Anons, hoping this will go over better with the night crew.

>>528603

>>528914

Earlier today I posted something that I'd come across. I thought it might be "the key," or a big part of it. I didn't go over well--the daytime anons seem to be a lot slower than the nighttime ones.

So here's the idea: we know that the days that Q posts matter, because when we mirror certain posts around Dec. 23rd, we can find matching posts that the same number of days before and after that day. I decided to make a table for people doing that work--marking each date where Q posted, so they could find mirror days easily.

I remembered post #365, which seemed to say that a 10 day spread was also a "10" marker. But taken by itself, that's basically useless knowledge: how many contiguous groups of ten can you find among 144 days? Maybe something like 124, I'm guessing. Useless.

Then I started thinking about the 7/10 posts...and I was thinking "7 out of 10" instead of "July 10." And it struck me: what if it's about finding sets of ten contiguous days where Q had posted in seven of them?

Looking over the table, I found six groups where that was true. Some of them overlapped, and I wasn't sure how they should be interpreted...so I looked up other situations where you had a number/number. I found 7/10, 9/11, 10/30, and 12/19.

There's only one section of 19 days where Q posted on 12 of them...and the day that falls in the middle (11-20-2017). I found two interesting things:

1. the 12/19 post says "(Find Post)", and

post #166 (the middle of the 12/19 section)

says "(Repost to correct thread)."

1. post #162 says

"QMAP 1/2 confirmed.

This is the key.

Q"

It's not exact, at all...but during one of the 7/10 periods (2/8 - 2/17), there were two domestic airplane crashes--the one in Russia and the one in Iran. There wasn't a single domestic airline crash in all of 2017 in the entire world, but suddenly there are two in a week--and both from agitator states? (note: Bloomberg and BBC posted their stories on Feb. 17, but reported the crash as happening on the 18th).

So I started looking up other connections. RED_RED 9/11 matched up with the RED RED posts on December 4th, which was in a 9/11 section. I just noticed that Q mentioned an interview that Obama did on 11-27-17...but I'd never seen or heard of it before. Today, when I did a search I found it--I think it was recorded in 11-27-17, but released sometime in January.

As I've said, it isn't perfect...but it might be another tool to help triangulate answers. I don't think there's just one big "trick" to get the whole map figured out--the "Think Mirror" trick only works on some posts, the markers only unlock some parts, I suspect the "clock" thing is only going to unlock some, and I think that this unlocks some.

One other thing: if this is actually a thing, then the first post mentioned that the national guard would be activated on 10/30, and Hillary Clinton would have her passports flagged and be extradited if necessary. A lot of people immediately turned away when October 30th came and went...but what if Q was referring to a time when he would post on ten out of 30 days? He hasn't posted in a little over a week...

It's just something to consider as you research.

>>530951

Please don't say it's the one that says "lads" all the time–he seems to get it right. He's up on the news, understands the implications when he sees something big, etc.

>>531188

Granted, it's pretty odd. But maybe government there was a law that established databases or the collection of information in 1969, and that's the earliest date you can select on some of them? Maybe the emergency service people didn't click a "start" date, and it defaulted to that.

Still, it's something to keep in mind. Maybe something else will pop up and we can draw connections. Q did mention testing of emergency services.

>>531291

I just did. I noticed that he was looking at a post that was kind of related (#165, which is reposted as #166). Maybe something will come of it, who knows?

>>531318

Personally I thought things were going pretty well. We were having waves of people shilling in here–you could always tell, because they'd coordinate and try to push the same stupid idea–calls for immediate action despite a well-described plan, advocating for ideas that both a) have been widely debunked and ridiculed, and b) have nothing to do with this board. I understand the idea that censorship is bad, but when shills get in here and slide the board with nonsense designed to discredit it, you have to admit that censorship is exactly what they have on their mind–censoring us, that is.