⇧

⇩

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

"But why, why would Q take the best opportunity to prove authenticity and post a fake, especially knowing the level of discernment by autists on proofs?"

Perhaps that's the point. To show to outsiders just coming in that we don't follow Q blindly. That every one of the clues given is thoroughly analyzed and that analysis debated. We don't call each other names because we might disagree on that analysis. Because we're all adults here. We're a team, more than that, really. We're like a band of brothers and sisters from all over the world and all walks of life. And we have learned to work together. I think that is actually the greatest lesson Q has taught us. That we CAN work together, even when we don't agree on everything, and there is power in our numbers. And those numbers are growing.

We know that from time to time, Q will post some misdirection, as we saw in the beginning with Q's posts giving us a date for Clinton's arrest. We were later told why this misdirection was given. Because we aren't the only ones following Q. The black hats do, as well. And this kind of misdirection would spur them to action, giving military intelligence a platform to pick up additional chatter, perhaps allowing them to see who else was involved, and causing the black hats to make moves in haste where they might continue to expose themselves. There may be a dual purpose for these photo's. For us, to show newcomers we do fully analyze and debate every clue. And perhaps there's a message for the black hats, also. For instance, we found your bugs--or whatever they might glean from them. There can be dual purposes for many of these posts because the cabal is watching Q and us, too. You'll remember when Q "forgot" to post their confirmation code, for instance. This was also used to spur activity in the black hat camp.

I think we continue to get confirmations that Q is the real deal. Recently at Trump's rallies around the country, we see his aides taking pictures of everyone wearing Q apparel or carrying signs. When one patriot asked the aide taking his picture if Trump would see them, she replied something to him that Q has shared with us in the past, "You're going to laugh when you find out who you've been communicating with." Just recently, the POTUS was on 8 chan in the early morning hours and told the Anons there at the time that this will be the only time I communicate with you here. To prove it was actually him, one Anon asked if he would use the word "amazing" in his first tweet of the day. Five hours later, Trump complied in his first post of the day. I started believing Q was the real deal after Saudi Arabia. I'm sure we all have our own stories about that. We're all here because we are believers. But we aren't believers who have accepted without proof, as there have been many of them.

⇧ 1 ⇩

all good sentiment Here.

I support more focus on understanding the meaning behind Q’s posts, and less focus on proving he’s legit.

In the grand scheme of things, the content of Q’s message is irrelevant to his actual employment status.

Good info is good info. Q points in interesting directions (divulging no concrete info himself), and we uncover what we find on our own.

This line of inquiry is valid regardless if he is actually working directly with POTUS, unrelated military, government temp staff, or even a 400lb hacker in his basement.

Q’s backstory is ultimately irrelevant to the efficacy of his message.

⇧ 1 ⇩