Has Q chucked it?
- Thread starter Robert
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 10,783
- Reaction score
- 6,516
Thought this was a piss take at first but no, it seems Mr. Dilbert really has fallen down the Q hole.
He'll soon be warning us not to play Judas Priest backwards.
He also comes out with this beauty:
By that logic Joe Brown, Joe Baker and Joe Bananas are all the devil.
The whole video is here. Relatively sane until about 28 and a half minutes in when the "satanic coincidences" woowoo starts.
He'll soon be warning us not to play Judas Priest backwards.
He also comes out with this beauty:
By that logic Joe Brown, Joe Baker and Joe Bananas are all the devil.
The whole video is here. Relatively sane until about 28 and a half minutes in when the "satanic coincidences" woowoo starts.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 14,933
- Reaction score
- 2,142
Thought this was a piss take at first but no, it seems Mr. Dilbert really has fallen down the Q hole.
He'll soon be warning us not to play Judas Priest backwards.
He also comes out with this beauty:
By that logic Joe Brown, Joe Baker and Joe Bananas are all the devil.
The whole video is here. Relatively sane until about 28 and a half minutes in when the "satanic coincidences" woowoo starts.
He must be a relative new convert to the conservative side. These sort of conspiracy theories about a Republican president (or candidate) being the literal devil has been around since at least the Reagan administration. The Reagan is the devil one was probably the loudest, but they also targeted both Bush's.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 10,783
- Reaction score
- 6,516
From memory, he came out as pro-Trump in 2016, before he was elected. However, I am happy to concede that being pro-Trump does not necessarily make anyone a conservative.
On the other hand he does appear to be a relatively new convert to Q-flavoured numerology, symbolism, satanic conspiracy theories and general moon-howling bampottery.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 14,933
- Reaction score
- 2,142
In defense of Scott Adams, not everything he has said is wrong even though he was attacked for it at the time. He correctly predicted Republicans would be hunted down in the street, and Biden hasn't even been elected (yet?).
The media is framing it as a generic "one dead in clash", except there was no clash. He was executed simply walking down the street. This is not an isolated event.
- Joined
- May 17, 2005
- Messages
- 12,253
- Reaction score
- 2,690
I'm not sure that he is, but he does like to float balloons. I doubt that he thinks these things but he is looking to plant things in minds that might.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 10,783
- Reaction score
- 6,516
It's one thing being ignorant enough to believe such woowoo, but if he's the type of person to play on the gullible by encouraging them towards nonsense like satanic numerology and symbolism, then he's as much of an arsehole as any faith healer.
- Joined
- May 17, 2005
- Messages
- 12,253
- Reaction score
- 2,690
I wonder if this has anything to do with the trial balloon Scott seems to be floating:
Trump allies see threat in evangelical support for Biden
Trump is an obvious atheist who transparently panders to the Christians (because that's what politicians do with voting blocks - which is part of the reason I am uncomfortable with the growing numbers of Muslims, because they are at least as nutty as the christians, but I digress) so he has a weakness here with a constituency the Republicans have courted for decades.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 10,783
- Reaction score
- 6,516
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,808
- Reaction score
- 793
So far as I've seen his commentaries, it's his way to ridicule things.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 10,783
- Reaction score
- 6,516
In the context of either just the "satanic coincidences" section, or the whole 40 minute video, I didn't see it as an attempt at ridicule.
Perhaps too subtle for me.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,808
- Reaction score
- 793
I eh, do have to admit I haven't seen the video.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 10,783
- Reaction score
- 6,516
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,808
- Reaction score
- 793
So it's now "Woke" versus "Redpilled".
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 14,933
- Reaction score
- 2,142
I've seen a couple things lately to make me question the media talking points about Qanon that we've seen in this thread. I wonder if the most outlandish statements about them or examples are simply astroturfing. I may have to look into them. This video has nothing that jumps out at me as crazy. A lot of what they are saying, I have said right here for ~15 years. I'm talking about the apparent Q side, not the Liberal Media smears. I don't trust a word of the Liberal Media, they do nothing but lie. The Deep State exists. People are starting to see there is indeed a global ped0phile ring with all the arrests and subsequent "suicidings".
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 10,783
- Reaction score
- 6,516
Which one, Jim Watkins or the original 4chan one (forget his name)?
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 10,783
- Reaction score
- 6,516
Could be we're both wrong. I stumbled across this podcast from a year ago which looks at Scott Adams (and rather tenuously links him to Q anon). If what the podcast claims is true, Adams has been a wuwu-believing crackpot since way before Dilbert was a thing.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 14,933
- Reaction score
- 2,142
The Qanon movement in general. I've heard the movement itself called just Q. I don't know the various players yet or 100% proper terminology, but I'm going to look into it. The video I posted above mentions a person called Q+, who some speculate is Trump himself. I find that to be a stretch, but would sure spice things up
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 10,783
- Reaction score
- 6,516
Whenever you get around to diving down that rabbit hole, you'll discover the original half dozen or so "Q drops" on 4chan were almost certainly made by different person(s) to the resurrected Q who posts on 8kun (widely believed to be the work of site owner Jim Watkins and friends).
You'll also discover that whenever Q makes a prediction, regardless of which Q it is, it's almost always wrong. Right from the very first Q drop which wrongly claimed Hillary Clinton would be arrested the next morning.
-EDIT-
Here's a screen grab of the first two Q drops:
Needless to say, Q doesn't predict too much nowadays, preferring cryptic messages or copy-paste drivel.
The fun really starts with the "bakers". These "anons" are self appointed interpreters of what Q actually means. They take the cryptic "breadcrumbs" (Qdrops) and "bake" them into fully formed "bread" predictions about all manner of crazy nonsense, often utilising symbolism and numerology.
That's one of the reasons we end up with such wonders as Bill Gates caused 5G cell towers to spread Covid-19 as a smokescreen to vaccinate everyone with tracking chips, secret mass arrests of anyone not right-wing enough, their subsequent executions and replacement clones, ritual eating of the faces of live babies and a time-travelling Lord Trump who is battling satanic forces to save the universe. No Q drop (to my knowledge) specifically said any of these things but some of the "anons" interpreted them that way and spread the gospel.
As for the movement itself, well that's rather murky too. Most of the people I know that have simply fallen for any of the above nonsense have never heard of Q but the ones that are evangelising and peddling it most certainly have.
Last edited: