Does Anyone Give A **** About The Origin Of The Virus?

[flightsimmer]

In this illogical world of today it would seem logical that the communist government was running a lab to create biological weapons for (insert reason here) and mistake was made and it got loose from the lab. When the scientist discovered it they informed the party leaders who then made illogical decisions based on honor and pride not science, this is why I call it the Communist party virus. Trump is nicer in calling it the Chinese virus.

 

[HoughMade]

Yes. Because it matters.

House burnt down. Does it matter whether it was an unavoidable electrical fire, or arson for the money? (or even you playing with fire and Everclear while drinking heavily)

In the greater scheme of things, sure it matters...but it doesn't matter that much until the fire is put out.

 

[spencer rifle]

In the greater scheme of things, sure it matters...but it doesn't matter that much until the fire is put out.

Sure it does. You don't put water on an electrical fire. Knowing what started it is essential if you are to select the proper method of extinguishing it. Someone in China knows, and it would be helpful in developing treatments. But they aren't talking.

 

[NKBJ]

Accidental release?
Nope.
It takes time and money to contract for, prepare and deploy a weapon on schedule.
That doesn't happen by accident.
The Chinese did a bang up job fulfilling the contract.

 

[OakRiver]

they have such great safety protocols..


https://us.cnn.com/2020/09/17/asia/china-brucellosis-outbreak-intl-hnk/index.html

Wait a second. So, CNN publishes an article that calls this virus "Malta fever or Mediterranean fever", but calling COVID the Wuhan virus is racist?

 

[Leadeye]

Wait a second. So, CNN publishes an article that calls this virus "Malta fever or Mediterranean fever", but calling COVID the Wuhan virus is racist?

Malta has much less cash and probably isn't spending it at places CNN likes.


Always follow the money

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I have, until the last few days, held a very dim view of the Wuhan Lab narrative. I simply thought the simpler more reasonable explanation was a people willing to eat and handle things which the West shied away from (for good reason, we associate them with disease) had brought upon themselves disease.

I listened to a Joe Rogan Podcast few days ago with a Bret Weinstein. Mr. Weinstein is not exactly my cup of tea, but he is a controversial figure and an Evolutionary Biologist which makes his thoughts on one thing (a virus) relevant and interesting.

If you jump to the 1 hour 57 minute mark in this Podcast https://youtu.be/pRCzZp1J0v0 there is an interesting discussion which takes place on why Mr. Weinstein now believes Covid19 may not be a "natural" virus. I thought his statements were interesting and reasonable based upon his reported expertise.

Warning: Much of the Podcast is a real slog for most of us on this forum. I have been trying to challenge myself to listen to the "other side", if for no other reason than intelligence purposes. There were parts of this however that I just couldn't stomach and jumped past.

Good find! Weinstein was saying the same thing the Hong Kong virologist on Tucker Carlson's show was saying... there are several parts of the virus genome (DNA) that appear to be spliced in from elsewhere. They aren't just an evolutionary mutation difference from what is out in nature.

Also, note that the Rogan interview with Weinstein was from JUNE according to the Youtube timestamp!

 

[Keagan2828]

I was literally just thinking about this earlier today. Crazy to believe they said it came from people eating bats there at the beginning

 

[jwamplerusa]

Good find! Weinstein was saying the same thing the Hong Kong virologist on Tucker Carlson's show was saying... there are several parts of the virus genome (DNA) that appear to be spliced in from elsewhere. They aren't just an evolutionary mutation difference from what is out in nature.

Also, note that the Rogan interview with Weinstein was from JUNE according to the Youtube timestamp!

SheepDog4Life, it knew it was an older episode, Rogan had mentioned that episode in a more recent one which drove me to listen to it.

When I listened to Bret Weinstein, I had not heard of the Tucker Carson interview with the Hong Kong Virologist. Frankly having now watched both, to a laymen, the statements are eerily similar.

 

[Alpo]

A Chinese virologist claimed the coronavirus was 'intentionally' released. Turns out, she works for a group led by Steve Bannon.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucel...avirus-has-ties-to-steve-bannon/#22881f1222d5

 

[DoggyDaddy]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucel...avirus-has-ties-to-steve-bannon/#22881f1222d5

About the author of that opinion piece: "I am a writer, journalist, professor, systems modeler, computational and digital health expert, avocado-eater, and entrepreneur, not always in that order."

So yes, it's clear that he is qualified to make judgements about her claims. WTF is "digital health expert" anyway? Someone that advocates for anti-virus software? He knows that computer viruses and real viruses aren't the same, right?

 

[Alpo]

You can google a lot of articles published in reputable periodicals if you have a problem with Forbes.

But, attacking the author isn't the same as attacking his facts. If you disagree with his facts and have rebuttal facts, lemme know.

Otherwise....pfffft.

 

[NKBJ]

Why is anyone still even thinking about whether or not the release was accidental?
The answers centering upon intent (cui bono) and what it bodes for our future should have dictated the actions of individuals a long time ago.
"News" has been used to keep people befuddled, neutralized. Quite effectively.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

You can google a lot of articles published in reputable periodicals if you have a problem with Forbes.

But, attacking the author isn't the same as attacking his facts. If you disagree with his facts and have rebuttal facts, lemme know.

Otherwise....pfffft.

I didn't really see any facts presented, so how is what he's doing to her any different than what I'm doing to him? He's attacking the messenger too. Are his opinions peer-reviewed? He's certainly entitled to them, as I am to mine. When did Forbes become a scientific journal anyhow?

 

[halfmileharry]

I think you should have said "there were Level IV" as the US stopped this sort of research in the US in 2014.

But that doesn't mean that the US didn't help fund such research in other countries, most notably in China. As did France and others.

And the idea that a virus could spontaneously appear in nature perfectly suited to infect humans rather than it's current hosts is billions or trillions to 1.

That such a virus could then infect an intermediary and produce enough copies, while making a 600-1000 mile trip to a specific wet market in Wuhan, less than 200 yards from a Level IV viral research lab conducting gain of function work on bat corona viruses, has to be well over 1 million to one.

The combined odds of those occurrences happening in short order are pretty much infinite.

It didn't come from Nature. Most likely someone in this lab, (which has had other exposure events) was exposed to bat ****, blood, spit, etc., then went home to quarantine for 20 days and thought they were in the clear only to be pre-symptomatic, goes to lunch with the co workers for some piping hot horseshoe bat colon soup and coughed on some woman selling tiger penis powder.

You left out India. They're a great lab facility for testing and producing chemicals.

 

[Alpo]

Well, without much problem, I found more information from YOUR side of the political spectrum. While not a peer review, it certainly seems that your "scientist" might not clear a peer review.

https://nypost.com/2020/09/16/us-virologists-dispute-chinese-whistleblowers-covid-19-claim/

If Bannon is associated with it, what is the likelihood that it's a fraud on the public?

 

[Ark]

Like so many things, the politicization and censorship has made it impossible to have a rational or fact-based public discussion on this topic. If you express any suspicion as to the origins of the virus, you are automatically a right wing trumper conspiracy theory nutjob and it is legitimate to censor or ban you.

 

[NKBJ]

You left out India. They're a great lab facility for testing and producing chemicals.

The initial analysis of the bug that was published from India was quite revealing. So much so that it was immediately attacked to stop discovery and conversation.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Well, without much problem, I found more information from YOUR side of the political spectrum. While not a peer review, it certainly seems that your "scientist" might not clear a peer review.

https://nypost.com/2020/09/16/us-virologists-dispute-chinese-whistleblowers-covid-19-claim/

If Bannon is associated with it, what is the likelihood that it's a fraud on the public?

I found several things in that article that were interesting.

“It does not advance the inquiry. If anything, through its unsound reasoning, its oversold conclusions, and, most important, its sponsorship by Chinese fugitive billionaire [Guo] Wengui, it decreases — not increases — the likelihood the Chinese government will agree to an open and credible forensic investigation of the origins of the virus,” said Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist from Rutgers.

But Whittaker said Yan’s report does offer a detailed explanation on how to grow the virus in a lab, which is sound. While he does lean towards the theory that Sars-Cov-2 occurred naturally, he said it’s too early to completely rule out the potential of it being man made.

He and Dr. Nikolai Petrovsky, an endocrinologist from Australia’s Flinders University, also said Yan’s report provides a solid counterpoint to a March Nature article titled “The Proximal Origin of Sars-Cov-2” that argues there is no way the virus could have been grown in a lab.

https://nypost.com/2020/09/16/twitter-suspends-virologist-who-claims-covid-19-was-made-in-lab/


“All the tools were there, all the information was there to create the virus, she’s not proving it was created, she’s proving it was possible based on what was available at that time,” said Petrovsky, calling the Nature piece “horribly flawed commentary” that was “political.”


Note that they're not ruling out that she is correct. In fact it sounds rather like she may have some sound reasoning to her beliefs. Also, her paper decreasing the likelihood that the Chinese government would agree to an open and credible investigation of the virus kinda makes it sound like she might have hit close to home, doesn't it? That's the way I'm interpreting that.

 

[NKBJ]

Like so many things, the politicization and censorship has made it impossible to have a rational or fact-based public discussion on this topic. If you express any suspicion as to the origins of the virus, you are automatically a right wing trumper conspiracy theory nutjob and it is legitimate to censor or ban you.

You know now that you mention it, yeah I've noticed that.