>>26306

>>26308

Are you actually claiming that every post needs to be a Zero Delta now KB?

Anons, let's celebrate Jims larp being BTFO forever. Awaiting further instructions from POTUS and only POTUS

>>26279

>!!LHodQlswQg 

Kinda poetic the last trip has two cap Q's in it. Goes great with the 2 Zero Deltas.

>>26335

I would have to assume after the last 0 Delta Q thought he wouldn't have to address this again. But the idiots on JimResearch are slow learners.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220707045539/https://8kun.top/qresearch/res/16653317.html

https://archive.ph/dKL3B

Archives of the breads in case they get deleted.

>>26349

>>26351

I think the Zero Delta is the most important confirmation, if Q came back with that trip tomorrow and no ZD, I ignore it.

>>26731

>Again, with a picture vs without. Show one where a single non-picture post was backdated 8-14 seconds, and then for a bonus make sure it has a zero delta with PDJT.

Meaning something like:

Normal post :14

Normal post :17

Normal post :19

Normal post :03 < Zero Delta

Normal post :21

Normal post :25

From different UID with no pictures.

>>26733

I understand completely, and I am saying if that happened it would be obvious as fuck because the 0 delta would be completely out of sync with the posts around it by a large margin. 14 seconds is a long time. You don't appear to understand that I am saying the difficulty of pulling this off in a way that passes even the lightest of tests is next to impossible when you consider ALL the moving parts.

>>26735

>14 seconds is a long time.

And that 14 seconds backdate would mean it fired of INSTANTLY from the moment PDJT truth hit the QAGG server. With lag and everything it would entail, you are probably looking at closer to a 16 second backdate.

>>26736

No one is arguing against you ability to argue, just arguing 2 things

1 this is much more difficult of scenario than I think you realize

1. You are giving the pig farmer way to much credit. He literally blamed Wordpress for attacking Q research 2 nights ago.

>>26774

Not really, again, the timestamp is derived from the server the moment you hit reply, but the posts are added when they finishing transmitting. So a tar post that take longer to transmit would be expected to be posted after a clearnet post that replied after. If anything is fishy it is that the notables post preceeded the two posts following the tor post but had a later timestamp.

:58

:53

:56

:57

>>26779

My proofreading is garbage.

>>26797