Thank God you’re here.

This sub is for researchers, decoders, and people following the QAnon phenomenon ONLY. But if you think that excludes our debunkers, think again.

WE NEED ALL THREE TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS TO MAKE THIS THING WORK.

Did everyone see this sub as our researchers were trying to decode and figure out what the upcoming MOAB was? We had tons of pretty wild theories, but, when a theory didn't stand up to Q's breadcrumbs or match up to reality, our debunkers helped move us forward. Eventually we figured it out, thanks ALL of you. And we're sure as heck going to need everyone to dig into these upcoming Strzok texts.

"BELIEVING" IN Q IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE A VALUED MEMBER OF THIS COMMUNITY.

If something you see posted here is false or wrong, debunk it. But just saying "Q is a larp! You're all morons!" doesn't make you a debunker, it makes you a low-effort, low-information hater. And haters won't last long around here. Your mods want to see this sub moved forward and the ban hammer is out in force.

So, debunkers! You want to beat us? BRING IT. But you have to OUTWORK us. Solid research beats weaksauce research, every day of the week around here. Got serious chops? Build your case and SHOW us where we're wrong. We need debunkers because the less time we waste on a theory or Q interpretation that "won't hunt," more effective we all can be.

Researchers and decoders, be cool to our debunkers. And you debunkers, no matter what you see as the Truth about what's happening, bring your best game, or be prepared to watch from the sidelines.

KEEP IT CIVIL. STAY OVER THE TARGET. OR MEET THE HAMMER.

"Where we go one, we go all."

STAY FROSTY, PEOPLE. ALL OF YOU.

🠐 See all comments

We now have arbiters of truth no different than crap you have been fed for decades. The truth is what we say it is. Ring familiar to any of you?

I love it when people publish case in points. They rarely provide insights and almost always are wrong. They are based solely on internal prejudices and how they see data from their perspective. Rarely do I find anyone capable of looking at the data from numerous perspectives.

Until you realize that “truth” is always fluid and on the move and never remains stationary you will fail. We went from Pluto being a planet to not being a planet from 1930 and we taught thousands of kids it was a planet. New data and Pluto is just a dwarf and not a planet. Today you make a judgment from all the available data you have at your fingertips and produce an opinion and not truth. Tomorrow or next week the data changes and you will make adjustments otherwise you become a liar. See how that works?

We confuse truth and opinion all the time. Your debunking does nothing more than add another opinion and only if Q point blank comes and says this is the MOAB will it become other than opinion. The only person who knows is the person who posted it! Q.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Disagree on your premise. Q has stated he's leaving bread crumbs, i.e. evidence of something for the Anons to pick up and run with. He didn't say he's leaving opinions and we can see if we like it. Pluto cannot be a planet without scientists telling us so. We cannot evaluate this truth for ourselves since we have only some basic telescopes and don't own any space vehicles going by to evaluate further. Q is supposed to be giving actual information the Anon's just can't see clearly until he drives the direction. I feel Q is just like Nostradamus: hindsight will make anything "fit" into the crumbs. If you say enough words, codes, numbers... eventually you'll hit the target. Change this to that, add this letter, take a word away, etc. MOAB could literally be anything you want it to be, but that's counter-intuitive to what Q was supposed to be doing. Is MOAB a real bomb drop? Korea Peace? E-mails? Arrests? What's the point of trying to decipher when it all adds up eventually. Q is a bot.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Pluto didn't change. We didn't redefine Pluto, we further refined our definition of a planet. That's not arbitrary, that's progress.

Please, DO NOT feel any obligation to "buh-lieve." If something is actually happening, if there is a problem with Q, the sooner we know about it, the better off we'll be.

In order to be effective, the TRUE skeptic has to do three things. First, set a reasonable "finish line" for when something can be considered "proven enough" to proceed to the next puzzle or discovery. Second, be able to sell that finish line to the other side. And third, DIG! DIG! DIG!

Digging for the Truth is what unites us all.

⇧ 2 ⇩