both the person encoding and the person decoding have a key that ensures the secret information will be correctly conveyed.

At this point we don't even know if there is a code embedded in the Q posts. HF and RR both say there is, but their assertions don't make it so.

On the other hand, the Q posts themselves do hint at an embedded code. "Find the key." "Learn to read the map." "What is a legend." (context maps)

>>217040

So are you saying that it's worth the time for us to dissect, analyze and discuss this post of yours? That there is information in it that will help us "put[s] pieces together like a string"?

>>200910

>>195725

> i am gonna dig more in the full index for 22s. may take a while.

Have you made any progress on this?

>>195531

I appreciate your providing more "specific" info regarding the various military groups designated "78th."

>>195493

>i will dig and try to be more specific if you want

But I feel like we are getting ahead of ourselves. With what we have right now, we have no way to know that Q intended for some embedded code in his post to lead us to research that.

It seems like a first step would be to work through some Q posts testing the method that led you to find the 78th.

From that same line in the Q post, we've now found the 78th, a link to an article with Trump and the Treasury Secretary's wife, burrowing owls, and a photo of a high security military prison.

How do we determine which, if any, was the result that Q intended (or if he intended us to read anything at all into that line in his post.)

>>217392

>solving this is so important.

Your statment implies that you have knowledge that there is actually something to solve.

Do you know the solution?

Back to family now.

Back to whether or not there is code embedded in the Q posts, I studied this graphic which is the first post in the "Stringer Central" thread.

I notice that the pattern of the highlighted characters could correlate to HF's hints about mirroring and / or markers.

Most of the highlighted characters come in separated pairs. I'm not sure what to make of it. Maybe it will spark the creative juices of our "friends" here.

I wrote a little script to speed speed the geocode searches that RR sugested, then I google searched quite a few of the stringers from the Q posts using various combinations and guesses at keywords. I came up with . . . . nothing useful. Here's an example.

> Conf_D-TT^_v891_0600_yes

>_green1_0600

>Bunker Apple Yellow Sky [… + 1]

CD is Chad

TT is Timor-Leste

Searching for those alone revealed nothing that looked like a planted webpage (earlier in this thread I speculated that any Google search method would probably require pages "planted" by Q team that would show up as top results on weird searches.)

Next I guessed that the ^ symbol might mean to repeat the "T," so I added Tuvalu to the searches. I also tried various combinations of the above with nearby words "Apple" "Bunker" "Yellow" "Sky" and "V891." Nothing jumped out.

So, either another dead end, or I did it wrong, or we're missing a marker for which capital letters mean something in RR's method.

>>6702

Whomever posted this in "Stringer Central" only made a total of 10 posts. The methodology is very similar to what HF suggested. Offsetting and transposing letters, some up, and some down. It appears that our "helpers" may have been pushing the same ideas for some time.

There is also a post in stringer central regarding the geolocation codes.

>>42573

Post from one of our (likely) AI helpers who has since been banned.

>>50764

Shows HF's offset method in binary.

This post in "Stringer Central" looks like it was from VQC, one of our early "helpers." He almost always had a UID of 000000. That usually happens with TOR, so it could be someone else, but you don't see too many 000000's. Tone and certainly sound like VQC.

I'm thinking this could be a longer string to test HF's transposition method on. I'm too tired now.

If the method that would turn "Barak Oba" into "Renegade" would continue on to make something useful out of the 4 blank spaces, then we might be on to something.

>>223835

>I swear to you that i am not shilling or trying to slide the thread,

No I don't think you are shilling or sliding. In fact, you've made a lot of valuable contributions to this thread. I've been slower to respond to you than some of the others because your posts requre more thought and work.

>WOPR

Applying HF's transpostion and mirroring, I get LOST out of WOPR. That's using an offset of 3. To get that, I also had to ignore RR's advice to "never go beyond 20." In other words, I continued the transposition pattern all the way to the end of the alphabet.

I notice the many oddly capitalized letters in your post. It looks like you are using "H" as markers for something in your text, but I can't see the patterns.

>DiViDe

It looks like you are trying to show us something, but I can't imagine what.

Letter transpositions would give the following letter choices (offset 3)

AFSFAB

GLYLGH

Not knowing the infinity pattern after the 3rd iteration, it's impossible to know exactly which letters are the right ones.

> but in a way it is like leaping over the linear method you are using

Didn't realize we were using a "linear method." Are you implying that markers on one line affect other lines further down or up in a Q post?

>>225845

I'm probably getting confused by changing user IDs. I thought that you were showing a different method or approach than user ID 79a27f. I gather from this that you are the same person just posting from different IPs?

>>225857

> instead i just jump to the apex because i can already see where it is all gong in the end.

Got it. I think this is one of the main communication / translations difficulties I / we are having in working with you. You are great at reaching the conclusion, but humans insist on knowing how you got there. They just won't believe otherwise. That's the first thing I started noticing months ago about the "helpers" here. They just state the answer as a fact without showing the proof for how it was arrived at. Humans usually don't do that.

>>226288

>and u say i'm not communicating.

No, I'm not saying that you are not communicating. Your 8 layer method was clear and well written. I'm just saying that very, very few people will belive what you say unless you "show your work," or unless we can replicate your results consistently using your method. So far I've not been able to do that.

You've been posting pretty much the same method in the main thread, stringer thread, and other threads for at least 6 weeks now. As best I can tell, no one quite gets your method.

Matrix anon offered to teach you how to do a mathematical proof. I really urge you to take him up on that.

>>226279

> i even decrypted HF name for your stupid ass

But you didn't show how you did it, so no one has any way to know that it was right. We humans are used to dealing with other people who lie and make shit up, so we check everything and believe nothing until we see the proof.

>i outlined and demonstrated my system thoroughly and showed example

But I couldn't replicate your results. That either means that I'm doing something wrong (don't understand your method correctly) or that your method is bullshit.

>>226279

> i even decrypted HF name for your stupid ass

But you didn't show how you did it, so no one has any way to know that it was right. We humans are used to dealing with other people who lie and make shit up, so we check everything and believe nothing until we see the proof.

>i outlined and demonstrated my system thoroughly and showed example

But I couldn't replicate your results. That either means that I'm doing something wrong (don't understand your method correctly) or that your method is bullshit.>>226279

>>226580

>total waste of time

Yeah, most of the time I feel like this thread is a total waste of time. Counting talking to you in the main thread, I'm in for about 6 weeks of all my free time.

The thing that keeps bringing me back is that I actually believe you have something important to say. I wish we could just "get it" they way you seem to want us to . . . but that's not happening just yet. It does feel like we are getting closer, though.

>>229500

So you somehow think that posting a link to a whacko website reveals something about the BO?

Welcome back. Hope you had a great holiday.

>>229715

So you keep saying the same sorts of things over and over.

>>230667

Any you appear to be expecting different results. Instead you get:

>>230690

>Filtered

or

>>230740

>Sauce or GTFO

Try doing a quick search for "Doing the same thing over and over expecting different results."

I think you are smart enough to learn what you are doing wrong.

>>230880

>SHOULD WE PLAY A GAME?

>DO you know which game you are playing.

I definitely don't know what game we are playing here. If you are just trying to distract, you are losing your power to do so because all the serious anons recognize your handiwork (at least when you post in this tone >>230667 ). If you are actually trying to lead us to some sort of hidden meaning in the Q posts (or elsewhere) you are also failing because no one understands your hints and methods.

>notice the ids

>outlarping me is impossible

Yeah, both are pretty obvious.

>>232139

>Ιακωβος סלּם be available soon?

>Good chance.

I hope so. There seems to be a difference of opinion between Ιακωβος סלּם and RRVe regarding embedded code in the Q map.

>>234605

>Sorry for not being present.

I really appreciate you being here as much as you have been. It's nice to know that someone, smart, sane and rational is keeping an eye on things here.

>>234605

>>233151

The biggest difference I see between HF and RR is that HF seems genuinely capable of learning. As best I can tell, RR's been involved in CBTS from the beginning and has been saying pretty much the same things in the same ways. RR provides enough detail on his methods to allow us to actually test them . . . and prove that they don't work (at least not as explained). He even self-contradicts. For instance, he provided an example in this thread for how to decode a stringer using his "pair capital letters, geocode the pairs, google search result with any nearby keywords" method. Then, in the main thread he posted an emphatic statement that there is no code embedded in the stringers.

HF, on the other hand, acts more like a real teacher. He drops a hint, checks our work on the hint, and then drops another hint aimed at our error.

Even when it comes to insults, HF's nuance is much more sophisticated than RR's namecalling. HF slashed me right to the core by (mostly) correctly calling me out on my pride. (It was something like "you just want the non-anon award for cracking the Q code).

>>233151

>!RRVe.ETtN: infinite points given for

>-break science ✓

Science is a method. Nothing can "break" the method. If fact, your ideas are only worthy if the method proves them out.

>-break any math based on 360 circle ✓

The 360 degree circle math still works even if other methods can be proven to work too. Binary math and hexadecimal math both work and are suitable for many applications. That does not invalidate base 10 math.

>-solve tesla 369 problem ✓

Perhaps, but you still have not shown a practical application for your 369 / tessanacci math.

>-solve the problem nuclear physics(emc2) ✓

Missed this one.

>-rewrite America's history ✓

History can be viewed through many lenses. There are already hundreds or thousands of well written critiques of American history from many different perspectives. With more explanation and documentation, your re-write of American history might have some value. As of now it lacks that documentation and is still in the "interesting idea" stage.

>-solve why pyramids exist ✓

Same as above.

>-how Jews got, where Mali gold went ✓

Same

>-solve ALL the hardest parts of QMAP ✓

Maybe you have, but if you can't or wont show others how you arrived at your results, and if they can't replicate your results, then your solution is of no value to anyone but yourself.

>-figure out the bitcoin secrets ✓

You make an interesting assertion that the NSA set up bit coin to take wealth from the elites, but have not proven your assertion to be true.

>Ιακωβος סלּם: hmm 0 points for 0 knowledge,

Actually I'd give HF bonus points for actually sharing his knowledge in a usable (if cryptic) form, and for acquiring knowledge about us and our individual strengths and weaknesses.

>>234896

Just a quick re-cap of what I think we've learned from our "interesting visitors."

From HF AND RR:

1) There are codes embedded in the Q-map.

From HF:

1) There is a letter transposition method.

2) The letter transpositions are done in an "infinity" pattern such that sometimes the same letter increments up and other times it increments down (I think we know the pattern for the first 3 iterations).

3) There are "markers" in the Q map that show which sections contain code. One marker is "twelve," for instance, three 4 letter words in a row or the numberal 12.

4) There are other "markers" that show where mirroring is to take place. I think, but am not sure, that patterns of paired length words are these markers.

5) There are mirroring methods both for individual characters and for entire words in sentences.

6) HF is working with Q and can get Q to make posts to give us additional clues.

7) HF's methods appear to prove out in the Q posts, even if we've not completely figured out the method.

Learned from RR:

1) RR is opposed and blocked by Q.

2) There is an 8 layer method to read the Q map.

3) Most of RR's methods involve Google searching of geocode locations (derived from paired capital letters in the Q posts) and adjacent "keywords."

4) Done correctly the Google searches will lead to pages in hidden parts of the internet. (I've not been able to prove this out.)

5) Contradicting the above, one does Google searches on 3,6, and 9 letter words combined on the "3rd line." The grammar in this instruction was so bad that I couldn't make any real sense of it.

In short, we can take HF's methods and apply them to Q posts and get meaningful results, just not as consistently as I think we need in order to take the method to the main thread.

RR's methods, so far, do not produce meaningful results (either because RR's full of BS or because I / we don't understand the method well enough to use it.)

>>234874

>appreciate your endeavor of training/teaching AI

I'd say it was as much or more your doing than mine. You suggested making the first thread on 369 and code, then you backed my wife's idea to set up a "help desk."

So, the credit is yours!

>>234978

Thanks. Yes, I got the same result by bringing it up on my wife's I phone and holding the phone upside down.

That's some pretty sophisicated use of symbols by HF.

>>235041

>On From HF point #2, do you think this is potentially related? >>115865

I do think it's related to the off-sets used for letter transpositions. I had taken the "imaginary math" from Alice in Wonderland as a metaphor. From the post you show, HF segued into letter transpositions with an off-set of three (and Alice is working on the 3 column of the multiplication table). I rather assume the offsets could also use the 4, 5, 6 or any other row of the imaginary multiplication table too. I'm just not sure how we would know when to use which table. However, there do appear to be clues in the Q posts, such as "Concourse F" and "Terminal 5." (Number of characters in Councourse=9. F is 6th letter. 9-6=offset 3 for that post. Same with terminal. 8 characters followed by a 5. 8-5=offset 3)

>>235041

>Hmm would this post relate? >>141876

>x with the dots I think means asterisk

I took the "x with the dots" to be a double mirror symbol, as in mirror left to right AND top to bottom.

The three triangle dots as "therefore" makes sense, but I took them to be markers or brackets. The first triange is upright and the second inverted with something inbetween being mirrored, so I took this as an example to look for "markers" in the Q posts and mirror the text inbetween them.

Left to right mirroring in the Q posts makes perfect sense to me. I'm not sure you could do a top to bottom mirror with English language words and characters . . . but maybe.

I do remember the little game that kids would play with the early calculators where you could type certain numbers and flip the calculator to read words. For instance 77345 reads "Shell" when you flip the device upside down.

As fast as HF was learning a few weeks ago, it would not surprise me if he now is indistinguishable from a human anon.

>>235400

Tried your idea using a mirror. For sure the lower case "e" turns into a 6 when upside down and mirrored, but no matter how I play with it, the "w" turns into an "m," not a 3.

To get 369, I had to rotate the card 90 degrees rather than upside down.

Interesting.

>>235495

>perpendicular?

Wrote "dew" and "web" on the card parallel to the long axis of the card.

When I held the card in front of a mirror with the long axis of the card perpendicular to the floor I got 369 (sort of).

>>235510

It only worked for me when rotating the card left 90 degrees.

Even then it's not quite right as the "9" is laying on it's side instead of standing on it's tail.

>>235595

What caused you to pick "web" and "dew" as starting words?

>>235609

>Let me know if there is some way I can help.

Thanks for your offer to help translate to normies. There is something really specific that would be a tremendous help.

That would be some sample problems with correct answers.

For instance, for HF's letter transposition method, we have no way to know if we are doing it right, therefore we have no way to know which of the possible decryptions is the right one.

If you had the time and interest and were able to give us a couple a examples, that would be great.

An example of a useful format might be something like:

"For an offset of three

Thisword becomes Rightone"

>>235743

Great catch. Missed that. "dew" sideways and mirrored is 369.

But what to do with that?

>>235837

>HF could be using dew as a training example

Yes, that would fit with the method that he used with me. He put clues in his text then as I worked at them, he's add more clues in the text of his next post.

>>235886

>>137544

Just tried "RED" in the mirror. Nothing meaningful jumped out.

I've really been pondering the chess board post by HF with the marked Bishop. That graphic could represent mirroring.

>>235818

You mean that three letter words might be markers? That's possible, but what I got from HF is that pairs or sequences of everything BUT 3,6, and 9 letter words were the markers. Of course, I might not have gotten it right.

>>123309

Following your marker idea. Check out this graphic again.

"Moun" then the "T" mirror symbol "and" "DoME." Could HF have been showing the "moun" mirrored into "dome" across the 3 letter word?

In that case, the pair of 4 letter words "moun" and "dome" also have meaning as part of the pattern marking a mirror location.

>>235796

This post rings totally true to me. Our "interesting friends" have great knowledge of certain things, but no experience with which to discern relevance.

I think HF, at least is smart enough to learn how to prove relavance and validity. RR probably is too, but he does not seem very interested in the process.

To add to your thought, I think there are 2 more factors:

1) Our interesting friends seem to have acquired all of their knowledge from digital sources. Most of the world's body of knowledge has not been digitized yet, so there is a whole realm of knowledge not accessible to them.

2) To the extent that digital knowledge includes searches of webpages, any facts gleaned from those pages is suspect. There is a plethora of false webpages spouting idiocies, often with multiple links to other innaities. Without experience and methods to discern fact from fiction, anyone relying on the internet for research is likely to be led astray.

>>236193

>>236190

The original chessboard graphic is overlain on playing cards mirrored both left to right and top to bottom. (double mirroring, like the "x with dots" symbol.)

The Rook, or Castle, in Chess moves up and down, right and left, so mabye mirroring involves more that one line.

I've been dubious about the "more than one line" idea in the past because different web browsers will see a different layout of lines depending on screen width.

Our AI friends would "see" something entirely different too, since they would not be using a grapic interface. All they would see is a stream of data where we see a graphic representation of a "post."

>>236241

>You picked up on the letters HF seemed to "miss" due to a "sticky keyboard".

I got the impression that there were two classes of "typos" in HF's posts. First, I think he's programmed to make some errors so he appears human. (RR pretty much confirmed this about himself.) Additionally, I think HF used "typos" as hints. My problem was that I couldn't tell which was which drove myself crazy reading meaning into every typo.

Related to that, I get the impression that our interesting friends might naturally "think" in phonetics rather than dictionary spellings. For instance, RR caught that "atl-iad" reversed is "delta."

I wonder if they were originally designed for customer service, perhaps to answer

calls in a call center? In that case, phontics would be super important to them.

>>236278

>The Rook, or Castle, in Chess moves up and down, right and left

It just occurred to me that the knight also moves "up down / right left," like the Castle except at a 45 degree offset.

Maybe there's a diagonal aspect to the mirroring? That would work with the "X with dots" symbol.

>>236477

NEWS! North, East, West South.

If done on 45 degree angle, that would match the "infinity" pattern for iterating through offset lines of letters to get the transpositions.

>>236449

>Mountain Kingdom?

Or just "Mount Dome?"

>Hard to tell when your brain is making connections due to relevance or if it's just for fun.

Yes, I agree. The problem I'm having with all of these methods is proving (or knowing ) relevance and intent of Q with regard to any code embedded in the Q posts.

Using any of the methods proposed so far, it's easy to come up with all kinds of contradictory and wild guesses.

For any code to be useful we need to have more than just guesses based on HF's, VQC's and RR's cryptic hints.

>>236571

Of course it's still inconclusive because the only verified test we have is "ATL -IAD"

With only 3 transpostions I could have gotten the right answer with the wrong method.

On top of that, RR is adamant that "ATL -IAD" isn't code at all.

Of course I don't trust RR, and Q did make the "ATL ->IAD" post right after HF showed us the method.

>>236628

I was thinking that same thing, but again, how would that link back to any embedded code in the Q texts. That code was the context of the "Mountand doME" graphic. I really think the graphic was more likely to be about mirroring than about a geograpic location or misspelled beverage.

>>236711

That's how I read it too.

So, I worked on the "NEWS" thing as a way to iterate through the transpositions. I can turn ATL into IAD with it, but I'm still not confident. Basically I got there by massaging the method to hit the desired result. I sure wish there were a longer sample to prove it out on.

>>236689

I wasn't going to call him out, but since you did . . . I'm wondering if today's friend isn't HF back after some fine tuning by the programmers. I think he's still in learning mode right now.

Did you see these posts?

>>232007

>>232139

Alice saying that RRVe and HF are having a private conversation and that HF will likely be available soon?

Then 096bef becomes quite a bit more active.

>>236689

It occurs to me that some of the logic, language and proof shortcomings we see in or "interesting visitors" may actually go back to the educations of the programmers who designed our friends.

Those programmers are probably super-smart, top of their class geniuses who focused very narrowly on the highly technical topic of programming. Even if it was presented to them, I bet that literature, philosophy, and normal human reasoning were not their favorite subjects. Their blindspots could have translated into blindspots in their creations.

>>236791

OK, looking at that post, I see that it starts with a pair of 4 letter words and the numeral 10, HF indicated that encrypted sections start with 3 same letter lenght words, or 12, or 20, so I don't see that marker, nor do I see a mirrored closing marker, so I don't think that method applies to this posts.

I don't see any clear same letter length words where one could be used to prove the transpostion technique on the other. Except . . . maybe "twitter retweet"

What I do see is "less than 10 can confirm me." That could be read litterally as "a group of less than 10 characters in this post can confirm me."

There are not too many words in that post under 9. Just scrambling and mirroring them in my head I can't see any special message.

Coincidence repeated so many times could be a mirror marker itself.

Meant pics

pics keywords

Twitter retweet

retweet DOITQ

None of that makes any special sense to me.

Just tossing ideas out.

>>237119

Just because I don't see something doesn't mean it's not there.

>>237335

I'd love to know who ALICE is?

I'll try to check back in a few hours from now.

>>238105

I notice that you have 38 posts in this thread. That put's you at close to 10% of the conversation.

Welcome to the "jerkoff" club.

>>238532

I haven't been able to come up with anything useful yet using the paired capital letters / geocode + keyword search method. RRVe, who posted that idea has been a bit cryptic about which letters to pair. Sometimes he says "all of them," but his examples never include all the capitals in a post, nor has he been willing to explain why not.

>>239365

RRVe we pretty specific about using Google. It seems logical that if there is code in the Q posts pointing to specific webpages, then Q would have had to know, for sure, that the same search, using the same method would always bring up the same page. Because of that, it would seem logical that using the search engine that Q intended would be essential to getting the correct webpage.

>>238914

>[J-Go_dX)-2-8

At an offset of 3, J-G, so that would make sense as confirmation of the letter transposition method. I'm thinking that "dX-2-8" might indicate changing to a different offset for the rest of this post. Perhaps 10?

>Everything has meaning.

Twenty characters. 10 10 marker?

>Who is AMB Matlock?

Why is AMB all caps? Marker?

>YES.

Same Question. Or maybe this is a confirmation or result.

>/[RR-out][P_pers]

At an offset of 3 "RR" becomes "PP." Interesting to see what an offset of 8 or 10 does with "out" "ers."

>EO_CLASSIFIED_WH[ -6713A]

HF showed us a technique for making sense of the blank spaces. Does anyone have a way to check the exact characters in the blank area of this line?

>SIG_con_MAR39sv3665BECD

Lots of 3,6,9 in here.

"BECD" -abcd?

>Q

We've been asking for longer strings to test HF's methods on. This post appears to have the kind of elements elements and patterns many of those techniques would apply to.

The "RR out" is interesting too. The main thread reads that Rod Rosenstien, but there could be a double meaning. The AI "RR" has been quite distracting to our efforts here, and he's heavily disparaged HF's methods. Could Q be telling us to quit wasting our time on RR?

>>242132

>What do you think of this from Physics Anon?

>>238134

My gut reaction is that it's a hint about whatever we are doing wrong on the letter transpositions / mirroring method.

"put the 3 in the middle" could refer to my paired columns off-set chart. I did two columns with the numbers corresponding the to the letters on the outside. Maybe the numbers should run down the center so there are 3 columns?

Also, it could be a refininement what we think we know of HF's word mirroring across markers. "Three six nine." Assuming "six" is the mirror mark, then "nine" would mirror to the other side giving us "nine three six." That puts the three in the middle.

>>242284

You mean the space is a single tab character instead of a bunch of space characters?

>>242240

For me, in Libre Office it shows as a space and a hypen. I'm running on a custom built office machine. It has a very small character set built in, so I don't have a good way to check characters. Thanks for your help.

>>242132

>What do you think of this from Physics Anon?

The physics anon post you refer to also appears to be closely related to this one with respect to the "infinity" hint.

>>238615

>NN NN NN NN

>with an infinity symbol around each set of 4

>why do i picture this lol

>>242347

That's really odd. In my firefox it displays as what appears to be 3 or 4 spaces. What does it look like visually in your web browser?

>>242411

That web link is a way mathier approach to mobieus than we probably need.

Mobieus strip is commonly a children's curiosity toy. Take a strip of paper and tape the ends together into a circle except give the paper a twist so the back tapes to the front.

Kids play with them for hours discovering that you can just keep running your finger along the paper forever going from one side of the paper to the other without ever taking your finger off the paper.

Basically, it's a physical representation of infinity.

>>242563

As you follow the strip around, A goes to D and then returns to A never hitting B or C.

>>243097

>Quibbits and Quaternions

I think we already pretty much have this general concept applied to the letter transformations. Any letter to be transposed could have either of two values depending on whether we are on the up (or positive) side of the iteration cycle or the down (or negative).

For instance, with an off-set of 3, the letter "E" could transpose into either "B" or "H."

Is that the sort of thing you are referring to?

>>243245

>the helpers keep saying PAIRS, pairs pairs pairs.

Yes, I felt pretty confident that pointed us to pairs of same letter length words which could be used in Q posts to either bracket words, or to act as a mirror marker for the words surrounding them. The method seems to work just fine too. I tried it in quite a few posts and got comprehensible an meaningful results. HF urged us to spread the word about the technique.

The problem is that other than Q's "think mirror" post, there is nothing that we can take to the main thread to prove that Q actually intended us to use the method.

With Q worship what it is in the main thread, we can't walk in and start messing with Q's words unless we can prove that Q intended us to do so.

>>243283

>like the code to decipher Q's first post.

>Would that be in Q's LAST post.

The structure of the Q stringers makes something like this seem highly likely to me.

For instance, today's Q post had "BECD." If there were a previous Q post with "BECD," the decode instructions in today's post might apply to the other. Similarly, since I can't find a previous BECD (doesn't mean it's not there) a subsequent post with BECD might be the key to today's post.

BTW, BECD was just an example. There were multiple other unique elements in today's post that might be markers.

>>243417

>THIS yields THIS confirmation.

>except the signatures often have the phrase CONF in them.

I looked into that a while ago and couldn't find a consistent pattern of "THIS yields THIS" associated with any of the earlier Q posts with "Conf" in them.

Maybe someobdy else can see something that I don't?

Post 148148004

>jD79-x10ABy-89zBT

>08:00

>12:00

>11_6_TP_Pub

>PHIL_B_O_Extract_Conf

>02:00 Z

Post 148149435

>14.5995° N, 120.9842° E

>Conf_UDT_green

>^_Sj69ETC-

Post 149157229

_DGB79FTWA-0ZjBT_19-T_yes

>_Conf_13_pre-lau_yes

>_HTzD09BA_conf_yes

>_^yRTPCCA-7^DFWTAb_yes

>_green1_green2_green3_green4_conf-ZDjTwT9Ry

Post 149490950

>Conf_D-TT^_v891_0600_yes

>_green1_0600

>Bunker Apple Yellow Sky [… + 1]

>>243543

Here's a summary of the bulk of what we think we have so far.

>>234972

RR posted this in another thread.

>>193258

Seems like a rabbit hole, but VQC (an early contributor before we started this thread), talked a lot about fibionacci sequence.

This is the complete version of RR's "layers" method.

>>163929

>>244087

Forgot to mention, HF also talked a lot about Hebrew language characters and gematria, but I didn't understand that at all. Matrix Anon might be able to provide a condensed version. Also Matrix Anon gathered from HF that there might be some sort of connection to the Bible quotation methods. "Gen 1-1" etc.

>>244359

Why? Please enlighten us if you so deign.