|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 13, 2023 22:01:48 GMT -6
Our own Oz of Mar a Lago denied and tried to block the reports of the pandemic here...presumably not proving anything about it's source. Has nothing to do with what I posted. These were regular US citizens working in Wuhan. Jesus. They reported, not surprisingly a repressive autocrat suppressing news. China at that time denied any problem with COVID. Whatever the source. Just as did our own would be strongman autocrat. That observation of an unknown amount of unreliable Chinese man on the street belief was hardly conclusive about a lab leak. Repression of those rumors prove repression not truth of the rumor.
|
|
|
Post by villagepub on Mar 14, 2023 7:00:26 GMT -6
Has nothing to do with what I posted. These were regular US citizens working in Wuhan. Jesus. They reported, not surprisingly a repressive autocrat suppressing news. China at that time denied any problem with COVID. Whatever the source. Just as did our own would be strongman autocrat. That observation of an unknown amount of unreliable Chinese man on the street belief was hardly conclusive about a lab leak. Repression of those rumors prove repression not truth of the rumor. I did not say it was "one unreliable Chinese man" on the street talking to others. There were many. There were multiple workers who left the lab infected. They all interacted with others who spread the word. Your bias is a problem with your posts. You've already spun yourself dizzy.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 14, 2023 8:29:07 GMT -6
My bias is to be skeptical of second hand hearsay accounts.
My very strong bias is to fund scientific research at a level to allow better safety and supervision.
My bias is to trust analysts and scientists in the intelligence community who it seems very likely knew about these rumors and studied them.
I cannot jump to the level of complete certainty you have about the explanation you believe fits these unreliable reports of unsubstantiated nature. You ignore and completely discount other credible explanation. I do not.
We can agree the Chinese are repressive and agree a lab leak might have occured.
I'm not at all certain about what probability to assign to that leak theory, and not sure what conclusion to draw if a leak did occur other than that we should agree more science funding would very likely have prevented any kind of leak.
|
|
|
Post by coastalcard on Mar 14, 2023 17:55:43 GMT -6
It was 🦇🦇🦇 in the Wuhan live animal wet delicatessen that jumped on the head of a passing customer wearing a mask of flesh colored pantyhose who had hoped to slap the nocturnal winged mammal between two slices of marble rye and slather it with spicy dijon. This certainly explains the “animal-to-human” jump that the Chinese insist most Americans just cannot seem to grasp. No amount of isolation or lockdown will ever prevent 🦇🦇🦇 from jumping on your head. It is a miracle, as kids throwing baseballs into the 1960’s night sky to lure evening bats from their nightly feeding frenzy, that we didn’t invoke this deadly viral calamity on the midwestern United States way prior to the Wuhan outbreak.
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Mar 15, 2023 19:58:21 GMT -6
I slapped a bat once. They were flying around my head so I started swinging and connected with one. It was kind of gross.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 17, 2023 11:52:01 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Mar 18, 2023 21:55:18 GMT -6
They're back to blaming the raccoon dog again like they did in 2022. www.zerohedge.com/political/please-stop-raccoon-dogs"As The Scientist (who better to tell you about The Science?) wrote about an earlier round of nonsense in February 2022, “one of the studies shows that raccoon dogs were sold in a section of the market where coronavirus samples were detected.” Which is more or less precisely what yesterday’s “scoop” said. I’ll leave you with this from The New York Times. The Times has not exactly been aggressive about covering the potential lab leak, and it followed up on the Atlantic’s piece today with one of its own. But even the Times couldn’t avoid telling the truth, four paragraphs in: The jumbling together of genetic material from the virus and the animal does not prove that a raccoon dog itself was infected. And even if a raccoon dog had been infected, it would not be clear that the animal had spread the virus to people. Another animal could have passed the virus to people, or someone infected with the virus could have spread the virus to a raccoon dog. Someone infected with a virus?
Gee, I wonder where they got it? Maybe the giant lab working with bat coronaviruses a couple miles away"
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 19, 2023 1:43:57 GMT -6
Of course it doesn't prove anything by itself. It is one piece of evidence. There is no definitive account here.
That's my point. We have less of the whole picture than the intelligence community.
Those with the most evidence are not so nearly sure as you and posts above seem to be.
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Mar 19, 2023 11:50:03 GMT -6
And my point is Fauci worked early on to discredit the Lab Leak Theory of Covid origins. This isn't the scientific method. The scientific method is to look at all possibilities, especially early in the process of discovery."On February 1, 2020, Fauci and his boss, NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins, and at least eleven other scientists participated in a conference call during which several of them warned that COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China - may have been intentionally genetically manipulated. Three days after the call, four participants from the call (Scripps Research virologist Kristian Andersen, University of Sydney virologist Edward Holmes, Tulane School of Medicine virologist Robert Garry, University of Edinburgh virologist Andrew Rambaut and Columbia University virologist Ian Lipkin) seemingly discarded their concerns over a lab-leak, and drafted "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2," which they sent to Fauci and Collins." www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/covid-lab-leak-virologist-changed-tune-fauci-fundingThis paper was then cited by Fauci as evidence for discrediting the lab leak theory. These same virologists were then rewarded with $25.2 million in research funding between 2020 and 2022 from the NIH. The message is clear, play ball with what Fauci and Collins want, or not get funding for research and potentially end your career. It's a corrupt system where scientists working for the government are dependent on funding from folks like Fauci and Collins. Fauci and Collins then control what gets out and what doesn't.
Fauci who offshored banned gain-of-function research to make bat coronaviruses more transmissible to humans needed to stifle any support of the lab leak theory in order to cover his tracks. That's my point.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 19, 2023 15:31:26 GMT -6
Evidence for a lab leak was weak. As you say it was possible and considered. Discussed and abandoned.
That part of science which is quite ordinary is why the concerns were discarded at that time.
Your conspiracy theory that somehow there was quid pro quo for a scientist publishing what the better evidence showed is just that a conspiracy theory and there is no evidence for it. It is insulting to the scientists involved. That the evidence was weak explains why that hypothesis was abandoned at that time.
That Fauci's agency awarded grant money to some of the best researchers in the field subsequently is completely normal. That among others those that had examined the lab leak theory doesn't really need justification.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 20, 2023 11:44:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Jul 10, 2023 22:32:28 GMT -6
Wow, finally a Democratic candidate for president who makes sense. www.foxnews.com/media/rfk-jr-would-prosecute-fauci-president-crimes-committed-he-caused-a-lot-injuryDemocrat presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., said Monday that he would prosecute Dr. Anthony Fauci for his actions during the coronavirus pandemic if he is elected president and his attorney general determined that "crimes were committed."Referencing Kennedy's book "The Real Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, Big Pharma and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health," Fox News host Jesse Watters asked the Democrat why he believes Fauci is "the devil" and whether he stands by his earlier pledge to prosecute the former NIAID director as president if he or the National Institutes of Health played a role in the Wuhan lab leak. Kennedy went on to say: "We only have 4.2% of the globe’s population, but we had 16% of the COVID deaths in this country and that was from bad policy," he added. " There are countries that did the opposite of what we did that provided Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, other early treatments to their populations and had 1/200th of our death rate. There are many, many things we did wrong in our country and some of those were I would say…some of the things that were done by health officials at that time, that they knew they would be harmful." And to think Kennedy is running second in the polls to Joe Biden with approximately 20%. Maybe there is hope for the country after all.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 11, 2023 14:37:16 GMT -6
Wow, finally a Democratic candidate for president who makes sense.
Kennnedy name is meaningful and powerful, apparently more than anything he is advocating.
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Jul 12, 2023 19:34:47 GMT -6
Kennedy represents what the centralist portion of the Democratic Party used to be. Sometimes referred to as "Blue Dogs" the policies advocated by JFK and Robert Kennedy no longer represent what today passes as the Democratic Party.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 12, 2023 20:27:31 GMT -6
Kennedy represents what the centralist portion of the Democratic Party used to be. Sometimes referred to as "Blue Dogs" the policies advocated by JFK and Robert Kennedy no longer represent what today passes as the Democratic Party. Except for his borderline crazy conspiracy theories and anti vax views. The GOP may be more unrecognizable. Those past GOP leaders would today be reviled as RINO. They created NATO, advocated free trade, governed by seeking workable compromise with the opposition, had leaders with high character and personal morality.
|
|