Not many people realize that human-engineered experiments yield telltale traces that nature does not.
Nature doesn’t “think” the way humans do.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.livescience.com/amp/coronavirus-not-human-made-in-lab.html
1 Like
My opinion is that the title of the article does not agree with the body.
Finding no evidence of genetic engineering may mean that there is no good way to determine if a virus has been genetically engineered. That does not prove that the virus developed as result of natural mutation with no input from humans.
Likewise saying that the virus may have a natural origin does not rule out the possibility that it was accidentally released from a lab that was studying the virus.
Ultimately everything has a natural origin; as an extreme case consider plutonium. Plutonium occurs in uranium ores in minute quantities, and the plutonium in nuclear weapons is made from materials ultimately found in nature.
The story I posted shows why it is far more likely it evolved naturally rather than was human generated.
When was the last time you were in C H I N A Mr. World Traveler? Or did you “learned” it from the internet? Did you know Al Climate Change Gore invented the internet?
Remember it is your Global Village, Bro.
1 Like
The new paper simply restates the same information that was reported earlier from researchers in China. See links in posting 19.
The earliest paper (which appears in a link in post 59) noted that the features that allow the virus to infect humans is similar to that of HIV and concluded that it was evidence of genetic engineering to insert the genetic material from HIV. The authors of that paper very quickly asked to have it withdrawn, and speculation is that they may have done so under pressure from Chinese authorities.
The second paper also notes the same HIV-like feature, but calls it a “mutation”. That term certainly agrees with the official party line in China.
My viewpoint is that the newest article is clearly overstating the case for natural origin free from human intervention. Here are two examples of how the arguments in the new paper are clearly flawed:
Argument 1: The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein was so effective at binding the human cells, in fact, that the scientists concluded it was the result of natural selection and not the product of genetic engineering.
Counterargument: The feature may be result of the natural selection in another virus, such as HIV, and then was inserted. Natural selection may further improve the function after insertion. Natural selection and lab origin are not mutually exclusive.
Argument 2: If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen, they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness.
Counterargument: The article ignores gain-of-function research actually published by researchers from Wuhan using similar bat coronaviruses. It ignores the possibility that the virus is the result of similar work. The new coronavirus may have simply been research gone wrong, or it may have been intended as a new type of bioweapon.
This new paper has such obviously flawed arguments that it is almost certainly an example deliberately misleading information.
Wherever it came from this ■■■■ is bad news.
Bill, delete all references of China our you till be sent to a reeducation center.
Yep.
Of course I could be wrong about this whole coronavirus thing. China and the WHO have assured the world that the is no evidence of human-to-human transmission, so all the recent news reports of epidemics must be fake news.
They did no such thing
The WHO said that additional investigation is needed to ascertain the presence of human-to-human transmission, modes of transmission, common source of exposure and the presence of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases that are undetected.
It is critical to review all available information to fully understand the potential transmissibility among humans and to continue investigations to identify the source of infection, the WHO added.
There are no HIV sequences in COV-SARS2.
There’s been extensive research done since then ruling this out. There was one initial paper on that…it has not borne up under scrutiny.
And you don’t understand gain of function research in the slightest.
So yes…you could be wrong about the whole thing.
I don’t know what this fascination is with always having to associate bad things happening with nefarious human activity.
Bad ■■■■ sometimes just happens.
In the case of disease, they just happen quite a bit.
The Chinese are known for their “wet markets” were they prepare the meat bloody and all right on the street doesn’t sound so good 
supposedly that’s how SARS started. Great to know about 95% of the ingredients in our medicine comes from China.
Bill, Who’s Chinese handlers minimized the early ■■■■■ On about January 27, the started changing their tune. Please do not marginalize their initial coverup that start early November (although some believe it really started in October.)
Seriously
Very serious. Bill took us through logical steps. This is interesting.
Not quite. He tried to counter scientific evidence with an unsupported guess based on emotion
Not to those relying on MSM agencies.
Once people realise Indian tonic water (containing quinine) and cheap anti-malarials drugs are effective in preventing and subduing infections of this virus, the economy will bounce back quickly.
That is LITERALLY fake news.
1 Like
Prove it is fake. I am not arguing just would like to see proof. That is good for our brains to ponder,
With no proof that it is true, it can be nothing else.
