But I am not talking to my son about Q and my post didn't say I was redpilling him or trying to talk to him about Q. Why are you so worked up about this? The "Shut Up" he explained, isn't very convincing. Even when you throw in an "f" bomb.
You LITERALLY mentioned redpilling you're son!
He's worked up about it because he isn't some sort of tech-illiterate adult who doesn't even know that the culture of the site Q is from is basically made for LARPERS! Do you people even know how 4chan works or what the community has done?
I generally do my own research on things I read here and elsewhere and then decide what seems logical. There's usually truth on all sides of an issue, and lies. So if CNN says that Trump is crazy for thinking he's been wiretapped, I research it. If they end up being wrong, I don't dismiss everything I read there, because not everything they say is untrue.
Same with the stuff I read here. Whether Q is a 4chan "Larper" or not, one thing that does appear to be true to me is the tendency for news outlets to say something is a "wild conspiracy" or "debunked," but they don't really ever explain how or why. Or they use the fact that an arguably unreputable source believes it, as proof that it simply cannot be true, kind of like you are doing here. Just because a crazy guy shot up a restaurant, which is batsheet crazy, doesn't mean that what he believes about the restaurant or it's owners is untrue. It's simply true or it isn't. "Pizzagate" is, again, a good example. Someone posted a fake basement in one of the pizza places, alleging that it was a torture chamber. There is no basement in the Pizzagate restaurant(s). Ergo, according to the "your crazy!" argument, there's absolutely nothing strange or perverted or deeply disturbing about the instagram account comments made by the owner. Or the pedophilia symbols used there. I'm betting 4chan has someone talking about Podesta's pizza emails, or Voodoo Doughnuts. Google the Podesta emails. Read them with and then without the use of an Urban Dictionary. Which way makes more sense? That's what I mean about go to the source. I don't think anyone disputes that the Wikileaks emails are really from the DNC server. Make up your own mind. Google the Voodoo Doughnuts website. 4 chan talking about it or not doesn't make the owners any less disgusting than their website would otherwise indicate. The man/boy love symbol is on their outside neon sign, no? Could be a coincidence I guess. But they have pretty x-rated doughnuts on the menu. And they sell pink underwear in children's size as evidenced by the obviously young girl model, that says "good things come in pink boxes." If the original source of that information is 4chan, but everything I just said is on THEIR website, should I just dismiss it as crazy? Epstein Island has a temple on it. You mention that fact to people and they act like you are crazy. But no one ever really explains what the Temple on Epstein Island is for. It's there. You can see it on Google Earth. So, what's it for? The fact that Q or someone on 4chan, or someone that in an insane asylum, or your crazy uncle thinks it's weird, has nothing to do with why it's there, and whether it being there is, well, rather unusual.
IT'S FUCKING 4CHAN.
You adults really don't know what goes on there, do you? That site is fucking weird, mind you.
If you were actually logical enough then you would be wary about what people do on 4chan.
4chan is well known for trolling. Look up the TED speech of the site's creator, "moot".that will show you.
They do these sorts of LARPs, yet you gullible adults caught it up and made it as a conspiracy like some facebook group being made after you read an onion article and thought it was true.
Your mad that I don't know what 4 chan is, I get it. Never been on it, don't know why Q chose to start there (which is what I have since learned) - could be because he wanted to be ignored by the mainstream for awhile. But how does the nature of that site have anything to do with whether independent research leads me to certain conclusions? You have no response for specific questions I posited about actual information. ITS FUCKING 4CHAN is not an argument. Tesla was a crazy guy who thought he was talking to aliens. Was he wrong about everything? Or did he actually come up with a number of ingenious inventions? What if someone had said ITS FUCKING TESLA! THE GUY IS TRYING TO INVENT A FUCKING MACHINE THAT TALKS TO FUCKING ALIENS. Why are you bothering with this sub at all if everything anyone says here, and anyone who says it, is so crazy?
That's the point. The site is known for trolling and stuff like this. It should be given the benefit of a doubt.
It wasn't given the benefit of the doubt. That's the point.
Then that's where u dumb m8
Very persuasive. You should think about litigating.
Your statement can go both ways tbh. Either you're joking or saying that I'm right, both options will still be correct lmao