so dont state it as fact

and if you think about it there is very little that can actually be confirmed in the way you are demanding now

in life i mean

99% of our world views depend on assumptions

yes, but truth is not assumption, its factual

your truth, and my truth, is different then the factual reality of the verbage

well as i said: q factually confirmed it, but did not provide evidence

confirmed does not == proven

i too believe what you believe, BUT its belief and opinion not confirmation

confirmed just means another source gave you the same results

you said confirmed, not that we believe based on assumptions of Q's posts that he is "blah blah blah"

yeah but by standards that high you cannot even really disprove flat earth

well let me put it another way: is there another option that makes sense?

sat footage? world maps? physics of water / liquid mass in 0 g...

who else could be Q and not have gotten completely fucked by now?

who else would potus work with?

who else would work with potus?

thats for the msm to ask so we get a real CONFIRMATIOn

occam's razor does not provide me many alternatives

again you conflate fact with assumption

well i feel that might be coming very soon

and that is the hope

no i am pointing out that there aren't many possibilities

but feeling... common, we dont work on feeling here... and when we do, we know its assumptive and theory

and i see no particular reason to question this particular assertion

not many possibilities =/= the assumption of what we believe is true

like i said if we maintain these kinds of standards, can you even know with certainty that grass is green?

or the sky blue? cuz we could have a long discussion about reflection and refraction and all that shit

its not about questioning. its your wording, dont say things in 100% fact if it is based on assumptions

i never said it was 100% fact based, someone asked if it was confirmed and i said it was

you said confirmed, confirmed is fact

wrong

confirmed means getting the predicted results from another source

one asserts a thing, another confirms getting the same results in his experiements

doesn't mean they can't both be wrong

evidence does not == proof

^i told you this dude does nothing but argue and junk up the chat with nonsense

lol bloozer have we met?

Ya you banned me fir giving an opinion on the new mexico compound

You were all butturt and abused mod powers