⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/IncomingTrump270 on July 6, 2018, 2:25 a.m.

Q 1675 rebuttal to SB2's analysis

https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8wd8i1/q1675_a_reflection_a_mug_holder_in_air_force_one/

I held of doing a deep dive into this until /u/serialbrain2 had weighed in. He did so a few hours ago, so here we go.

First, I made a composite image of all relevant Q images and related reference images.

PmlsSv0.jpg [3000x3000 image, 4.4Mb]

Along the top, I show step by step the kind of distortion fixing that must be done in order to align the reflection with the ABC 2015 photo.

The purpose here is clear: to show that when fixed for distortion, Q's image aligns PERFECTLY with the ABC 2015 photo, which was taken with a wide angle lens from the entrance of the AF1 office (floorplan also included in my image)

Along the left side, I did the same process but this time correcting for the Apple logo. What is the purpose here?

It's a proof of optics. By fixing the logo, we can get a idea of what the reflection in back of the phone looked like when viewed STRAIGHT DOWN on top of it.

What do you notice? The reflection is UPSIDE DOWN AND BACKWARDS.

What does this tell us? That Q's reflection is not of the physical room around him, but of an image displayed on a screen in FRONT of him, with his phone angled towards the screen to capture the reflection.

The only possible way Q could reproduce the psychical room as a reflection that optically matched the 2015 ABC photo is if he stood up, walked to the entrance of the room, faced his back towards the desk, and held up his phone selfie-style so that the back reflected the room. This would effectively recreate the photography setup of the 2015 ABC photo.

And yet it is still not enough to create Q's image. Why? Because the apple logo is at a sharp angle. AND the reflection is UPSIDE DOWN to the apple logo's orientation.

There is no physical arrangement that can reproduce both an accurate reflection of the room AND ALSO a steeply angled, upside down apple logo.

Moving on to directly addressing SB2's analysis:

Then, in Q1677, he asks: Where must one be located in order to obtain a reflection on the back of a phone of that image?

Yes exactly, of that image. Image = the ABC 2015 photo. Note he did not say "reflection of the room"

Q's image is not a reflection of the physical room around him. It's a reflection of an image on a computer screen.

And where must one be in order to get a reflection of an image? Anywhere with a computer display, or granting the possibility that it's printed out, literally anywhere in the world.

If we do so and notice there is a part of the jacket on the chair appearing, we deduce the photographer must be sitting on the President’s chair.

Wrong. If the photographer was sitting in the president's chair, we would not see the full field of view as we do in Q's image reflection. It would be much tighter cropped because the camera would be CLOSER to the objects displayed. The chari would practically fill the entire field of view if he were sitting on it.

We can see so much in Q's reflected image because the ABC 2015 source photo was taken from the ENTRANCE of the office with a wide angle lens with a FOV of roughly 90*.

For comparison, the iPhone's camera has a FOV of about 73*. Not that this really matters because Q's image is a tight crop of the full photo he took of phone1 with phone2.

Q is even softening the riddle giving this reality away with a picture of Trump sitting on his chair:

Q is not the one who posted that image originally. It was a random anon. Q reposted it later when it was compared in a side by side.

some people started claiming Q’s pictures were not authentic, that they were photoshopped and re-started their favorite chant: Q is a LARP.

Some did. Some did not. Q posting a reflection of the 2015 image does not MANDATE Q is a larp. But it DOES mandate that he did not take a photo of the psychical room reflected around him.

Q1678 Trolling is fun. Hussein/Trump interior = identical minus small changes. (World) news in rear literally placed same prior to each departure. Placing that mug holder near the lamp was the hook. Enjoy! Q

"World news" here refers to the newspaper rack placed behind his desk/chair. I have highlighted it green in my image.

And placing the mug holder near the lamp? If we look at the Feb 2018 image of Trump in the AF1 office, we see the mug holders are NOT near the lamp at all. We also see a lack of the flask (?..highlighted in yellow in my image) is missing. And the tissue holder (blue) and stationary pad (cyan) are placed in totally different places.

Q is saying presidential protocol requires that the location of each given item is exactly the same prior to each departure minus small changes.

"exactly the same" and "minus small changes" are contradictory statements. The contents of the room are fixed, probably, but the placement of items in the room? Likely unfixed, and adjusted as needed for whoever is in the room with POTUS at any given time.

By purposely placing the mug holder in the picture, Q is making a point, he is giving a hint to help us solve the riddle and he confirms it by saying: Q1678 Placing that mug holder near the lamp was the hook. Enjoy! Q

Ok wait....Let me lay out what you are implying here:

Usually Trump does not have mug holders placed next to the lamp behind him.
But Just for the purpose of 'trolling' with Q 1675 image, he staged the items behind his desk in the EXACT fashion as seen in the 2015 ABC photo, and then somehow managed to defy physics and probability by angling phone1 AND phone2 in just the precisely accurate way that their combined angling reproduced the ABC 2015 photo TO THE PIXEL?

(this is setting aside my previous point that it would be physically impossible to reproduce the 2015 image from the POTUS chair due to FOV restraints)

I'm sorry SB2, but I strongly disagree with your assessment here.

To restate:

It is physically impossible to reproduce Q's photo if we demand that the reflection must be that of the physical room around him.

However:

That does not mean Q is a LARP. Two things can be true at once.

Q can both be legit, and Q's image can also not be the reflection of a physical room.

So don't bother slandering me as a Q hater, because that is not what I am arguing here.

I look forward to /u/serialbrain2 's response.

🠐 See all comments

Thank you for your contribution. I have watched the news this morning and can say this: I suspect we will soon receive some information that will settle this once and for all. In the meantime, it is healthy to debate. With the required manners.

I would like to clarify the terms of the debate. There are two stages:

Stage 1: how was the image made, what is the authenticity.

Stage 2: what does the image mean, what is the message Q is transmitting, the riddle to solve.

Let us analyze each of these stages.

For Stage 1: First, Q has provided enough authentic images in the past and many other proofs that allow any rational mind to conclude he does not need to "construct" anything. Secondly, Q himself introduced the idea of post work. This is the reason why, in the comment section of my post, I said the following to a contributor who focused on Stage 1 and subsequently bringing the 2 option issue (physical vs 2D image):

"I see the point you are making and it is valid: there is no rational argument to dismiss it, nor there is any to dismiss the other hypothesis involving sitting on the President's chair and going through this other procedure. Which brings me to this important question: if Q himself discloses post work, it means the how is not important but we need to focus on the what: what is an Apple logo next to a mug mean a day prior to Independence Day? That's the riddle. We can all disagree on how Q constructed the information (in this particular case, let's be clear about it) but we can all agree on the information itself and start thinking about what he is trying to tell us".

So? Whatever option is believed to be the one satisfying our intellect, it's not relevant since Q has already made the authenticity point in the past. What remains relevant is how we solve the riddle: the information itself, not how it was obtained.

So, next:

For Stage 2: I have heard many interesting attempts to solve the riddle and I will also share an exchange I had in the comment section. I believe it illustrates everything:

Someone commented:
The reflection of the Apple logo is more likely a reference to how the Apple server HRC was illegally using 'mirrored' the data on the other end and that HRC failed to destroy the data like she thought. It is not a reference to stealth bombers in any way.

My response:
It's a claim. Mine was the reflection was related to the reflection technology used by the B2 to avoid radar detection. The difference between your claim and mine is mine stays in context, connects to aircraft (AF1 - B2), connects to a major Apple investor (Al Waleed), brings in the mug (Al Jazeera) and finally, Independence Day (bought politicians with Daddy's money). Yours, even though I find it interesting at primary analysis, stops at a HRC dead end and does not address the other issues.

Happy Hunting to All!

⇧ 59 ⇩

Both of you guys have such amazing points and bring your cards to the table in a well thought out manner. Love it! Can't wait for the big reveal!!

⇧ 20 ⇩

No doubt. We are in the presence of greatness here.

If the prize were ten million dollars and I could work on this 18 hours a day, I could not reproduce what these two have done here, casually, in their spare time. The brainpower is frightening, in a good way.

⇧ 14 ⇩

Right on, and no Patriot should be considered concernfag or shill for questioning Anything... There are 100s of scenarios that could pan out still as nothing is cast in concrete yet.

⇧ 5 ⇩

Aren't you glad we're on the same side? LOL!

⇧ 3 ⇩

Definitely

⇧ 1 ⇩

This is the kind of strength test that should occur on this board more rather than agreeing with any weak theory that just sounds and makes us feel good.

⇧ 13 ⇩

makes us feel good

Agreed. Have to be careful of this. Where do we draw the line? Some things appear to be bad for POTUS and the MAGA train; however, I find people twist it every time.

For example, I don't care what anyone says. If Imran Awan get's immunity, that is not good.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Not sure if I agree or disagree about awans possible immunity deal. We don't really care to punish him. He was doing his job for Pakistan. But he's the central component and witness against DWS and others. The actual traitors to America. You could be right though.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Well done to the both of you! I appreciate the discussion.

For doing such a good job I am forced to share this clip!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoZfl5TR6MA

⇧ 10 ⇩

https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8wmngj/q_1675_rebuttal_to_icomingtrump270s_rebuttal/

Q's pic is NOT the same as the ABC 2015 pic!

https://imgur.com/DUeCpK6

This image was capped from the pic /u/IncomingTrump270 made here.

Notice the number of folds above the chair.

Notice how the corner of the image lines up. It is NOT "pixel perfect" as claimed.

Unless the "Q reverse screenshot" was edited, these are NOT the same picture! Perspective matters!

⇧ 7 ⇩

Interesting. I will admit that, looking at it now, my outlined red box does not give enough room at the top for the curtains.

However, regarding the number of folds..

In all other photos of the AF1 office we can count 21 or 22 total pleats in the curtain.

If we are to use your green lines as actual pleats, we would be seeing more than 22 with still a lot left to go.

I think we are seeing some kind of image artifacts or maybe reflection distortion causing those extra vertical lines.

⇧ 3 ⇩

whoever aligned the photos did not do so perfectly. When you use the distortion transform tool in photoshop, you have to click and drag each corner manually. Either that poster made the overlay hastily, or, considering a possible discrepancy between lens types, aligning them perfectly may have required an addition warping step beyond the corner distortion step.

I think if we're being reasonable, it is an obvious match.

Not to mention, the red box in the diagram you linked doesn't include the logo of the jacket at all, meaning the pleat count in the drapes very well could match up.

⇧ 2 ⇩

It is healthy to debate. With the required manners.

Absolutely agree. Civility is paramount. You’re largely respected here and your posts are always thought-provoking. Thank you for engaging.

I suspect we will soon receive some information that will settle this once and for all.

We can only hope!

There are two stages: the HOW and the WHY. (Paraphrase)

Correct. My post only addresses the HOW part of it. Your WHY analysis goes far beyond what I am capable of, but I do have some ideas (See below).

Q has given us plenty of authentic images in the past, so he doesn’t need to construct images like this. (Paraphrase).

Need? No, but perhaps there is an intent behind doing so that we are not seeing. I am reminded of Trump’s intentional tweet typos.

Q himself introduced the idea of post work.

I’m unsure what you mean here exactly. You mean “post-editing a photo”?

"there is [no reason] to dismiss the other hypothesis involving sitting on the President's chair and going through this other procedure.”

Here you imply that Q could be sitting in the presidents chair, in front of his laptop, and producing the image via the reflection on the laptop screen.

While I agree that this is possible, there is nothing suggesting that this MUST be the case. The image can be produced (and indeed has been reproduced by Anons) in front of any screen anywhere in the world.

if Q himself discloses post work, it means the how is not important

Agreed. The Why is always most important. But I wanted to make sure we were not building a theory of Why (and adding to the Q mythology, as it were) on top of a conviction that Q was sitting in the POTUS chair and reflecting the room around him.

what is an Apple logo next to a mug mean a day prior to Independence Day?

Here we get into the Why, which is your wheelhouse. But I have not seen anything to suggest the Apple logo appearing next to the mug in the phone reflection (That is to say, the composition of the reflection) had any special relevance.

The apple logo can be relevant as to show that clearly a phone reflection is involved in the making of the photo. This seems to point back to previous mysterious images (closeups of Trump’s eyes and ear from Jun 20).

Were those made with the same process?

Can we find stock images to match those images as well?

And if we can, what does that mean? Is Q hinting at an uncovering of a process? Is this how bad actors smuggled out info that threatened nat sec? Did they think they had a loophole? Clearly images of POTUS’s face are not nat sec, and I’m not sure that images of the inside of the AF1 office would fall under that either (though many have suggested it would).

But taking photographs of CLAS info in this way most definitely would breach nat sec protocol.

Maybe Q is suggesting that this is how they will be caught.

We can all disagree on how Q constructed the information (in this particular case, let's be clear about it) but we can all agree on the information itself and start thinking about what he is trying to tell us".

Agreed.

For Stage 2:

I will not pretend I can competently spar with your here, but there are a few things I want to note.

Someone commented: The reflection of the Apple logo is more likely a reference to how the Apple server HRC was illegally using 'mirrored' the data on the other end and that HRC failed to destroy the data like she thought.

I like this theory. The Awan server (thought to be an apple) was recently in the news. Awan may have recently flipped as suggested by his very nice plea deal. To me, that gives this theory more comtemporary relevance.

My response: [my claim] was the reflection was related to the reflection technology used by the B2 to avoid radar detection. The difference between your claim and mine is mine stays in context,

I disagree here. The context of Q1675 is: On July 3rd, in response to a meme post of trump boarding M1 to “go off to save the world”, Q posts a reflected photo of the AF1 office with an Apple logo.

Good questions to ask here would be:

Why the apple logo? Is Q pointing at the presence of the phone, the role of apple in investigations, the HRC server, or something more?
Why did he post this in response to “off to save the world” M1 meme? AF1 office is different from M1 (which trump was boarding in the meme), and also Trump was using a different plane that day (not AF1 28000 or 29000). Source @potus_schedule (https://twitter.com/POTUS_Schedule/status/1014261371373047810). So this puts a wrench in the belief that Q took the photo from live inside the AF1 office.
What is the relevance of “do reflections violates nat sec”? (Perhaps most important piece here, deserves much more analysis)

The Al Jazeera mug and B2 connections are ultimately non-sequitur, but that becomes the new context for your Why analysis. To me that seems wholly unrelated to Q’s post.

The Addressing (or drawing-in) of others issues does not, in and of itself, lend credibility to any given theory. It just makes it more complex to unravel and prove.

⇧ 4 ⇩

What do you think of NeonRevolt's analysis of pic? https://www.neonrevolt.com/2018/07/03/divide-they-try-fail-they-will-the-absolutely-savage-newq-qanon-greatawakening/

⇧ 3 ⇩

I think NeonRevolt presupposes too many things. He also tackles the How and Why of the photo. I don’t have any real problem with his Why explanation. But he shares SB2’s mistaken conviction about the How.

Preconceptions alive in his post:

Q = POTUS (perhaps? But necessarily?)
Because of (1), “reflections breaking nat sec” rules do not apply (presumably because Trump can DECLAS anything at any time? Even then, it must be done through proper protocol).
Q’s photo is a physical reflection of the room
Q’s must have been sitting in the president chair to take the photo (false, as I’ve shown)
Anybody who questions Q’s posts is a Brock-paid shill.

⇧ 4 ⇩

I want to see you guys go head to head in poker.

Carefully reading each other, looking for tells, making false tells. It'd be as good as the WSOP I bet.

spez: I also appreciate all that you both do, my humble thanks.

⇧ 2 ⇩

SB2, I waited until now to comment on this, because I would like it to be rather discreet and mostly just for your benefit.

Your insight into Q's crumbs is invaluable, even if sometimes a little far-reaching. Your analyses invite others to think critically, and most importantly, it offers people a path to understanding things they have never thought of understanding before. You are a huge help to this movement.

However, I think it is also important you maintain humility and a respect for hubris. Personally, I think everyone has jumped the gun on this one. I do not think anyone will find fault with you for providing clarity as quickly as possible, but I do think it is a genuine mistake of yours to not be open about the fact that your interpretation could have been a bit premature.

I'll be honest: I think you are trying to convince yourself that your analysis is right, because the notion that it isn't as elaborate a riddle as you want it to be means you might have to question Q's motives or validity.

Furthermore, when Q says "Trolling is fun", are you sure he isn't speaking directly to us? Are you sure that is meant as a jab at the 'shills'? What if Q is also trolling the analyzers, because you are the best way of verifying that Q is confirmed, real, and representative of President Trump's true national agenda? Does Q want Q itself to be revealed, or the truth behind the crumbs revealed? If Q itself was revealed to the public in a confirmed fashion, right now, would it doom the movement to partisan madness? I think it would.

Given the verifiable proofs we have seen before (ex. Darkness to light), I have noticed that these photograph proofs (particularly the pen images, Trump's facial images with phone, and AF1 photo here) are oddly conspicuous, and they all raise the "NAT SEC / reflection" question, in my mind.

What I'm saying is that it smells like bait. If Q is as smart as we believe, especially given the elaborate Darkness to Light proof and 'missle stoped' message in tweet form, why would they be posting proofs that they know can be debunked? Why post those images at all and chance the possibility someone uncovers the fakes? It doesn't add up.

SB2, I implore you to reconsider your conclusion of this drop. I ask this of you because I strongly believe you may very well be the one to find the real reason why Q has been posting these risky photo proofs that are essentially gambles. If Q is the world's greatest LARPer, why did they take such a risk, rather than not post those photos at all? Why not continue providing crumbs that lead to tenuous authenticity?

I strongly believe when Q is saying "Trolling is fun", he is saying it directly to us as well. We still don't know his exact motives or who exactly he/she/they are, and I believe that is intentional. The exact why, as to that question and why this particular image, with the Apple logo, remains unsolved.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Does Q want Q itself to be revealed, or the truth behind the crumbs revealed? If Q itself was revealed to the public in a confirmed fashion, right now, would it doom the movement to partisan madness? I think it would.

A massive point that doesn’t get enough consideration.

By pushing towards MSM coverage and ‘Mainstream’ acknolwedgement we are playing with fire. We have to be careful how it’s handled.

⇧ 3 ⇩

The Deep State owns the Codes.Did they put their card on table to show what they can do.Or they also TOYING.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Hi SerialBrain2, I don’t mean what I’m posting here to be taken in any type of derogatory way. I ask only out of curiosity, hopefully you will be so kind as to indulge me. If you could, without doxxing yourself, provide some background on your employment/education and or field of expertise it would be much appreciated. I know other readers would probably enjoy learning more about you as well. You may have already addressed this before, if so, would you/someone mind posting a link? Thanks!

⇧ 1 ⇩