Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#120,553
#120,553
Hi Tony,
Thanks for sharing. Yes, I saw this earlier today and both Eddie and myself are actually quoted in it. it's a
great article, but the problem is that our phylogenetic analyses aren't able to answer whether the
sequences are unusual at individual residues, except if they are completely off. On a phylogenetic tree
the virus looks totally normal and the close clustering with bats suggest that bats serve as the reservoir.
The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (<0.1%) so one has to look
really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered.
We have a good team lined up to look very critically at this, so we should know much more at the end of
the weekend. I should mention that after discussions earlier today, Eddie, Bob, Mike, and myself all find
the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory. But we have to look at this much
more closely and there are still further analyses to be done, so those opinions could still change.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, KptVFL and NorthDallas40
#120,554
#120,554
volinbham said:
It wasn't anti-science. The lab leak theory is as based in science as is the natural theory.

Neither was proven via science.

Natural theory = entirely based on past history that this is a way the viruses move from animal to human. The science against it was and continues to be the lack of the transmission chain. That alone suggests the theory may be wrong.
Lab leak = has happened before in China, lab working on these types of viruses, virus emerged at the location where the work was going on, cleavage site on virus appeared unnatural.

Each is based on pieces of evidence and neither is conclusive.

To say the lab leak theory was anti-science at the beginning is simply untrue. Dismissing it out of hand is anti-science.
Click to expand...

First, neither theory is, as you put it, has been "proven via science." That is the whole point of the "low confidence" moniker.

A part of this has to do with the source and the fact that we know they have agendas to make it appear that their own theory has somehow been shown more valid when that is not the case. Laura Ingraham, desperate to be taken seriously and to show she belongs with ratings giants Carlson and Hannity, is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
 
#120,555
#120,555
volinbham said:
It wasn't anti-science. The lab leak theory is as based in science as is the natural theory.

Neither was proven via science.

Natural theory = entirely based on past history that this is a way the viruses move from animal to human. The science against it was and continues to be the lack of the transmission chain. That alone suggests the theory may be wrong.
Lab leak = has happened before in China, lab working on these types of viruses, virus emerged at the location where the work was going on, cleavage site on virus appeared unnatural.

Each is based on pieces of evidence and neither is conclusive.

To say the lab leak theory was anti-science at the beginning is simply untrue. Dismissing it out of hand is anti-science.
Click to expand...
The natural theory is basically just “experts” saying that’s what happened. Like you said, there is actually zero evidence of the transmission chain. Even SARS 2003 they identified the chain.

There are piles of published research papers from the Wuhan lab and UNC lab regarding GOF research on bat coronaviruses. Ignoring that evidence in favor of your favorite expert’s opinion is baffling to me.

And, I’m not at all saying it was leaked intentionally. I highly doubt it was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#120,556
#120,556
lawgator1 said:
First, neither theory is, as you put it, has been "proven via science." That is the whole point of the "low confidence" moniker.

A part of this has to do with the source and the fact that we know they have agendas to make it appear that their own theory has somehow been shown more valid when that is not the case. Laura Ingraham, desperate to be taken seriously and to show she belongs with ratings giants Carlson and Hannity, is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...
Can you interpret the email I posted above? To clarify, that was Dr F's personal email communication with the team of experts assembled to study the origin of the virus AT THE SAME TIME that he was poo-pooing the lab leak theory as nonsense.

Just try.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, Rocky_Top_Vol13, NorthDallas40 and 1 other person
#120,557
#120,557
lawgator1 said:
First, neither theory is, as you put it, has been "proven via science." That is the whole point of the "low confidence" moniker.

A part of this has to do with the source and the fact that we know they have agendas to make it appear that their own theory has somehow been shown more valid when that is not the case. Laura Ingraham, desperate to be taken seriously and to show she belongs with ratings giants Carlson and Hannity, is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

It wasn't Ingraham's theory - plenty of scientists were open to the lab leak theory - she was repeating their views. Even some of the one's that ultimately wrote a paper that quashed it (for a while at least) began as either 50/50 or leaning lab leak. I suggest you read the unredacted email discussion lead by Fauci and Collins that essentially ruled out the lab leak theory which became media gospel.

You were wrong to dismiss it because the source because you didn't understand the real sources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#120,559
#120,559
The fact that F laughed it off publicly while discussing it openly with the research team tells you all you need to know. Like a poker player who can't shut his mouth, everyone knows what he was holding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and NorthDallas40
#120,561
#120,561
lawgator1 said:
See, why do you have to engage in this hyperbole of "silenced persons" and "laughed out of the room"? Its not helpful and is inexact in the extreme. All it does is make it apparent, ironically enough given the weekend's news, that it is you and not me who is completely unwilling to change your mind.
Click to expand...

In reply to @CagleMtnVol saying the liberals always need a boogie man:

lawgator1 said:
cough cough China Virus cough

cough cough the media cough cough
Click to expand...

No silencing or laughing here, folks. No mockery at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, NorthDallas40, 85SugarVol and 3 others
#120,564
#120,564
To his credit @lawgator1 actually posts his own thoughts. Unfortunately, it makes for easy pickins. Many others simply post a tweet from others and share which makes it impossible to search the post for specific key words.

Also, SO. MANY. DELETED. TWEETS. Twitter is used irresponsibly in this forum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#120,565
#120,565
McDad said:
To his credit @lawgator1 actually posts his own thoughts. Unfortunately, it makes for easy pickins. Many others simply post a tweet from others and share which makes it impossible to search the post for specific key words.

Also, SO. MANY. DELETED. TWEETS. Twitter is used irresponsibly in this forum.
Click to expand...

You sure about that? His thoughts tend to mirror the current MSM talking points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, davethevol, 85SugarVol and 1 other person
#120,566
#120,566
lawgator1 said:
2) My understanding from the reporting this weekend is that this is still the theory of many agencies, but that now the Energy Department says that it started in a lab. (footnote: why the Energy Department studied this issue, I have no idea).
Click to expand...

Someone has never seen Stranger Things…

On a serious note - DOE operates 17 national laboratories across the United States, you rube.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#120,567
#120,567
25 years from now, when we are in better position to look back and quantify everything…

What will the total economic impact of the Covid Scheme look like?

It could be in the order of $Trillions
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and McDad
#120,572
#120,572
Rather than break down all the examples of anti-science against the lab leak theory proponents I'll post this article which has plenty of good examples.

My favorite is the NYT science and health reporter clinging to the lab leak theory as being not only a conspiracy but racist even after Fauci came around and said it was plausible.

COVID lab leak is a scandal of media and government censorship

Politifact labeled a scientist's claim that it was man-made as a "pants on fire" lie (they later retracted the assessment).

it was the lab leak deniers that were anti-science
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, AM64, DC_Vol and 5 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top