[_up]

A lot of things Q says isn't verifiable yet, and maybe to most not believable but that doesn't make them categoricly "false". He predicted Christ Church hours before it happened and even said it will probably be a mass shooting this time outside the US. Although he claimed Europe as the country it might happen. He also predicted the El Paso shooting 48 hours in advance but wrongly claimed it happens in the next 24 hours. These are very close predictions and you also have to consider that an exact prediction would start people wondering if he couldn't have prevented them.

[rsynnott]

> He predicted Christ Church hours before it happened and even said it will probably be a mass shooting this time outside the US.

Hold on, what did it predict exactly? Did it say "there'll be a mass shooting in New Zealand, on a specific day" or just "something violent will happen somewhere, maybe"?

You're being taken in by a very old technique; make many, many, very vague predictions. Look at the daily news every day, either personally, or farm it out to your fanbase. Cross-reference the daily news with your library of predictions, and take anything that could possibly be read as predictive. Rinse, repeat. Nostradamus was a well-known offender (or, rather, he made the predictions, his fanbase did the rest). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postdiction#Skepticism

[toomanyrichies]

> ...you also have to consider that an exact prediction would start people wondering if he couldn't have prevented them.

This sounds an awful lot like the "When he's right, he should be lauded, but when he's wrong it's because of $valid_reason." Am I summarizing what you're saying accurately?

And if so, I have to ask- is there anything which would convince you that QAnon is untrustworthy and/or full of BS? If so, what would that be?