Misrepresenting the extent of the epidemic may be just the start:
2 Likes
There is significant scientific evidence that the virus was not “created in a lab”.
we can trust U.S intelligence again?
Don’t believe it did either…but there is plenty of evidence that it didn’t start in Dec…or even Nov for that matter.
Also it seems China is closing down cities as we speak. Why?
I have no doubt that China has been lying to the whole world from the get-go.
No. The scientific evidence is that the Covid-19 coronavirus is probably a chimera of two naturally occurring viruses. Chimeras are rare combinations of two viruses that can result when two different viruses infect the same cell, or they can occur as a result of genetic engineering.
Even if the chimera was a “natural” result of infection in an animal, that does not preclude the possibility that the infected animal was in a lab. For background see:
Senator Cruz is saying that a lab origin is plausible:
And we should trust his medical expertise because…
Once again this is false.
There are no sequences in SARS-COV2 similar to HIV.
And chimeras can arise in nature…one of the reasons SARS-like viruses were being studied in the mid-2010s.
Studied in a lab?
Yes they were.
1 Like
Neither you nor I have the knowledge and understanding to be in a position to “judge” anything involved with this. Let’s not pretend otherwise.
Now, the question becomes - how do you objectively measure the validity of sources? Who do we believe, and why do we believe them?
For me, I go with consensus of experts over a desire to believe something because it fits into my worldview.
I think you need to pay more attention to the posts I was replying to.
I’m not talking about the OP.
Neither am I. I was talking about the LiveScience article title.
The title?
Did you actually read the article, or just the headline?
I read the whole thing looking for their evidence.
Well, all of their “evidence” is in the article.
What "evidence’ to the contrary have you found?
Unless we have solid evidence I’m not going to promote this theory.
2 Likes
Here is a point-by-point refutation of the Nature article:
Here is an excerpt that explains a possible origin of the apparent disinformation campaign:
. . . it seems pretty clear that their recent article, “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” is just one more example of their influence. China bought off the head of Harvard’s chemistry department, you don’t think they could buy off run-of-the-mill research scientists scrambling for tenure and funding and publication? It’s absolutely horrific that so many scientists and researchers are taking part in what’s really clearly a disinformation campaign orchestrated by the Chinese Communist Party, and willfully spreading a smokescreen about something that’s already killed thousands and is projected to kill millions more across the planet.
What makes you think their “refutations” are correct?
Why do you believe an anonymous blog?
