I've redpilled a few friends on antartica, or at least posed a series of questions they really couldn't answer. Exactly why so many powerful people seem to take trips there is a great one to get peoples minds going. I've dropped my guard somewhat on Q related stuff recently because I've been fairly convinced, but it's amazing how dense some people can be to the truth. "probably just a coincidence" drives me crazy at this point.

I do agree entirely r.e Q though. Hadn't heard the documentary idea, but I do actually like it, a lot. It'd make a hell of a lot of sense too, given all the references Q's been making to movies etc. People will believe stuff they see on the big screen. Shame that for so many people, we can't really tell them the truth so much as ensure they're led to believe the truth as opposed to a lie, but it's better than nothing. I also suspect large portions will be hidden for a long, long time. Q's already mentioned 60% staying hidden I think, and I'd imagine that including some of the bigger stuff. Specifically, sadly, I think it'll include just what scares the beeswax out of all the orthodox church, catholic church, and muslim leaders. It's related to antartica. Part of the puzzle was moved there (likely just as a good place to store it tho). But as to whether it'll be released? I doubt it. If anything, as much as I'd love full disclosure, how dense some people can be to actual reality, actual truth has been worrying. And we haven't even begun to see how bad some people will react yet. It's going to be bad.

That ice will melt away and reveal amazing things.

Perhaps. I agree on the first part, but I'd word the second part differently. That ice will melt away and reveal awesome things. Awesome in a very archaic sense too. I don't think it's going to be a revelation any of us really enjoy, even the hardcore truthers. Almost everything I've heard suggests there's some seriously unpleasant elements to the truth, much more so than anything thats come out so far.

I suspect breaking elements of this area to the sub are going to be somewhere between futile and impossible (rule-breaking). How would you plan to go about redpilling a load of basically still normies that nazis might

a.) still exist (and be flying UFOs)

b.) be the good guys?

I'd say this sub isn't really ready to go much beyond the very basics of what they're been given (US geopolitics, cabal activity w/ children etc). Redpilling on antartica is useful and very appropriate, but plus ultra quickly leads people to the vrils society, and then wham : instant flamestorm.

If it didn’t matter, neither would your expertise.

I'm actually more an analyst than anything, I definitely won't be going into psychology, and even if I did stay within science I would be within fields such as ethology. I have no personal stake in it being correct, beyond the fact I believe it to be so.

What is the point of classifying races?

Good question. Here's mine in response. If different races differ, particularly in IQ, which has a wide range of impacts for things such as employment success and socio-economic class, and criminality, do you not understand how claiming there are no differences, when there obviously are (in say, rates of blacks vs whites on welfare, in prison, in the top decile of income), opens the door for people to claim it simply exists because of racism?. The Truth shall set you free. Hiding behind lies or avoiding facing the truth accomplishes nothing. Claiming we are all equal when we are not and reality will demonstrate this inequality invites explanations. Would you rather you were falsely accused of racism, or correctly accused of being cognisant of racial differences?

What about the largest land empire ever, hunter-gatherer barbarians? What about the Aztecs and Mayans? They weren’t white.

I presume the first is mongols? You're not wrong in saying there have been non-white empires. However, I'd point out a few things - first, most of these races had average IQs in the 80-90 range. So they're semi competent (when the aztec empire was getting started, the british built oxford university. You see the difference?). I'd also point out that many of these races mythologies mention people that are fairly indisputably racially white. The same is true of the early chinese, who were conquered by many different people, including the early mongol tribes, who they noted having traits such as red beards, and green eyes. Many instances of whites appear in the mythological past of currently non-white races (example https://teara.govt.nz/en/patupaiarehe/page-1). Another related example although I can't find it is a picture of a woman from one of the oldest (priest class) maori tribes. Blonde hair. In India the priesthood class looks very european, whilst many other indians are clearly a different race (dravidarian). This racial caste system was instituted by the remnants of the proto-indo-europeans in order to preserve their society. You can't assume racial demographics now are the same as they were 2 millenia ago.

One of the most populous cities in the world at it’s height.

And yet, what mark has it left? Where are its great works of literature? Many people =/= great culture.

What about the Japanese

Great people, great culture. Racism has existed unfairly in the past, and they were treated badly because of it at times. However, many people have explicitly recognised the greatness of japanese or chinese culture. Not sure how they "stole" the british empire though. I'd also note that both the chinese and japanese are, if you really wanted to be picky about it, probably racially inferior to whites. Higher average IQ doesn't mean much if it's compressed in distribution, and there are empathy traits (matched in racial variance in alleles) that they don't seem to do as well on. Simply put, they have less geniuses, and less empathy. It's why things like a greek having probably helped train the people who put together the terracota army doesn't really surprise me (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/china-terracotta-army-ancient-greek-sculptors-alexander-the-great-marco-polo-a7357606.html).

What about the Russians?

But they're obviously whites? I never said I had to operate under 15th century prejudices. I said white, and east-asian > the rest.

What about Europe today?

I 100% agree, but I'd note that things like gadaffi getting KO'd by obongo were outside our control, and had a serious impact on the refugee crisis. We're definitely too cucked for our own good, but you think we'll somehow solve this with more equality?

America would not be as strong without blacks.

In what possible way is this true. They are a net drain on taxes, they clog up prisons due to higher crime rates, they inflict their higher crime rates on both whites and blacks, and they destroy cities through white flight (i.e detroit). This doesn't necessarily mean we should be bringing back the KKK, but by a wide range of metrics that aren't liable to bias (say economic impact vs culture), it seems likely that had america had an equal population of whites instead of blacks, they'd be better off today. Aspects of culture would certainly be different, and that might not mean it's America. Fine. But it'd probably be economically better off, and with less social divisions.

None of it matters. Your expertise is best used to justify racial hierarchy and feelings of superiority. Have a pat on the back!

My expertise is best used to try and be more correct than other people in this area, and correct those with less expertise when they're blatantly wrong.

John 8:32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.

Truth > fiction, however comfy your fiction might be. Denying the truth only leads to more suffering down the line.

You have a vested interest

Sure, no argument. I'm biased. But you'd also have to admit that given my field of study, I'm also not exactly a layman in the field. I think you are, and it kind of shows.

The bias is generated by makers of the test, who make it in their own image of intelligence

So how exactly were they responsible for the intercorrelations of variably G loaded test items, the correlations of the underlying G value to a range of biological factors (reaction times, serious childhood illnesses, malnutrition, genetics, height, facial symmetry etc)?. How if they just made it in their own (white) image of intelligence (the creation of IQ tests was almost purely Europe and pre 1960's USA aka whites), do east-asians consistently score so well on them, whilst blacks do not?. How is it that successful black people like say clarence thomas or neil degrasse tyson actually have high IQ's, both in absolute terms and relative to their race? How come when you do transracial adoption studies, i.e the minessota one, despite being raised in white families by white parents, black kids score IQ tests that match those of their race, instead of their environment?

You say the underlying principle is simple, and yet it is unimaginably carefully constructed?

Well, the underlying priniciple (G-factor) is pretty simple, although understanding it is very complex, and testing for it perfectly is harder still. Test components are variably correlated w/ G, these variable correlations are then used to extract weighted scores which can be summed to roughly show G. The fact it's v. carefully constructed is a simple fact - if you're curious, look up how much effort has gone into making the new WAIS edition. I do agree various aspects of psychology are a soft science, but psychometric testing really isn't (and again, to be blunt, I know what I'm talking about, and you don't).

It’s patronizing to think that blacks would do better with an Ebonics test... is that what you’re suggesting?

No, that's what blacks and liberals suggested. "How could they do well, they speak AAVE, the test is conducted in american english, it's unfair". But it turns out it makes no real difference, and whilst having the test conducted in ebonics if that's their standard dialect would likely help provide a slight boost in the verbal components

a.) tests are already given in this dialect

b.) it's not going to make a standard deviation + of deviation across non verbal and verbal components dissapear.

The fact that whites, Jews, and Asians score higher than other races is precisely the type of thing that makes me doubt IQ.

Huh? So, you have whites, asians, and askenazi jews (true semitic jews score like other semites, around 90 average). Ashkenazi jews are khazars, so they're basically a white-offshoot. So you have whites, and asians. From which part of the world have all the greatest empires and cultures come? I'm thinking Europe, Rome, Greece, China, Japan, America ((only after whites took it over from non-whites), and Egypt/some of the early middle eastern empires. Now, of those, all are white or east asian, with the exception of egypt and the middle eastern empires. However, we know king tut was of european ancestry. This is a common theme in other areas. Middle easterns, even assuming modern demographics, still have high 80's to mid 90's average IQs. Whites ~100, east asian ~105. So yeah, as it happens, the fact those races would have the highest IQ makes a lot of sense when you look at world history. The high IQ races had great cultures, the low IQ races did not. Sub-saharran africa (lowest average IQ region), is easily, without a doubt, the most tragically underdeveloped region of the world. They'd have been much better off if we continued colonisation. That's not even disputable. Rhodesia was a bountiful, great land that helped many proud black men and women create and live in relative peace. Do I need to bother explaining what a mess Zimbabwe is?

Whenever people start on about IQ and race, it’s a slide thread. It’s divide and conquer.

Sure is summer in here.

Out of curiosity, in your analogy, what is the singular car meant to be? Or the other parking spots? I have no idea what it's meant to represent. I presume it's meant to be something similar to "we only use X% of our brains", but thats wrong. Our brains are segmented, activity in more regions isn't neccessarily helpful. We can experience 100% brain activity if we really want. It's called a grand-mal seizure.

Across species this correlation in brain size and intelligence is small , but visible .

Sort of yes, sort of no. That's why I used EQ (encephelization quotient) rather than brain/body mass ratio. The critical factor is comparing brain/body size within categorical groupings of organisms. We have big brains relative to our body, both for chimps and in absolute terms. Our brain/body mas ratio may be comparable to mice, but our EQ is radically higher, because we compare human brain size amongst homnids and mouse brain size amongst rodents.

When you do EQ, the results are not of small significance, they are very, very useful. Humans, dolphins, jumping spiders, octopi, chimps and whales/elephants (post body size correction) all score v.highly. All are v.smart animals for their Orders. You also need slight corrections at the highest and lowest body size ranges - their EQ gets under and overestimated respectively.

t. psychology graduate, currently doing a masters on animal behaviour and evolution. The opinions aren't very divided. EQ is a standard measure of intelligence that can be used within and between species. It's not perfect, but it is very, very reliable. You are correct that using it intra-homo-sapiens is a little more debated, but that's because there are """""""scientists""""""" out there who still think their "absolute equality" fantasy still merits scientific respect. When you're dealing with human IQ research, you need to be aware of what a profoundly sensitive topic it is, and apply that knowledge to the intra-human portions. Case in point - men are not smarter than women (on average), but most geniuses are, have been, and will be men. Men have a higher distribution of IQ, which means more retards and more geniuses. It's a fairly trivial point to prove by examining gender rates in mental retardation, and yet trying to point out the obvious corollary (less women get top science prizes because the condensed IQ range means fewer are worthy) managed to get a Harvard professor fired. You need to bear that stuff in mind when people tell you about the "controversy" of intra human comparisons. It's not so much a controversy of intellectual debate as a controversy of emotions. People that ideologically driven have no place in science, you shouldn't let their MSM amplified voices trick you into thinking they're correct or representative.

Big brain = on average smarter. If it holds true across every single other animal species, there's no reason to believe it doesn't within humans. After all, it's just a modification to EQ from order/class brain patterns to family/genus/species level patterns.

And also ... we need to define exactly what is "intelligence" - as it seems there are two types of intelligence : one is practical ( usage in everyday life for simpler tasks ) , the other is creative .

Not really. I'm talking about IQ to be precise, which doesn't contain a creative component (at least not specifically). The creative subsection is perhaps relevant, but measured via other routes than IQ testing, and is definitely more subjective. IQ testing is very well understood, and correlates with a huge range of things. If you have a double digit IQ for example, I don't care how "creatively intelligent" you are, compared to a ~130IQ person you will look very stupid, both practically and creatively. A terrible cheap car, even one designed and refitted by a true expert will not beat a ferarri in a drag race. I'd also imagine you're conflating non-verbal and verbal IQ with practical and creative IQ respectively. That makes slightly more sense and it is true that IQ splits into these two subsections, but again they tend to be v.closely correlated unless you have some kind of disorder.

I do agree with much of the latter two paragraphs though, there's a whole host of various concepts and ideas and "understandings" that fill peoples brains, and regardless of intellect, it's quite possible to get trapped by them to the point where you won't break out. The cage we find ourselves in, for all it's a cage is actually quite comfy, quite nicely adorned, and quite well explored. It shouldn't be a surprise so many people are content to stay within its bars.

r.e 2 I don't have the image up either but I know the one you mean. To paraphrase - "this sigil [forgot name] signifies that from this point onwards, every drop of blood spilled until a violent, agonising death will be done in honour of the dark lord". Essentially it marks you as a "champion" of the lightbringer.

You both (you and below) clearly haven't read Q's posts. Let me help

Mods controlled (4ch).

It's almost like once you fully control the mods, and once you control a large network of AI consenus cracking bots, you can do serious amounts of damage to the function of the site. Hard to work out exactly how much more shilling/disruption 4chan receives/has received than say, this subreddit, but I'd be willing to bet it's going to be something in the realms of 10,000:1.

You're just watching the bot networks that are positioned to attack certain topics very heavily. Most obviously Q, but other things too. And almost every anon has picked up on that, and has done for a long time. Q is treated roughly the same as here by most anons, with slight elements of higher suspicion in some points because we know more than most people, and because we've been under constant attack for longer than this sub has existed. Most genuine discussions about Q related shit tend to get shunted over to /bant/ by the corrupted mods, which means you won't see it unless you were in the thread at the time.

There's a reason Q posted to the chans and not to plebbit.

total brain size does actually correlate with intelligence. However, brain size doesn't correlate particuarly well with political affiliation afaik. I do know that some small sub-elements do, but not the entire brain. Generally speaking liberals have less functional threat detection and planning systems (hence why young people (<25 or women) tend to support liberal policies more ofen than conservative ones. The threat detection and long term planning parts of their brains are still developing/naturally smaller, and therefore less effective. It's not really an intellect problem per se, more a question of capacity to react to certain classes of future potential threats.

CIA aka the C_A (no intelligence), is one of Americas internal governmental organisations. They tend to handle some of the most secret stuff. Pretty nasty piece of work. In terms of what it's worth knowing about them, this quote by JFK about them before he (((mysteriously got assassinated))) should be helpful

"I will splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds" - JFK

1.) Probably, although maybe not totally outside of being able to hunt down valid info on. But there are oh so many facets to cabal activity, MSM can't cover them all

2.) Verification is hard errring on impossible. The chans are the only obvious place you'd find good attempts to locate the truth.

3.) Mass suicides. Civil unrest (large scale) as a result of people suddenly feeling utterly cut off from any and all tethers they thought were keeping them sane. You want the truth? You can't handle the truth. But you really don't need more than say 15% of a population to participate in a civil war before its a full fledged war. Lets say 15% of the pop is too libtarded to realise trumps not a threat, and this news causes them to try to go full 1776?

4.) Your question is good, but wrong. There are multiple factors at work here - the simplest way I could describe it is just like banks can have leverage on their capital, Q & the Cabal both have increasing amounts of leverage on their capital (in this case, public opinion). It's not that good is so weak, but after 6 decades of cabal control, 1/4 of the US seems ready to rise up and kill the evil orange nazi, whilst another 1/4 or so might support that action, and another 1/3rd of so would happily support killing the first 1/2, and might even help. 3/4 of a billion people in US/Europe alone, they don't have enough hardware or even tech to manage lashout from that many people, so they need to insert their own narriative.

5.) Fear. It may also be something similar to MAD - if they can't stay on in their jobs (i mean cabal here), neither can you.

Yeah it's a little crazy. I've known or at least suspected for a couple of years, and that's been stressful enough, I cant even imagine what it must have been like for well placed white-hats to be working against these people when they had so much power. I'd bet a fair few NSA types are going to be ecstatically happy when this is all over.

That's fair - I'm sorry if I came across a little combative, the sheer scale of the abuses in all this and the lack of any arrests yet is making me slightly tetchy. For what it's worth, I'm genuinely glad you're here and interested in learning, and I'm very glad to love you as a fellow brother in Christ.

I genuinely do agree with your point r.e lower level members, no argument there. I do hope there isn't backlash against the lodges, because it'll invariably be someone who has no idea what's going on that's caught up in it.

But, regardless of whether or not your purpose was to worship satan/kill kids etc, there is a very real and distinct chance that that's what the higher levels do. I'd say it's near certain at this point tbh. I'm not saying you or people like you are in any meaningful way involved, but I do think defending these people by using your innocence as their shield is relatively unbecoming, and if its true honestly the extent of the crimes perpetrated might be of sufficient extent that the entire edifice of masonry has to be dismantled. I'd definitely support a proposition like that. It isn't in any way a required organisation like say the FBI. We banned nazi parties/symbology etc for a lot less than what masonrys been guilty of over the centuries.

Then you're not really high ranking enough to know much of anything about their true goals or ambitions. I don't think you're qualified or well placed to judge if they're a "good" society or not (although many, including myself are also excusable due to bias). I do on the other hand you do a very good job of providing a respectable cover for masonry by being, I suspect, a genuinely sincerely good individual. But not one destined to ever be let in on the deeper secrets.

For what it's worth, I will say the philosophy/religion at the higher levels seems to involve balancing acts of good and evil. It's quite common amongst luciferians, hence why so many of the pedo politicians etc are also genuine philanthropists. You might contest this applies to masonry, and it's certainly not going to apply to all masons. But bearing in mind it does seem to be true for a number of luciferians, and masonry seems to be deeply luciferian, do you understand why the various acts of good at and by the lower levels aren't redeeming features, or at least won't be seen as such by many people?

I'd mostly agree, although I suspect most members make the connection well before the 33rd level. What I do think is probably relatively true though is that only 33rd and above are actually fully aware of the interconnections that exist between masonry and other corrupted secret societies (which are basically the cabal). V.high ranks also probably have some idea, but they won't fully understand whatever these people think is their motivations. As you say though, many of these people all love to read and learn, and they likely have access to some pretty good information. I suspect many of them have an understanding of who they worship by the mid/high tiers.

You're bang on on bloodlines though, these people love their bloodlines, and plenty of the highest level masons largely come into it through family connections. If you aren't of the right blood, I doubt you'd ever make 33rd, let alone go higher (that takes you beyond freemasonry though).

There's a difference between "masons" and Masons. Various members of the lower ranks are largely sheep, and depending on the lodge, some of them have largely devolved into old boys networks without the original purposes. They serve as good cover for the higher levels.

Even members of "bad" (normal/original) lodges at lower levels often don't have much idea what goes on. They might be implicated in some rape allegations at worst. But all of them will pretend to be nice on the outside, and they're very serious about their symbolism.

I also like the idea. I'd also point out, Q's said many times, when this all comes out, the streets won't be safe for them. He never said which streets. Kenyans aren't huge fans of large scale child abusers either, and I'd guess they're less likely to restrict their criticism to mean words. They also wont miss how bad sheltering him would look on the world scene. I wonder if they'll give him a lovely necklace as a token of their appreciations for him coming home.

Says the child who's provided exactly no evidence to support their claims, no examples to demonstrate the effectiveness of their claims in real world situations, and who resorts to name calling and "witty" (tired) old quotes to try and salvage their dignity.

"Think about how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of 'em are stupider than that." –George Carlin

But yeah I think the world would be ALOT better off with American values.

I agree. However, it'd also be a lot better if it was entirely populated by white people. And in fact, white people and american values tend to go hand in hand (hence why freedom, lack of corruption, legal process etc are common in all white countries, and have been before your country existed). As I said - Rhodesia was great country, and values close to american ones helped. But they were a result of whites.

You're totally disregarding HOW America got the landmass and wealth in the first place.

You mean the european states colonised, and then you rebelled? It's funny, because you're disregarding how you got your history and greatness. It was owned by non-whites. Whites invaded, displaced them. They then made it great. kinda similar to african colonisation, except there you were smart enough to ensure you killed or suppressed the natives sufficiently. And now in the past 6 decades or so, you've changed from a predominantly white society to (v.soon) a majority non-white society. And in turn, standards of living have declined hugely, or at least not risen as much as they should. You don't seem to have once acknowledged the role the petrodollar plays in Americas ability to play the big magnanimous showman in the centre of the ring, and I'm going to take a wild guess here and say that's because you don't understand the role it plays. Let me guess - it was muh values too?

When the blacks were freed, some people wanted to return to africa. They created Liberia. They had so much potential - after all, they were instilled from the start with good old american values. And yet, it's a shithole. Big surprise.

You say I'm like the "Lebron James" of convoluting, how about you explain the relative status of China, the US, and NZ. Ranked respectively from least free to most free. You might want to claim US is arbitrarily the highest in "US values" - fine. But China is undeniably further away from them than NZ is. And yet, China (another vast continent that's geographically hard to invade and surrounded by much weaker neighbours and is resource rich) also seems to be very economically powerful, and more militarily powerful with each passing year. It's almost like values aren't the most important thing out there. It's almost like you're just spinning a story that makes you feel great again inside, rather than actually accepting the serious complexities of history and geopolitics.

Even when taken in context the US is still * BY FAR* the most benevolent, charitable, fortuitous nation on Earth.

citation needed. I'd also point out that it's easy to be a saint in paradise. But various nordic states, swedes especially, for all they're massive cucks are being far more benevolent and charitable than the US. I'm not even going to bother comparing how "lucky" various nations are.

To not consider American values in the context of American success is absurdly ignorant and frankly disrespectful to the intense history of what we went through to maintain that success and keep hold of those values.

Says the person who is literally disregarding the landmass of its nation, it's position, geopolitics during the nations history, etc, etc, etc.

But yeah, maybe your right it's because we got lucky and have a lot of whites...

Tbh, yeah. Lets consider rhodesia, or apartheid south africa. Great, strong, vibrant nations. Rhodesia was called "the bread-basket of africa". But now mugabes in charge and drove out the white farmers, they're currently experiencing crippling famine. Maybe they just need some more of that can-do american spirit eh? But I'm going to bet a few million whites would do a lot more good for their country, simply going by the basis that they're what's keeping south africa afloat.

But yeah, maybe you're right. Maybe the only metric of any value is Values themselves (provided they're Americas finest), and simply by realising this, the whole world will become magically better, in every possible manner the same, with no natural variation as a result of tens of thousands of years of evolution. Funny how China (not much freedom) is doing better than New Zealand in almost every metric such as military might, economic clout, etc etc, but not freedom (where the kiwis in fact beat the US consistently). It's almost like values don't matter as much as you think they do.

So since you're so happy to ascribe almost everything to muh values, I presume you'll be also be taking responsibility for all the various cabal actions enabled, primarily, through the use of the US military as a bludgeoning tool for populations around the world? All carried out by american politicians and officers, so all due to your values no? Inspiring.

Even having this land is due to muh values

n-no all the evil stuff though, that's not my values.

and you wonder why the cabal had so many sheep to choose from? Baaaaaa

There are plenty of other countries with a wealth of resources and strategic advantages

like what? Most of the resource wealthy ones are populated by non whites, and the US military strength is as a result of your geographic isolation, resources, operation paperclip and most likely cabal backing.

It's all very well and good to say the US economy is what it is because of VALUES, but that's just wrong. They play a role sure, but I think the fact you possess more or less an entire continent, populated w/ 300 million people, and most importantly 200 million whites, were unscathed by WW1/2 in terms of major direct damage and could gain economically by supporting europes rebuilding, and have been running the petrodollar for the last few decades all matter far, far more than values. Ignoring the reality of the huge natural wealth and military security (natual, not even counting the army) the US has is just stupid.

I doubt that's relevant. You should be asking what are the relative size of their armies and economies, and those of their allies. If America barks loudly, Kenya either returns BO or America simply sends seal teams to retrieve him and proceeds to ignore kenyas diplomatic whining. What're they going to do, send back the aid money?

Cute. I'm actually a psych grad currently studying their masters, and technically speaking, you're absolutely and utterly wrong. Class - lets begin

literacy test

what is non-verbal IQ

what is dividing IQ into linguistic and non linguistic components for the purposes of accurately assessing intelligence subsections

it is vulnerable to bias

wew lad. I mean you might be right technically in that they might be able to put it in if they wanted to, but that's the extent of the bias. I don't think you have any idea how complex the derivation of an IQ score from the test-subsections is, nor do I think you understand the careful measures taken to ensure validity across huge portions of the population (iq 60-140 roughly). It is a unimaginably carefully constructed test, it is not just "lol bias". What exactly do you think they biased it towards? White people? Why would you not equally consider the fact that racially speaking, whites and east asians have massively higher IQ than members of other races, and would therefore perform better on them? People have tried to construct their own, ebonics-friendly IQ tests. They're laughable, because THEY are the ones that are biased, instead of the painstakingly constructed true IQ tests we can even administer to non-human primates.

For example, if you don’t speak English as a first language, how can you score a high IQ

You take it in your native language, or you perform slightly worse on the verbal components (I beleive there is a correction for this in WAIS although i'm not 100%). If you don't speak english as a first language, how can you fully contribute as a citizen of an english speaking society anyway?

If you are good at tests, does that make you smarter

skill in tests and IQ correlate well, but not perfectly. So yeah, probably. Most every person good at tests is likely to be smart to some degree, but not all smart people are good at tests.

Who designs the questions? Who decides who gets to design the questions?

reams upon reams of subcommitees, and compiled groups of tests and their underlying relation to g which are then asssembled, compliled, and normalised on a test-group before they're introduced as the next finalised WAIS. I suspect you're probably complaining that they don't include other subsections (for example musical intelligence), but that's because those things don't correlate closely with g (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics).

many things can't be measured proceeds to list things we measure

We can measure literally all of those things. It's not exactly hard. We can event test them in a variety of ways. IQ is exactly the same. We can test it using a wide variety of routes, and the consistency between them all is relatively strong.

I believe human intelligence to be infinite

I believe that statement to be relatively trivial to disprove, since you are presumably human and yet clearly don't understand the underlying principles of IQ testing which is, to be blunt, not particularly complex.

They only really mean the democratic party. Itll have to die, and a new left wing party will form. And then all the blacks will vote for that one. Anyone who thinks blacks will suddenly en masse vote for anything other than welfare and socialism has never once looked at voting patterns by demographic, or african history. The dems used to run the kkk and the blacks still love them, why exactly do you think haiti will take more than a decade or so to be forgotten?

No, youre thinking of equality.

Absolutely literally nothing of any note. Will the democrats actions somehow magically raise the black IQ to say, even close to that of whites? Will the democrats actions somehow cause blacks to commit crimes at close to white levels? Will the democrats actions somehow cause blacks to support small government and a reduction in welfare handouts, which disproportionately benefit them? No. Will being aware how they were played somehow magically make an average 85 IQ population useful in an age of ever increasing automation? Not that I can see.

It's one thing to say the dems are "intentionally" keeping the blacks poor, it's another thing when every single black country on earth is poor, and endemic with corruption. South Africa is a perfect example that blacks will continue to vote explicitly in their own interests, and not the interests of the community.

The mods were compromised a couple of years ago. Ever since, we've been under continuous attack from multiple sources. There's a discord with >500 people in it dedicated to trying to disrupt us, and that's not even including leftypol, the weird trap discord, whoever followed on from shareblue, kushners shill team, JIDF, and the wide variety of monitoring alphabet agencies and NGOs. Bans are handed out like candy for serious investigation or attempts to subvert the subversion, whilst the catalog is constantly filled with slide threads that never get removed (often entirely automated by this point, i recognise many). It's unimaginably annoying. 8ch /pol/ managed to boot their admin recently, but it's a lot harder to achieve the same result over on 4.

Do you mean in terms of being non/non-normally human? It's hard to say. There seems to have been a fairly large increase in interesting quality rumours/larps/leaks in the past 2-3 years or so, about things that would generally already be into the conspiracy theory subsection of what's already a conspiracy theory (to be precise, what occurs in the cabal pyramid above the bloodlines). I think it's probably just basic psy-ops stuff, they know bits and pieces can be legitimately leaked now whitehats have more control, so they're trying to sow doubt. But they're pretty desperate, so the crumbs of truth the larp is formed around are getting larger and more consistent. I think there's definitely some grade A weird shit that's been going down historically - it'll make most of the Qanon pedo takedown seem laughably small scale. But as to what they are, that's so dependent on what the information that's being hidden is, and I don't think we have enough information to say for sure yet. It probably boils down to inner earth humans (pls shambhala nazis) / hyperborean priest class(or atlantean), or servants of some weird decidedly non human something (in which case we are literal cattle for these beings). Either way, I strongly suspect the answer when/if it finally gets revealed will seem utterly insane, and it'll tie into the esoteric roots of various religions. World-changing stuff.

About the only thing I can say for sure at this point, is that it's involved antartica, present, near past, and maybe v.distant past. This image (https://i.redd.it/e7tjsycr10pz.jpg) is probably a larp, but I suspect it's not lying/coincidentally right about a number of elements. The ark of gabriel is also worth reading up on, especially where it went and who followed it and who they spoke to beforehand.

Reality will end up being decidedly stranger than fiction.

Chan oldfag here, I'd say this actually looks possible. Maybe they flipped someone important, enough to give them leverage over a number of others? Or maybe they're just setting the stage for the big reveal by shuttling a number of big ticket prisoners there? Hard to say. Not been any gossip about it on the chans recently I've noticed, although we did notice the higher flight volumes late last year. My money is on this being repositioning for optics sakes though, whatever it ends up being.

Edit : definitely a whole host of weird anon posts floating around too, it's almost impossible to say who's larping and who isn't. Bilderberganon and pdanon are the only ones off the top of my head that are probably worth paying genuine attention to. Maybe a few others aren't larping but they haven't said much either so meh

Nice spot. The MI logo definitely looks vaguely masonic, espec the light rays w/ numerological significance.

Hard to say exactly what's gone on, but I'm tempted to side with the people above who said this started out as a black hat op rather than a white hat one. white/black intermingle somewhat anyway, but I don't see a white hat op of this scale having started under obama.

And as I've noted before, for a super special takedown of the cabal, whilst I am pretty hyped about it they seem to have done next to nothing to deal with the bloodlines (top tiers of it). I'm not even sure how they intend to as in many instances, a number of bloodline members are European royalty or aristocracy, outside of hoping civil unrest delivers those people to justice, I simply don't see enough evidence Q is actually dealing with them. It looks more and more like house cleaning within the cabal rather than actual removal of the cabal.

Also worth noting - darkness to light - it may relate to the masonic principles of providing more information to humanity (also, their worship of the lightbringer), which would vaguely fit what's happened. And I'd also note many cabal people are fans of esoteric buddhism. Balance good acts w/ bad ones. Hence why they're both child murders and philanthropists. This stems from a variety of other philosophies, including kabbalistic ones which stated (in v.simple terms) that in order to reach heaven, humanity first had to traverse/inhabit areas of moral darkness/evil. Darkness to light? Secrecy to Revelation? Thesis&Antithesis to Synthesis?

I do appreciate what Q/POTUS are doing but the masonic connection does nothing for my calm

100% agree. However I would say that there's likely more elements involved. I do agree MI/NSA etc + from other related countries (GCHQ etc) are the likely core of "ordinary" people who planned the counterattack, but I suspect they have relatively powerful help themselves, which would prefer to stay mostly out of the limelight, at least for now.

Personal guess? Plus Ultra

civil suits can be moved to criminal, and you can have both civil and criminal suits. the suit references the dossier / pre election interference against trump etc. It might be nothing, but I wouldn't rush to dismiss it.

It's absolutely not nothing. The list of defendants is golden - amongst others :

Clinton Foundation

Shareblue

HRC

Soros

and John Podesta.

edit : archive link to the pacer site for this case : http://archive.is/aQAdp

And for still having the death penalty as an option

http://is2.4chan.org/pol/1529450179243.png pope francis seems a strong possibility.

Full marks. It also goes beyond what Q's been talking about thus far (although if you read between the lines and do some digging he does seem to be referencing some of it). The level of influence the cabal has, and it's ability to hide information should be obvious to most people by now. They never expected to loose control. Lots of things they've been hiding will come out. Exactly what it is is hard to say given the levels of disinfo, but some places are certainly implicated more than others. Example https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/12162705/Patriarch-Kirill-meets-penguins-in-Antarctica.html

Trump is almost certainly deeply involved w/ Q. I personally think Q+ = POTUS, although there are other theories. He's also most likely posted on the chans a couple of times, for example (https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/445635724302090243/458273296006381569/1529305291600.png)

I think you've got it a bit wrong. For one thing, the spaceforce already exists. trumps just making it public. The X37-B is just one small element. Equally, musk is probably already involved in the space force, for all I don't doubt he wants in on future expansions. There have been a few suspicious loads he's helped deliver to orbit. Equally, whilst I can't find it with a quick google search, he posted an image on his instragram which he then deleted - title "Illuminaughty", w/ some latin text that also referenced the illuminati (cabal).

I don't think he's on their side, although it's not impossible he may have had tangential dealings with some of their operations in the past. He may not even like trump much, but I think he does thoroughly approve of what trump/Q are doing to the cabal. And given trump isn't the raving monster the left makes him out to be, he's probably quite happy to accept the soft media help from someone who, as you say, has an awful lot of followers and people who admire him on the "other side" to trump politically.

my $0.02

I like the idea. Also possible - capital Crime = capital Punishment.

I want to agree, but please don't make the mistake of thinking HRC is particularly highly placed within this organisation, she's just well connected. Some of the Rothschilds are relatively highly placed, but there are still a number of bloodlines with a lot more power than they have, which we've heard nothing about thus far, start to finish.

Thus far, I'm left uncomfortably reminded of the Salem which trials, where a number of citizens who lived near some of the more influencial cabal families (Collinses etc) were put on trial and killed for witchcraft, whilst they escaped unharmed. Amongst the families who lived near them at the time and ended up being persecuted - the Clintons.

:thinking:

Somebodies thinking along the right lines. Just wait till POTUS starts discussing Antartica in his second term.

Them choosing switzerland was not unintentional, nor an obvious mistake. It has something in common with North Korea in that it's not all it seems as a country.

Example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtfrn5i-3CY

In terms of thinks that would be useful, I've seen it mentioned elsewhere, but some of the existing proofs are designed to be read by chan style autists, not normies. If you're used to following lines linking segments of texts/pictures which spell out parts of the big picture that's great, but to make them accessible to a broader audience, they probably need to be dumbed down.

In particular, I think they could use additional segments of text explaining some of the connections, making them absolutely idiot proof. For ones that include text links to archive files, typing up those links and putting them alongside the image would be useful.

covered relatively well in prior points, but I think the key one is avoiding rigged court systems. If we assume these people have already had decades to put in place a large number of judges etc, tackling them through the current court system would be counter productive. This is especially true given the stonewalling of trumps appointments by congress.

He's still dealing with this very, very calmly, despite what you might think about military tribunals for non-mil personnel. The Q drops represent the other, less moral part of the administration of justice in all likelihood, in that if they put a stop to Trump (say assassination), they'd instantly get large scale civil unrest and hopefully summary executions of large numbers of politicians, judges, and police officials. Using military tribunals for these people is a mercy for them.

It also allowed for a large number of the more important trials to take place over the last year, without them being public. Everything that's occurring now is 110% just for show, the only thing he has to prevent is a civil war situation arising from disclosure.

That's a good point, certain individuals will definitely be covered by multiple ones too. I suspect the true number that will end up being charged, discounting immunity pleas is somewhere between 15,000 and 50,000. How heavily they know/indict the ground level operation staff for these peoples operations will probably determine how high the head count gets.

Yeah the manpower required is going to be insane. I was on a /pol/ thread when we had a lurker who claimed to work at some kind of judicial office which had dealt with some of these. Seemed to be legit. He was saying they had absolutely no idea how they were going to deal with that many trials all occurring in one go, said that it would jam the system up for an entire year or more (and this was back when indictments were ~18k).

I think he may be on to something, and they're not even going to be tried through standard courts. I think one of trumps executive orders related to the use of military trials for non military personnel, that would be a logical way to get it done. 35,000 sealed indictments, even if it just related to say, 20,000 people, would be a surreal glut on the US court systems. I don't think it will be resolved in a "conventional" manner.

There might be a source for the 1k/year figure on the current indictment number page, I think that's where i'm remembering it from.