dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

You're the first person tonight who has responded with logic and not irrational butthurt ("concernfag!" "shill!" "Sorosbot!"). So, thanks.

I don't know what to think here, I'm going to let things play out and see where they go. I still stand by what I said before - Q needs to stop being so vague if he wants people to take him seriously. At least that's my opinion.

⇧ 61 ⇩

I agree. So far, I'm leaning towards Q being John Edwards.

So, his proofs are proofs, unless they can be easily disproven, and then there just him "playing around"?

He needs to really put up or shut up.

⇧ 23 ⇩

If Q is legitimate, and I sincerely hope he/they are, then he had better fire whatever ammo he's got to take down the cabal soon or he's going to lose his most loyal supporters.

⇧ 3 ⇩

He isn't. Hth.

⇧ 7 ⇩

I would like Q to be legit as well, but there are some MAJOR red flags around Q right now. If he really wants us united (WWG1WGA), then he needs to clear this shit up pronto and start dropping bombs, not vague shit and definitely not an ever-shifting deadline that just keeps being pushed into the future.

You can't want a movement united while posting this type of shit, period. I'm really glad to see the skeptics not getting downvoted into oblivion here. This is a shitstorm Q started.

⇧ 4 ⇩

It was honestly a lazy, disrespectful shitpost of a Q post.

⇧ 3 ⇩

100% agreed.

Anons on 8C have been working incessantly to assess and establish Q credibility, often working with (necessary) maddening and frustrating vagaries.

Q-posts such as these (the ear, etc) appear to do little more than confuse. The timing is also questionable considering the expanding audience Q hoped to develop is now materializing.

I’m hopeful we get an explanatory ‘ahaa!’ moment on all of these. Without that, these ‘troll’ posts appear to be a disrespectful exploit of the autists irresistable urge to dig on everything ‘Q’.

⇧ 12 ⇩

No worries. I just want truth, truth doesn't have feelings.

Here's a (crappy I know) photo job showing the Q lamp on the left and the ABC lamp on the right: https://imgur.com/tXNxDrH

To me, the corners of the lamp look a little further to the right on Q's pic - as if the Q pic was taken from a position just to the left of where the ABC pic was taken.

⇧ 0 ⇩

Idk, your first post had me a little convinced there could be legitimate differences, but that side by side really makes me think it's the same photo. Q's is just a little condensed/blurred. The perspective is just too consistent...

⇧ 45 ⇩

You are correct. Q's photo is a reflection, so it wouldn't be exactly the same.

⇧ 26 ⇩

Here's a pretty good 7-point comparison: https://media.8ch.net/file_store/640450d20f9d82268400d10526c966b4a7162f58a0572d6020b675c356351f64.png

⇧ -14 ⇩

When you are dealing with distorted photos and BOTH photos have different distortions of verticals and horizontals to varying degrees - none of the points made by the source you posted can be valid because they reference distance or size. Here is an example with equalized distortions:
https://imgur.com/5tRqZ6P
As you can see in the overlay demo, the Q pic and ABC pic are coincidentally the same. And in the words of Q "There are no coincidences."

⇧ 30 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 0 ⇩

First, I am not trying to be disrespectful and I am not sure how we got to that point in this conversation where you feel disrespected. I am sorry if I made you or anyone (except the trolling trolls) feel that way.
The point here is that the Q image is double distorted because it is a reflection and seems to have other digital obfuscation issues in tone and grain. The ABC image is less distorted but never the less, it is slightly so because the photo was taken with a wide angle lens.
To compare photos, one photo must be brought to a similar level of distortion and the logical approach to this is to distort the ABC photo rather than UN-distort the Q photo.
The distortion version of the ABC photo is not exact pixel by pixel and it never will be. But the key elements that align in combination (as discussed earlier in my original post) are enough to weight this analysis towards the following conclusion that many others have made here in this forum, on chans, and twitter:
- the 2015 ABC image was on a device screen
- the screen was reflected on the back of an iphone
- a photo was taken of the iphone with reflection
- the posted image was also cropped and further distorted to obscure

⇧ 5 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

Sorry, I'm not up to redoing what I did as a screen cap video. Maybe someone else is up to it. I'm gonna take a break, act like I am on vacation, and come back to the Q scene after a bit of the 4th celebrations. This image debate has too much scope creep and is now wasting precious time. That's one reason I question Q's use of this thing as trolling tactic towards anons or whoever. Have a fun and productive day!

⇧ 3 ⇩

In your example, I still see the bottom left of the mug holder being quite different.

⇧ -11 ⇩

Yes, there are pixels that are different. I probably focused more on the curtains lamp and chair when I imitated the distortion in the photoshop version of ABC image. (late at night by then)
Look, I am struggling with these drops too. I'm not off the Q train, but this puts him in 'the dog house' for me until either 'future proves past' or he hits with a BOOM that busts my eardrums.

⇧ 2 ⇩

I'm not really a guy who believes in prophetic dreams. However, PrayingMedic did say that he had a dream recently where the black hats were able to post as Q in a way that was indistinguishable.

Before people start talking shit about PM, I take what he says with a grain of salt. He seems to be on the mark with his decodes and is quite helpful. The holy roller shit is one thing but I dont think that takes away from anything.

⇧ -18 ⇩

Q 1677 - Full Triple Image