>>4529737 (LB)

Clock needs understanding-refinement, but basic design is almost certainly accurate. Clock-fags "happen upon" to much evidence of precision design to think it's a fluke. I refer to the clock all the time even as I'm reading an article about something that jogs my memory of a certain Q-drop to see if there's clock alignment to confirm my suspicions that the two things are connected. Alignment on the clock doesn't ''prove'' a connection, but further reduces the possibility of chance, usually by a statistical factor of 30… and the more connections, the greater the statistical improbability of chance.

>>4529814

Kind of like an incident where… ummmm… lets see… Barbara Bush dies on "4/17"… "For Q"… yeah, not likely a natural death by old age. So then I look at Q-clock and 4/17 just happens to be directly opposite [41]… GHWB was 41st president… and so on and so forth. Great tool for connecting dots and determining if real life events are "moar than they seem."

>>4529811

Been a long time since I originally saw this (others like it)… very, very moving.

>>4529996

Most people viewing this clock don't/can't appreciate the astonishing number of coincidences here. The times and dates of the article/tweets and clock minute positions… 45 (POTUS), 11(K), 10-4(JFK), 28, 27(JFK), 5/29(JFK birthday), 58, 53… I mean…

>>4530000

For #35 (JFK) [mirrored] and [53] is at 11/25/18… 58 y/o.

"ITS" can pretty conveniently be translated as "911 2"… yes?

I as Roman Numeral 1

T=20th letter (drop zero)

S=19th letter.

A nine, two ones, and a two.

>>4530000

>>4530296

"ITS" could also be 19 and a half. 1/16/19.

19.5 years. Also 55 yrs + 55 days.

>>4530298

three 55-story buildings? What are the odds of ''that?''

>>4530394

All well-said.