This afternoon, some anons were suggesting that Q was a remote viewer… but what if it goes much, much deeper than that? Could an array new tech be involved once we get past the old paradigms of cabal control? Is the Q that we know just the public face for something much larger below the surface than we could have imagined?

What happens when an experienced remote viewer has been given "Those behind Q" as a target to seek out?

Edward Riordan was tasked with just that. He had not followed Q before, nor kept up with what we were looking into, but was tasked with looking into the Q Phenomenon and who lurks behind the single-letter pseudonym. His remote viewing expeditions took him on a ride that's bigger than even autists could imagine, invoking phantom ships and projections from "dark light" as well as clandestine meetings on boats (White Squall, anyone?) as well as other spoopy correlations to what we've seeked out over the past year…

I've attached the first session of 8 videos he did in his experience of remote viewing those guiding hands behind Q. The first ~5-10 minutes of each video contain a rundown of the sessions he held, but Of course, take them with a large grain of salt and an open mind.. Could the next few years open up such a dramatic change to the human race? Could 2020 see an entirely new human race?

>>3203266

nonono, time machine is only a part of it. it's an inter-dimensional machine as well.

>>3203313

>ebin contributing to 8ch since the beginning..

It takes like 3 half-decent quality posts to get 10ccp.. if you can't even do that.. then what da fug have you been contributing here? tits?

>>3203364

Did you post about jews being dindu nuffin good bois or something, or did you piss off the natives there by pretending you know more than they do? Regardless, BO can't change voat's site rules, so I guess you're stuck being a cuck until you make a new account.

>>3203401

>Who are those ppl?

Apparently, people who decided to make their own community and paid (financially) to do so. The fact that Q decided to send a large swath of people there is besides that specific point. It's clearly apparent if you'd browsed any other subverses of theirs that "Hate speech" as the libs would define it is the absolute least of their concerns. Moreso, what sort of bullshit did you post in order to get downvoated in such a way that you can't even post without having to register a fresh account to do so?

>>3203516

Do you not even understand their viewpoint as to why they would ban that as a practice?

>>3203548

Regardless of how I respond, besides the point that Faceberg doesn't use anywhere near a similar system to Voat, it doesn't change the fact that their rules are they way they are there, or that BO can't do a damn thing about it either. Try making a new account without begging like a homeless streetcuck and provide quality responses like you said you provided here, and maybe you'll have no problem getting the bare minimum 10 upboats required to post an article.

>>3203627

Where else would you ebin begin to suggest going to? Maybe you should bring it up with Q huh.. You could always go and make your own Voat clone which doesn't have the requirements, and end up with a thousand bot accounts downvoating any real damaging information just like shareblue does on plebbit… but hey at least it wouldn't require the community as a whole upvoting your account 10 times in order to post shite articles or 100 times to downvote another submission.