>>2048440

This is what it looks like when done automatically run for [:29] (3rd col in pic):

15-Mar-2018 18:29:14 (EST)==>46:14 BOOOOOM!

04-Mar-2018 11:29:14 (EST)==>46:14 [Roasted]

*16-Jun-2018 01:37:16 (EST)==>18:42 KNOW?

09-Mar-2018 18:29:48 (EST)==>12:48 [24]RR

27-Jan-2018 02:29:48 (EST)==>12:48 cut?

10-Mar-2018 20:29:12 (EST)==>48:12 Coincidence?

#08-Apr-2018 16:29:41 (EST)==>19:41 Connected

08-Apr-2018 16:29:41 (EST)==>19:41 web?

22-Nov-2017 23:29:41 (EST)==>19:41 updated.

14-Dec-2017 21:29:49 (EST)==>11:49 Patriots.

#11-May-2018 00:29:40 (EST)==>20:40 China

11-May-2018 00:29:40 (EST)==>20:40 further.

#29-Apr-2018 22:29:50 (EST)==>10:50 R

29-Apr-2018 22:29:50 (EST)==>10:50 18.

*05-Nov-2017 19:34:57 (EST)==>10:50 Country.

20-Nov-2017 02:29:21 (EST)==>39:21 October.

#07-Feb-2018 19:29:09 (EST)==>51:09 DACA!!!

07-Feb-2018 19:29:09 (EST)==>51:09 WH.

*11-Jun-2018 16:03:55 (EST)==>22:38 LARP

#06-Mar-2018 01:29:38 (EST)==>22:38 rebuilding.

06-Mar-2018 01:29:38 (EST)==>22:38 victory.

08-Jan-2018 23:29:38 (EST)==>22:38 PATRIOTS.

22-May-2018 16:29:23 (EST)==>37:23 show.

*08-Apr-2018 11:09:57 (EST)==>36:24 Globally

10-Mar-2018 14:29:24 (EST)==>36:24 Important.

#23-Dec-2017 15:29:24 (EST)==>36:24 Q

23-Dec-2017 15:29:24 (EST)==>36:24 Map.

#10-Mar-2018 12:29:06 (EST)==>54:06 helpful!

10-Mar-2018 12:29:06 (EST)==>54:06 11:11

11-Nov-2017 23:29:35 (EST)==>25:35 Satan”

#06-Apr-2018 18:29:25 (EST)==>35:25 planned?

06-Apr-2018 18:29:25 (EST)==>35:25 necessary.

*11-Dec-2017 13:39:59 (EST)==>55:05 chances?

02-May-2018 22:29:26 (EST)==>34:26 9

10-Dec-2017 23:29:56 (EST)==>04:56 show.

*19-May-2018 17:03:54 (EST)==>33:27 7

*23-Dec-2017 01:10:06 (EST)==>33:27 free)

#19-Apr-2018 21:29:03 (EST)==>57:03 soon???

19-Apr-2018 21:29:03 (EST)==>57:03 CA.

01-Jul-2018 13:29:32 (EST)==>28:32 know.

31-Oct-2017 23:29:28 (EST)==>32:28 picture.

11-Nov-2017 23:29:58 (EST)==>02:58 +

*27-Jan-2018 12:43:56 (EST)==>58:02 event.

07-Dec-2017 22:29:30 (EST)==>30:30 —end—

Missing out a bunch of those in the image, as it seems. Will have to look where these come from, and why they aren't caught.

>>2049362

Sorry, forgot to mention: Timestamps (EST) prefixed by "*" are those from posts mentioned by Q, which match the marker looked for (i.e. they have ":29:XX" as time).

When prefixed by "#" they also come from posts Q mentioned, but these mentions do not match the marker looked for (i.e. these mentions don't have ":29:XX in timestamp).

>>2040224

It's no problem running all connected markers (e.g. [:01] [:59] [:29] [:31]) in one fell swoop, and also combing these into some tabular. Takes that little machine just two mins or so and I have a PDF (pic) ….

problem is getting the words correctly extracted (i.e. finding a set of rules that is consistent & works for all cases – and is after what Q had in mind … lol)

I know it is time consuming & maybe even frustrating to do it manually ….

I'm slowly getting frustrated slowly about me being so dumb to not see the rules that need be applied to get it together accurately!! Darn ! :(

>>2033796

For your last word cipher pic above, I'm currently getting:

13-Dec-2017 00:15:45 (EST)==>15:45 “Special.”

*17-Apr-2018 06:18:17 (EST)==>45:15 work

08-Apr-2018 13:15:14 (EST)==>46:14 show.

03-Mar-2018 23:15:14 (EST)==>46:14 BOOM.

*03-Apr-2018 20:18:12 (EST)==>17:43 If_Satanists_Took_Over_the_Vatican

03-Jul-2018 23:15:42 (EST)==>18:42 United

10-Mar-2018 15:15:18 (EST)==>42:18 administration.

28-Oct-2017 17:15:48 (EST)==>12:48 Patriots.

*20-Nov-2017 13:19:39 (EST)==>48:12 Snap

08-Apr-2018 00:15:40 (EST)==>20:40 ok.

12-Feb-2018 15:15:20 (EST)==>40:20 forthcoming.

21-Apr-2018 14:15:51 (EST)==>09:51 incoming.

12-Jun-2018 22:15:52 (EST)==>08:52 happen.

06-Apr-2018 16:15:37 (EST)==>23:37 coincidence?

*23-Nov-2017 01:16:24 (EST)==>37:23 HERE

09-Dec-2017 14:15:53 (EST)==>07:53 Military

20-Apr-2018 22:15:07 (EST)==>53:07 later.

18-Feb-2018 21:15:07 (EST)==>53:07 COUNTRY.

*06-Jan-2018 16:18:50 (EST)==>53:07 PERSONAL?

05-Nov-2017 18:15:25 (EST)==>35:25 III.

*19-Apr-2018 21:16:41 (EST)==>05:55 ending?

10-Mar-2018 21:15:05 (EST)==>55:05 sick.

*17-Apr-2018 06:16:34 (EST)==>34:26 Q

05-Feb-2018 20:15:26 (EST)==>34:26 only.

10-Apr-2018 00:15:56 (EST)==>04:56 Start.

17-May-2018 19:15:27 (EST)==>33:27 [Personal]

04-Apr-2018 17:15:57 (EST)==>03:57 soon.

15-Dec-2017 01:15:57 (EST)==>03:57 Patriots.

*28-Jun-2018 11:17:39 (EST)==>32:28 sleepers?

18-Jun-2018 01:15:58 (EST)==>02:58 remember.

*17-Jun-2018 10:17:35 (EST)==>02:58 POTUS

19-Apr-2018 21:15:58 (EST)==>02:58 control.

21-Nov-2017 19:15:58 (EST)==>02:58 critical.

10-May-2018 10:15:01 (EST)==>59:01 pain.

10-Feb-2018 05:15:01 (EST)==>59:01 Goodbye.

07-Jan-2018 03:15:01 (EST)==>59:01 RING.

Not a bad match to what you have, except I have "work", where you have "Good", then the fucking "Satanists" (it's "over"), and I might have made a sorting error with "Q only." vs. "only. Q"

>>2050600

Had to verify the new ordering, and left the [:45:XX] & [:15:XX] markers in the table for now so you can have a look as well (and maybe faster find them in your archive)

>>2051086

Guess there's an error … :45:44 should be listed before :45:14 I guess?

>>2050600

Shouldn't be trying to do things when I can't focus. Give up for tonight. Might check the new ordering tomorrow, once I find time. Wish a good nite for now to y'all!

Posting the updated clockfags' QClock for the nr of tweets (realDonaldTrump). Wasn't able to check all breads, thus assume the General's dough is up to date, and Q didn't post since 07/04.

>>2054933

Enjoy your vacations, Anon! Jealous a little ….

Looks like things are coming to a head slowly around here – let's hope at least that we have it figured out by the time you're back!

>>2052729

Thank you very much for the lists – in the process of re-analyzing those for the things I'm missed out on so far. Haven't really done much, to be honest, except follow what I could gather from your work mostly – so thanks to you much more!!

This is really harder than rocket science for me and I do know a little about science & rockets … lol – but this here I have to learn all anew making the process quite slow. There's lots of things a can't say or ask, and typing/reading online is a much less appropriate method for communication/learning than brainstorming w/ a beer on the table lol.

At any rate, unless someone suggests that I shouldn't continue gathering the crumbs in this way, I'll try and reproduce these lists like >>2053879 and hope to have some results by later today. I think i'm getting closer to understanding how last and I might have to be treated – but no guarantees … lol Thanks again.

>>2061940

It does indeed. And if one gets the order of the post correctly onto the rolls, one could start "typing" … lol

>>2059347

Thank you. lol. Think many of us Anons are awesome, also I believe there's another one w/ that name already. Happy about being a simple clockfag (and planefag sometimes too).

With the two chapters – I thought so much already when seeing the graphic that had this "*/\/*/\" and figure (from the length of time) that the first two could be until July, the last one until later (whenever that might be). Wasn't able to completely figure it out though – will have to have a look at it again and think a little harder.

As for the [01:XX] word collection, there's a couple of things I noticed:

When Q referenced himself, these last words were included as well.

Some [01:XX] markers were not included, even though they seemed valid.

I excluded one post (which was deleted – the 0Hour one). Still I appear to have too many compared to what you got.

There was the "clever" () & "COINCIDENCE?" (13:59:38) in the image – both didn't have a matching timestamp. While "clever" references a Q post, COINCIDENCE does not.

So when Q references himself in a matching post this appears to have been included. When a non-matching Q post references a matching one – you think should be included too ?

There's also the ordering for timestamps of the same kind (e.g. [01:36]) – In attached image they are ordered chronologically … maybe I should order them by the "calendarTime" (i.e. [:MM]) on the Q-Clock instead?

>>2053879

the [:17] catches I had & also the reset at [:01:36] both have dates that, if nt mistaken are all between [:50] & [:00] on the clock.

Reminds remotely of "-10 days" – w/o having checked others for this. Maybe those are the ones you didn't include and I caught ?

>>2062448

The "#" have been removed. "+" are "self-references" in a matching Q post, meaning when Q made a reference to one of his previous posts. It seemed to me you included those as well.

>>2062448

I think there were a number of "here" 's which made me assume you included these post when Q referenced a previous Q post.

>>2062448

It might have been the "all" 's instead of the "here" 's – found them both quite numerous and had difficulties associating them.

Took out the "+" again right now, and am missing an "all"

>>2062448

Reordered them as in the image (w/ 00 & 30). All starting with ">" I missed out on, all in the bottom I have too much

Took out the "+"-prefixed ones out of the script again.

14-Feb-2018 19:01:01 (EST)==>59:01 1776.(:01:01)

*21-Nov-2017 20:18:17 (EST)==>31:29 Storm(:01:29)

@21-Nov-2017 20:18:17 (EST)==>31:29 Targets?

*07-Mar-2018 16:08:15 (EST)==>29:31 person?(:01:31)

@07-Mar-2018 16:08:15 (EST)==>29:31 over.

*19-Apr-2018 20:05:21 (EST)==>29:31 Related(:01:31)

@19-Apr-2018 20:05:21 (EST)==>29:31 captured?

> COINCIDENCES ?

21-Dec-2017 12:01:03 (EST)==>57:03 coincidences.(:01:03)

26-Apr-2018 14:01:03 (EST)==>57:03 redactions.(:01:03)

27-Jun-2018 16:01:56 (EST)==>04:56 day!(:01:56)

01-Feb-2018 02:01:55 (EST)==>05:55 Eberwein(:01:55)

*09-Mar-2018 06:16:07 (EST)==>06:54 legitimate.(:01:54)

@09-Mar-2018 06:16:07 (EST)==>06:54 soap.

07-Jan-2018 23:01:24 (EST)==>36:24 President.(:01:24)

21-Apr-2018 12:01:36 (EST)==>24:36 all.(:01:36)

> clever.

>all

06-Apr-2018 17:01:36 (EST)==>24:36 Purpose.(:01:36)

30-Nov-2017 01:01:36 (EST)==>24:36 reset.(:01:36)

*14-May-2018 21:18:27 (EST)==>53:07 all.(:01:07)

04-Dec-2017 22:01:07 (EST)==>53:07 Christmas.(:01:07)

11-Feb-2018 20:01:37 (EST)==>23:37 prepped.(:01:37)

23-Nov-2017 00:01:22 (EST)==>38:22 important.(:01:22)

15-Feb-2018 16:01:38 (EST)==>22:38 WEEK.(:01:38)

*18-Jun-2018 23:04:34 (EST)==>22:38 AM(:01:38)

@18-Jun-2018 23:04:34 (EST)==>22:38 here.

>WEEK.

>#Goodbye#

*06-Dec-2017 21:03:11 (EST)==>39:21 when?(:01:21)

@06-Dec-2017 21:03:11 (EST)==>39:21 Shutdown.

21-Nov-2017 19:01:21 (EST)==>39:21 EVERYTHING.(:01:21)

*10-Nov-2017 16:04:51 (EST)==>21:39 5th(:01:39)

@10-Nov-2017 16:04:51 (EST)==>21:39 Correct.

18-Jun-2018 23:01:50 (EST)==>10:50 HIGH.(:01:50)

26-Apr-2018 21:01:50 (EST)==>10:50 require…..(:01:50)

*10-Mar-2018 17:08:19 (EST)==>20:40 damage?(:01:40)

@10-Mar-2018 17:08:19 (EST)==>20:40 used.

27-Jan-2018 16:01:40 (EST)==>20:40 DUMB.(:01:40)

*22-May-2018 13:04:35 (EST)==>11:49 them.(:01:49)

@22-May-2018 13:04:35 (EST)==>11:49 happening.

04-May-2018 15:01:19 (EST)==>41:19 CONF(:01:19)

>collection

*07-Feb-2018 21:08:09 (EST)==>19:41 permission.(:01:41)

@07-Feb-2018 21:08:09 (EST)==>19:41 plan.

19-Jun-2018 15:01:12 (EST)==>48:12 day.(:01:12)

*22-Feb-2018 20:47:30 (EST)==>12:48 be.(:01:48)

@22-Feb-2018 20:47:30 (EST)==>12:48 comms.

12-Feb-2018 10:01:46 (EST)==>14:46 JFK.(:01:46)

02-Nov-2017 02:01:46 (EST)==>14:46 tomorrow.(:01:46)

07-Dec-2017 20:01:44 (EST)==>16:44 wild.(:01:44)

*04-Dec-2017 23:07:17 (EST)==>28:32 website.(:01:32)

04-Dec-2017 22:01:07 (EST)==>53:07 thinking.

19-Jun-2018 22:01:38 (EST)==>22:38 safe.(:01:38)

22-May-2018 13:01:41 (EST)==>19:41 failed.(:01:41)

04-Dec-2017 23:01:17 (EST)==>43:17 #FLYROTHSFLY#(:01:17)

*06-Apr-2018 16:05:43 (EST)==>43:17 WWG1WGA(:01:17)

@06-Apr-2018 16:05:43 (EST)==>43:17 WORLD.

*15-Feb-2018 14:12:42 (EST)==>17:43 Snowden(:01:43)

@15-Feb-2018 14:12:42 (EST)==>17:43 liability.

These are the ones I have too many and didn't find in your image:

>*04-Dec-2017 23:07:17 (EST)==>28:32 website.(:01:32)

^^Mention w/ the "RED" image (see you in Seoul) Mention has good timestamp

>04-Dec-2017 22:01:07 (EST)==>53:07 thinking.

^^ No idea how that got in … will double check and remove

>19-Jun-2018 22:01:38 (EST)==>22:38 safe.(:01:38)

^^Valid matching Q post …

>22-May-2018 13:01:41 (EST)==>19:41 failed.(:01:41)

^^ Matching Q post but w/ not good word … lol

>04-Dec-2017 23:01:17 (EST)==>43:17 #FLYROTHSFLY#(:01:17)

^^Matching timestamp in Q post, but has special char – maybe remove special char, then next word above would be "Relevant."

>*06-Apr-2018 16:05:43 (EST)==>43:17 WWG1WGA(:01:17)

^^Might count as a signature and is a mention w/ correct timestamp – could be removed?

>@06-Apr-2018 16:05:43 (EST)==>43:17 WORLD.

^^Q post to above WWG1WGA (mention)

>*15-Feb-2018 14:12:42 (EST)==>17:43 Snowden(:01:43)

^^post is a mention w/ matching timestamp

>@15-Feb-2018 14:12:42 (EST)==>17:43 liability.

^^Q post to above matching mention

Bread is still empty, so one more list … lol

Those that I missed out on:

>COINCIDENCE?

^^Q post stamped: 03-Jul-2018 13:59:38 – maybe a remainder from a previous :59 run in your work?

>clever.

Q post stamped: 21-Apr-2018 12:02:17 –

^^Self-reference to back to matching Q post

>all

^^ The last word in above back-referenced matching Q post. Matching Q post was stamped 21-Apr-2018 12:01:36, but has no forward ref (i.e. >>) to "clever"

>WEEK.

^^"WEEK." appeared twice in your image

>#Goodbye#

^^Q post w/ stamp 15-Feb-2018 16:09:29

References back to Q post from: 15-Feb-2018 16:01:38, which has "WEEK." as last word. No forward ref from there to "Goodbye#

>collection.

^^ 1st word in valid Q post, where I extracted "failed".

>>2063192

I did just fix the "thinking" bug, so it's out of the list. You think of those that I had too many should stay in?

… and back-references, i.e. when a non-matching (or matching) Q post references back to a previous Q post, like many in >>2063158 – you think I should use them as well?

Tomorrow will also have to think about ordering multiple matches for a single timestamp, eg the mess with the [01:36]'s and the others. Got late again, but will work on it all day tomorrow.

Also, anons asked for a software in the general today – could do that, but would first like to fully understand/foqus on this thing (and the enigma) before I start coding anything.

It indeed stands to assume that the Q-Clock is the cipher wheel/key which unlocks the "map".

>>2063766

yw. it's from early morning though – am in the process of checking breads and tweets and might post an updated version a little later.

>>2063996

That's a good idea, thank you. Will check during the day tomorrow and may try to run four of them, making that table and then playing with the ordering. One might be able to see which makes most sense, when combined w/ the others (i.e. 59, 01, 31, 29 – the "Z" as I came to call it, lol)

>>2064129

There's lots of other things I need to go over tomorrow (also, e.g. the */\/*/\ thing) Checked bread & Q didn't post, so I'll update tweets 'morrow only …

I'm out for this night … Thanks very much for the help again!! A peaceful good nite everone!

>>2068173

This looks beautiful, thanks! Makes it easier to understand the principle behind it in this graphic form than just from the lists above.

This is so exciting! It's like someone said in the previous thread:

"The map is going to be beautiful."

>>2068463

That'd be clockfag – nothing to do with no homo, except when it comes to sapiens.

You guys are so amazing with graphics – it'd take me a week to just produce sth half as good. So I better not even try … lol.

What do you mean the [59] marker? You mean a list containing the words that go with it?

>>2068930

Would be a hillarious picture: graphicfags, computerfags, shitpostingfags, chessfags and all talking dirty & "conspiracy" stuff while getting loaded …. LOL

Working on an image to get the four markers 59, 01 31 & 29 together – but haven't played around with the sorting yet.

>>2069067

No direct experience – university lectures in physics at a university w/ a professor who liked it. That's why I said "a little", meaning I'm familiar w/ the basic principles, and solved the underlying equations back then … lol. Sorry, didn't mean to mislead.