Anonymous ID: e59be4 Aug. 7, 2018, 11:40 a.m. No.2498128   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>8510

>>2498023

 

But he's 100% pro-Trump and pro-MAGA. And that's what Q is about. Q is not about Q. So I don't hold not buying Q against anybody. I'd be more skeptical of Adams if he was talking against POTUS or his supporters. I understand why Q is hard to buy unless you really look into it from multiple angles.

 

Scott is also notoriously more interested in saying what works, not necessarily what's true. That's part of his whole schtick. There could be other reasons he's against Q, or he could just be mistaken. Either way, any person who MAGAs is a friend of mine.

Anonymous ID: e59be4 Aug. 7, 2018, 11:51 a.m. No.2498251   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>8286

This "Q is a leftist hoax/prank" narrative is one of the best things to happen to this board.

 

Think about it from a psychological perspective. If someone thinks there's a board of crazy people who disagree with them, talking shit on everything they hold to be true and near and dear, their projected frustration will keep them from coming here.

If a leftist thinks that there could potentially be anything genuine here, fear of cognitive dissonance may keep them from coming here.

 

But if a leftist feels certain this is all a big joke on the same people they already think are jokes, they will come here fearless and ready to read and be entertained. Only to find we present genuine research, data, facts, and leads.

 

More than a few opportunities for them to have a "hey…wait a minute…" moment.

 

If our goal is to redpill leftists, this is a fine narrative for a certain percentage of them to motivate them to listen or take a look in the first place, when they otherwise wouldn't.

Anonymous ID: e59be4 Aug. 7, 2018, 11:57 a.m. No.2498307   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>8330

>>2498203

But what if a religion emerges purposefully and exclusively from an exclusive family/tribe, and marrying/having children only inside of that population is enforced. And what if that religion notoriously denies most converts and discourages people from converting?

Then that religion also, is almost exclusively linked to a specific subset of the population with common ancestors who over time become more distinct from the general population based on their common genes and geographic-based genetic variance.

You know, the definition of a race?

 

Then can you see how it can be a religion and race? I know a lot of Jews. Ask them if they consider Judaism a race. Ask them if they consider themselves white. Ask them if they consider themselves a minority.

 

This is not an agenda-based, controversial statement. Regardless of your opinions and convictions on the subject, there are biological factors at play that we can look at on a rational, scientific level.

Anonymous ID: e59be4 Aug. 7, 2018, 12:03 p.m. No.2498387   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>8399 >>8491

>>2498330

If they were, that would make them a race, yes? My point isn't whether or not they have remained precisely identical from their ancestors, because obviously over the last century a lot of variation started to emerge and Jews marrying non-Jews became a lot more common.

But you can do some basic research about the Jewish population and understand the biological correlation with a unique race.

Or, for the religious folks on the board, if you accept the claims that 100% of Jews who are not converted share some ancestry with Abraham specifically, you don't really have to look further than that.