>>2042513
It could be a photo from AF1, or it could be a photo of a stock photo of AF1. The reflected apple could be from sunlight through the cabin windows, or it could be from another light source reflected on the stock photo. The final photo was then distorted with simple photoshop methods. So in summary, not a reliable proof.
The fact that Q says "trolling is fun" and then "disinformation is necessary" after the potential method for faking this was described is concerning.
If a video of HRC crimes can be dismissed as fake, what good is it? Could do more harm than good.
Not an argument.
You can turn a phone to distort a reflection on the wall, or you can do the same to distort a reflection on a stock photo. You can also easily distort a photo using simple photoshop methods to narrow or widen the image. Proves nothing.
It matters because it addresses credibility of other drops. Dissecting every drop in an attempt to disprove them should be done here as a matter of course. When you find a drop that you cant dissect and destroy, then you know you might have something of value. It matters because it lets us know what we know and what we don't. We should know where Q made predictions that came true. We should know when he made predictions that amounted to nothing. Likewise we should know which "proofs" can be used as actual proofs, and which can be discredited.
I've been making arguments. You haven't. Know the difference.
Some here have argued that Q's last post where he pasted an old drop referred to the photo. It says disinformation is necessary.
Im not saying that it could be a photo of the EXACT stock photo you referenced. It could be another stock photo. What would be interesting is if the reflection could be determined to be on a 3-D surface or not by looking at the edges around the lamp vs. the wall/curtains behind it. I would expect some distortion of the apple edge as the reflection line moves from the lamp to the wall/curtains. The line however is smooth from lamp to wall, which suggests a reflection on a 2-D surface.
Exactly. Well said.
He's too stupid. Stop wasting your time.
Yeah he promised a proof from AF1 interior. Then he posted a bullshit pic that could have been easily faked. Q is not a guy sitting in his basement. He gets too much info too quickly to not be connected to some degree with what is going on at a reasonably high level. Q has to have a team behind him. But yes, the question becomes which side is that team on?
If a deep state op, the only strategy I can see with producing Q would be to get the base all riled up and hopeful, only to become disillusioned and drop out of supporting Trump when they learn it was all bullshit. Also perhaps to keep the base docile and inactive while "trusting the plan." Seems to be a stretch that deep state would conceive of something this elaborate, and keep it up this long for that purpose, but it is possible. It is also strange that Trump wouldn't call it out as bullshit if it was a deep state op, or at least have his supporters in the media call it out to put a stop to it.
On the other hand, it may be Trump team. There are problems with this theory too though. Why post a bullshit pic that can be shown to be faked or at least fakeable? Why make so many predictions, many of which haven't come to pass? Why not tell friendlies in the socials and some lower level media guys to ring awareness to it? Why call out Alex Jones, who along with Roger Stone has been a major asset to Trump in the election and up to the present? Why after the fact claim that they tried a hit on the Roths and failed, and then we hear nothing more about them? What happened to the impending drop of the HRC video?
Its all very strange.
You want to address my argument about the reflection line from the lamp to the wall, or just name call and post a gay picture? Name calling is what children do when they lose an argument. Thanks for proving my point about the problems with the culture of this board.
Could you elaborate? Are you saying Q edited an Obama speech? What happened with the Antifa flag?
Once again, proves nothing. The reflection could have been from another light source, and the lack of distortion from the edge of the apple reflection from the curving lamp edge to the wall suggests the reflection is on a flat surface. AKA the reflection is on a photo, not a 3-D room.