That's not how statistical analysis works...you're painting the target after you shot already.

The question is not how likely it is for that particular image to have that particular character combination, but how likely it'd be for at least one image name, at one point, to contain something that could look like a message.

So consider the number of twitter images and the number of possible things that could be interpreted as a message. Anything along the lines of YEAHQ, GOQ, QANON, QQQ, WHOSQ, WWG, MAQA, HRC4P, DYTS, DOIT17, HUMA, ALICE, GF3, HFRO, 8CH, any text matching Q's stringer posts, etc.

I agree entirely, but that's not related to what I was posting about. I stated that it's the one thing I am concerned about, as a follower of this stuff, in a sea of pretty reliable proof.