China Concealed Extent of Virus Outbreak, U.S. Intelligence Says

[Cratic3947]

@JayJay

@Bill.in.PA

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.

Coronavirus Origins: Genome Analysis Suggests Two Viruses May Have Combined | IFLScience

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:
Growing evidence that Wuhan coronavirus orginated in a lab - #65 by Bill.in.PA

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.

Seems this is when the message went out for all good leftists to call for censorship. Leftist history is full of censorship. And they did what they were told to. And run with those talking points…lol!

[JayJay]

Who called for censorship?

[Cratic3947]

@Tangible08

@Bill.in.PA

Here is a video explanation from the end of February and the origin of the outbreak along with a long list of published papers describing the capabilities and dangers of gain-of-function research. It also explains that there is evidence coronavirus with ACE2 receptors, such as COVID-19, and can cause autoimmune responses that can result in pneumonia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlplnH3VYyc

The views from this neurobiologist/journalist are similar the response I got from an acquaintance who is a researcher in animal viruses when I asked him about the origin of the coronavirus several weeks ago. His view was that the probability that the virus came as a natural development from animals in a seafood market is laughably small. It was virtually certain that it came about as a result of human manipulation, most likely as a result of research related to bioweapons.

What a load. 6 minutes and something seconds in, his main argument is that it’s unlikely to have been naturally selected because it had a mutation that was advantageous? That’s like the whole ■■■■■■■ basis of evolution

Attacking the messenger. The most common leftist tactic. Basically pushing CCP talking points if you ask me. … “We can’t have freedom of thought and debate”, says Twitter and the rest. We must censor and free speech died on social media just when we needed it the most.

[Cratic3947]

@Bill.in.PA

Here is a point-by-point refutation of the Nature article:

China owns Nature magazine's ass: Debunking "The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2" claiming COVID-19 definitely wasn't from a lab - Harvard to the Big House

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.

Gosh, Scientists just going along with the leftist media narrative. Imagine that? You don’t get research money by rocking the boat. See Climate change…lol! It’s the greed …

[Cratic3947]

@TheDoctorIsIn

@Bill.in.PA

Basically the logic of the arguments in the article is that the virus cannot possibly be of lab origin because the genetics shows evidence of natural selection and the virus does not match the authors’ ideas about a bioweapon.

It totally ignores the multiple examples of published research in Wuhan labs that included producing chimeras with gain-of-function features starting with naturally occurring bat coronaviruses. Research may not just be for bioweapons; it may be to develop defensive capability against bioweapons or simply to understand the biology of the viruses. The paper also ignores the long history of accidental release of dangerous viruses from labs, especially in China.

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.

Now that’s comedy… This is what happens when stop thinking for yourself.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@Cratic3947

Now that’s comedy… This is what happens when stop thinking for yourself.

I would argue that the comedy of the situation comes from your increasingly emotional responses to a thread from a year ago.

[Cratic3947]

@westaussie

One should also suggest that one should be extremely sceptical of claims coming out of D Trump’s mouth as well.

Trump was right.

[Cratic3947]

@westaussie

It is delusional of the highest order to think that countries are going to stop trading with China.

Yes, sad we didn’t learn anything from trading with National Socialism in the 1930’s.

[Cratic3947]

@conan

It’s not American isolation Jay if we have trade policies with representative nations. It’s non representative nations that doesn’t have our environmental laws…or freedom of press etc…or people interest for that matter.

When dealing with dictatorial goverment like China and yes even Saudi’s you’re asking for trouble IMO.

Yes, would he have called isolationism if it was the nationals socialist’s instead of the CCP.

[westaussie]

What was Trump right about? Was it his claim that there were 15 cases, soon to be zero?

[Axxowiz]

Trump more than likely like the rest of U.S. presidents got his info from intelligent sources. Granted he wasn’t the most grateful at presenting it. I personally never even entertained the lab leak theory until I read Nicholas Wades report last month on the origins of covid.

Not sure if we will ever know but I am more likely to think it was a leak not intentional from one of their two labs. Maybe since Trump is gone they will investigate it more although I didn’t like how the Biden admin put a 90 day limit on it.

Another thing that irks me after looking into it a bit is they are a few scientists that were investigating and wrote papers early on calling it a conspiracy theory that clearly had a conflict of interest they shouldn’t have been allowed to be on the WHO investigation.