Anons, quick question..
Did we ever disprove the 111 day theory?
I'm following as best I can but do not remember any bread that debunked it. Still a valid theory?
Bwamp. We obviously still haven't decoded 5:5 (see pic related) and I thought I had gotten somewhere with that recently.
Figured it to be a/the mirror point of that or something of that nature. A Q post being the marker, then 110 days pass and the next day (111) being the event. This being my somewhat cryptic logic flow
[MARKER]>111 days=[EVENT]
[MARKER]>110>1
[MARKER]>55>:mirror:<55<[EVENT]
5:5 - two fives
55 - two fives
55:55 - two two fives
5:5 - simplified
Burning the thought
There are still holdovers in the SC. Not all judges are /our/ guy/gal