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

[Leadeye]

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

Gharda makes everything. It's scary how much stuff has dried up here in the states and is now being made by them.

 

[TangoFoxtrot]

Check out the Fox News video tucker Carlson corona whistleblower.. the explains exactly how it can be proven it was engineered

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[Alpo]

What do you think we've been talking about TF? Chopped liver?

 

[NKBJ]

In the vaccine? Chopped fetal livers maybe.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

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.

Being an avacado toast muncher as his key qualification is equally ad hominem to Steve Bannon might have funded/supported somewhere along the line! Lol!

It is interesting in that the virologists'argument to pooh-pooh the paper actually support it... for example:

Kristian G. Andersen, a professor of immunology and microbiology at Scripps Research who has studied the origins of the virus, said of the claim on Twitter: “This simply can’t be true – there are more than 3,500 nucleotide differences between SARS-CoV-2 and these viruses.”

Which is exactly the point... SARS-Cov-2 is SO DIFFERENT from anything known in nature that it has no close cousins that it could have naturally mutated from. IMO, the "proof" that it wasn't manufactured and that it could be natural is to find a much closer natural coronavirus.

Is there such a thing that this likely came from?

 

[NKBJ]

North Carolina?

 

[Alpo]

North Carolina?

I was thinking a Marathon restroom in Chattanooga.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

So my admittedly novice read of her paper is as follows:

1. If you start with what she identifies as the closest know cousin to SARS-CoV-2, the differences in the DNA/genome sequence are:

2. Two discrete places that have multi-generational mutations indicative of laboratory gain-of-function (i.e. mutated then lab selected as best of breed, rinse/repeat)

3. What appears to be a complete splice of the ferrin receptor sequence (the protein that makes the COVID-19 "spike") which itself appears to be a multi-generational mutation (appears lab made) gain-of-function of the SARS-CoV-1 spike!

The way you dispute this is to say no, look at this virus over here, it's just a hop and skip to mutate into SARS-CoV-2. But that's not what her detractors are arguing.

ETA: Link to the paper:
https://zenodo.org/record/4028830#.X2S7MOjYqE_

 

[foszoe]

I read/heard a report on the BBC about how there are ways to tell from the genetic code it a virus has been artificially built and from looking at that structure, they determined it was not, so until something else comes along, I tend to believe it was either isolated in a lab for analysis or came from the food supply but I don't believe it is man made.

 

[HoughMade]

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?

All I know is that the Epoch Times has not run with the "virologist claims it was created in a lab" story....and you guys think you hate the CCP....

 

[BugI02]

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.

This is an interesting contrast to ... attacking the author of the paper Li-Men Yan rather than her assertions in the matter. Guilt by association with Bannon, but I see the divide in opinion pieces occurs down the same Trump/damn near everybody else fault line. When 90% of the media is attempting to silence, deplatform and character assassinate one, perhaps one feels the need to utilize ways to get one's story out that one might not choose in a truly free and fair marketplace of ideas

Given the breakdown of the for and against media, I'll wait to pass judgement on her claims

 

[Alpo]

I've only read a few comments by virologists who believe the research and conclusions are in error (Rasmussen). But, this is not a peer-reviewed paper. It has not been subjected to any rigorous peer process. Zenodo is what it is.

Is there a confiict of interest? I think that is something that should be studied. On its face, the funding of the project by anti-PRC advocates raises a concern that would normally not exist with typical research. As the conclusions are "inflammatory", non-peer reviewed and funded in this manner, I'd say that skepticism is warranted.

 

[BugI02]

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.




“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.

With respect to the part I highlighted, I don't believe it is possible to decrease the odds of the CCP allowing 'an open and credible forensic investigation of the origins of the virus' because that likelihood was already zero and I'm not sure a probability of less than zero is meaningful

 

[BugI02]

Being an avacado toast muncher as his key qualification is equally ad hominem to Steve Bannon might have funded/supported somewhere along the line! Lol!

It is interesting in that the virologists'argument to pooh-pooh the paper actually support it... for example:



Which is exactly the point... SARS-Cov-2 is SO DIFFERENT from anything known in nature that it has no close cousins that it could have naturally mutated from. IMO, the "proof" that it wasn't manufactured and that it could be natural is to find a much closer natural coronavirus.

Is there such a thing that this likely came from?

I have found some interesting information in reviewing papers about the ability of bat corona viruses in the wild to target the human expression of ACE2 (quite low) and WuVid 2's ability to target the same receptor site. It would seem a simple thing to characterize the differences b etween the two mechanisms and calculate how many mutations would be required to bridge the gap and how long such mutations would take if not artificially induced. I am still looking to see if that research exists or is in progress

I'm still skeptical about a deliberate release, more because it seems an unfinished product rather than that the CCP would somehow not take advantage of a bioweapon, but as I've said before it was the decisions made after the release that demonstrate intent whether the release was deliberate or accidental

To this date, I believe the CCP has not made early WuVid samples from the initial outbreak in WuHan available nor are they particularly forthcoming with pristine samples of the bat corona viruses as they exist in the wild in order to assess character and rate of mutation

 

[DoggyDaddy]

With respect to the part I highlighted, I don't believe it is possible to decrease the odds of the CCP allowing 'an open and credible forensic investigation of the origins of the virus' because that likelihood was already zero and I'm not sure a probability of less than zero is meaningful

Good point.

 

[BugI02]

I read/heard a report on the BBC about how there are ways to tell from the genetic code it a virus has been artificially built and from looking at that structure, they determined it was not, so until something else comes along, I tend to believe it was either isolated in a lab for analysis or came from the food supply but I don't believe it is man made.

Is the pangolin still involved in the 'official' explanation/progression? One of those papers I mentioned also showed pangolin ACE2 receptors to be quite dissimilar to human ones, so that a virus circulating in pangolins I would think would be unlikely to mutate in that environment such a way as to be highly effective at targeting human ACE2 receptors, as such a mutation would give it no reproductive advantage and would not be selected for. Again it would be instructive if research was being done to show whether the pathway from pangolin to the virus' pandemic form were possible or likely

 

[SheepDog4Life]

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?

From that article that supposedly "debunks" her...

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.


“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.”

Are all of these people affiliated with Bannon? Why is part of the scientific debate verbotten and cancelled?

 

[BugI02]

From that article that supposedly "debunks" her...



Are all of these people affiliated with Bannon? Why is part of the scientific debate verbotten and cancelled?

Likely for the same reason any discussion of George Soros' role in the deconstruction of America is similarly verboten. The truth is out there but they only want discussion about their truth

 

[TangoFoxtrot]

What do you think we've been talking about TF? Chopped liver?

I know, im the one that way up in the thread mentioned it

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I have found some interesting information in reviewing papers about the ability of bat corona viruses in the wild to target the human expression of ACE2 (quite low) and WuVid 2's ability to target the same receptor site. It would seem a simple thing to characterize the differences b etween the two mechanisms and calculate how many mutations would be required to bridge the gap and how long such mutations would take if not artificially induced. I am still looking to see if that research exists or is in progress

I'm still skeptical about a deliberate release, more because it seems an unfinished product rather than that the CCP would somehow not take advantage of a bioweapon, but as I've said before it was the decisions made after the release that demonstrate intent whether the release was deliberate or accidental

To this date, I believe the CCP has not made early WuVid samples from the initial outbreak in WuHan available nor are they particularly forthcoming with pristine samples of the bat corona viruses as they exist in the wild in order to assess character and rate of mutation

Ditto on the deliberate release... If they were "launching" this out into the rest of the world, it would have been better "distributed"... like via trade representatives whose counter parts would likely come in close contact to foreign leadership, for example. IMO, released through incompetence but "managed" for maximum effect.

And, mutations occur randomly... think of a slot machine. How many times do you see all the 7's but not lined up for a jackpot... lots compared to the number of jackpots.

Where are the SARS-CoV-2 near misses in nature? And, haven't they been looking at bat viruses for a long time? Where are all of the "close but no cookie" viruses that this came from naturally?