Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 12:27 a.m. No.19893   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>19207

There have been exceptions. Some stringer stuff referred to Zulu Time, and there were posts about what that meant. But for your clocks? EST is it.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 12:32 a.m. No.19925   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>19225

Just the fact that NK and SK talked this week is huge. As for needing Q around, being able to work without supervision is a highly valued personality trait and a sign of maturity. I'm sure he'll show up when he needs to.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 1:48 a.m. No.20227   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0245

>>20070

Why is Zuma such a concern? AF launches these. Are you implying that AF is in Deep State control? Are you implying that the payload is kept secret even from POTUS?

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 2:43 a.m. No.20376   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0394

>>20193

For a while, we were using Russian rockets. Not American ones. There was a time when we built them. And you're right: the tech is old. It's partly because when rockets were built, a lot of inventory was produced. It took a long time to use it up. Those margins are there because the payloads aren't cheap. The old products have been dependable, and chances of getting a payload into orbit are good. My understanding is that payloads are often one-ofs. Surely, they keep the plans, and it shouldn't be that difficult to rebuild them in the case of launch failure. But it's still costly. They're not assembly line products.

 

As for the permits, if Zuma concerns you, then you are implying that the government organization that produced it skirted the law on that. If so, then perhaps we are dealing with the same type of lawlessness that created the U1 scandal? And if so, then it's yet another case to investigate and try.

 

As for fuel, perhaps it's due time to explore using anti-gravity tech instead? Not sure that's entirely clean, either, but it's probably more so since I don't believe it is "spent" in the same way.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 2:58 a.m. No.20408   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20392

The trick is to get them to believe and understand that it's a real clean-up of corruption and not just partisan politics of another flavor. That's probably what MSM will tell them it is. Sometimes, the blind acceptance of the hypocrisy just boggles my mind.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 3:06 a.m. No.20419   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0423

>>20414

Speaking of which, there seems to be a shifting of preference for mathematically correct conclusions toward politically correct conclusions. When math is pushed aside for politically correct (preferred) answers, more mistakes are going to take place.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 3:11 a.m. No.20431   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0435

>>20423

I did hear about that. One of the stupidest things I've ever heard. Math gets in their way. They can't fake studies as easily when people understand math. Have you ever read a complete study and then wondered, "How did they come up with the conclusion in the Abstract from that???" Yeah, that.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 3:13 a.m. No.20437   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20424

I mentioned that today to someone. The person explained it away basically as trying to make a good impression so they could get their way. I think there's more to it, of course. But that's apparently how MSM influenced people understand it.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 3:18 a.m. No.20446   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20435

Most studies aren't accessible to most people. It costs money to get access. How many people are going to plunk down $60 or whatever to read a study? At the prices charged for non-subscription types, we're not going to be reading many. Plus, most people would get bogged down in the technical language.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 3:38 a.m. No.20473   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0480 >>0521

>>20417

Yes, good move. Related to that: Back when we were on half chan, Q wanted the information copied and made available. With the rules changed, I'm assuming there's a corresponding change in how to share the info. I've been working on a project that shares an organized view of chan materials. So far, 8ch isn't part of it. The parser and database need to be modified to allow for the multiple images allowed here. My thought on dealing with 8ch is to delete href contents on backlinks and not mention the move to 8ch in the About page. Is that enough to satisfy requirements here? Or is some other visual change needed here as well? The half chan posts are currently being displayed with their header information. But it would be easy to eliminate any or all of the post header information.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 3:44 a.m. No.20487   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0506 >>0608

>>20480

Yes, my purpose most definitely is NOT to disrupt what goes on here. The purpose is to make the Q posts together with the answers more accessible to more people. I've seen comments from even red-pilled knowledgeable people that they find the chans to be intimidating.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 4:02 a.m. No.20533   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20506

Yes, but I don't have the link. I have one from January 9. But I'm not sure how to get it to you. The Quick Reply form doesn't recognize the extension.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 4:07 a.m. No.20546   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20086

Half chan was treated as an open forum. That turned out to not work out well. When the move was made to 8ch, they told people not to direct people here. So anyone who's been directing people here did not have approval to do it.

Anonymous ID: 72abb1 Jan. 11, 2018, 4:15 a.m. No.20577   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20555

>Yaldabaoth

When I first saw the patch, I thought about Yaldabaoth. I don't think they're installing Yaldabaoth, though. I've wondered before how they come up with these patches. I get the impression that this isn't widely known even by those who work on the projects.