Covid-19 likely to be man made

Dohnjoe

mikekerry wrote: »

1. Problem - new virus

2. Reaction -
Cause confusion, fear and chaos through lock downs, restrictions, social distancing.
Manipulate data to suit agenda.
Get majority of public to buy into the fear.

3.Solution -
Vaccine.
Removal of individual rights.
Mass subordination and compliance.

Which of my rights are being infringed?

What is "mass subordination and compliance" in Ireland? Can you provide examples of this? I sincerely hope you don't mean paying taxes, wearing masks, adhering to the law, that kind of thing

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Which of my rights are being infringed?

What is "mass subordination and compliance" in Ireland? Can you provide examples of this? I sincerely hope you don't mean paying taxes, wearing masks, adhering to the law, that kind of thing

"Masks are basically the same as muzzles" Or something similarly silly.

Dohnjoe

King Mob wrote: »

This exact thing, almost word for word was claimed for swine flu too...

And if there's another pandemic we'll go through the same rigmarole. Paranoid people fantasizing that some unspecified authoritarian powers are "just about to take over".

NaFirinne

King Mob wrote: »

This exact thing, almost word for word was claimed for swine flu too...

I'm sure they learned a lot from the swine flu.


With covid we can see a lot of actual measures to control people being implemented.

King Mob

NaFirinne wrote: »

I'm sure they learned a lot from the swine flu.


With covid we can see a lot of actual measures to control people being implemented.

Yes. They said that about swine flu too. Only it was "I'm sure they learned a lot from bird flu."

it's the same nonsense.

So if you believe you're onto something different and you're not just recycling the same nonsense, please explain your conspiracy.

Who is behind it?
At what point will "Removal of individual rights.
Mass subordination and compliance." happen? In a month? 6 months?

if you can't answer these questions, please just admit this.

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

And if there's another pandemic we'll go through the same rigmarole. Paranoid people fantasizing that some unspecified authoritarian powers are "just about to take over".

And we'll be told "they learned a lot from covid" and "this time will be different."

Dohnjoe

NaFirinne wrote: »

With covid we can see a lot of actual measures to control people being implemented.

What measures?

Explain what they are exactly, and what is the "real" purpose of those measures?

Can anyone in this forum actually answer a question without vague overtones, jesus christ

IAmTheReign

NaFirinne wrote: »

The conspiracy is growing legs as Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò who was instrumental in unmasking cover-ups inside the Vatican regarding the sex abuse scandal came out with an open letter to President Donald Trump claiming that the COVID-19 pandemic is part of a plot to impose a “health dictatorship” and that Trump is “the final garrison” in stopping this agenda.

https://catholicfamilynews.com/blog/2020/10/30/open-letter-to-president-donald-trump/


Do you think the world is indeed heading for a Global Dictatorship or is it just all nonsense?

Certainly there appears to be a lot of people concerned that the world is heading that way.

It's nonsense.

Anyone declaring that Trump of all people is some sort of bulwark against dictatorship either has an agenda or lacks the ability to objectively view reality.

s1ippy

What I don't get is how come it's still mandatory for a huge section of the population to go in to work (many in non essential business) but going for a spin down along the coast to find some scenery is illegal. You have to sit in a cramped staff room in many workplaces, but you can't have your mother over to your house for dinner. And my favourite, you can meet in the park but not in your garden. Oh and don't even dream of trying to buy a coat.

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Can anyone in this forum actually answer a question without vague overtones, jesus christ

Vague overtones is all you can learn from watching youtube videos from bull**** artists.
You get more you need to look deeper and think about things.
But if you did then, then you'd see the conspiracy theory is obviously nonsense.
So some haven't done this, others willfully avoid doing this.

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

But the vast majority of scientists involved in the actually issue don't say this.

Are they all involved in the conspiracy?

Why should we trust random scientists who are disagreeing with the consensus?
Especial since at least one of them has a profit motive in selling a controversial book?

How about all the "scientists" and "experts" who also claimed that SARS, MERS, Ebola, Zika and AIDS are all man made? Should be believe all of them too?


Well for one, they aren't being silenced.
And they aren't "questioning things".
They are making false or unsupported claims. So yes, they should be ridiculed for that. Much like the cranks who claimed the exact same stuff about every other major disease in the last few decades.

Well that's the thing. Just because they are in the minority or at least ones who spoke out doesn't mean they should be ridiculed. There was only one person who questioned the Emperor's new clothes and that was a child.


You don't have to automatically believe them but you shouldn't automatically dismiss them either. Listen to what they have to say, analyze it. See if it's plausible. You have the time I'm sure.


Is it possible that the virus is man-made? I don't know but there are a lot of scientists who also dismiss the notion that it originated in bats.


If the official narrative was that it was man-made but a few random scientist came out and said "no, it came from bats" who would you believe? Would you get behind the the man-made narrative and ridicule the "bat" scientists?

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Well that's the thing. Just because they are in the minority or at least ones who spoke out doesn't mean they should be ridiculed. There was only one person who questioned the Emperor's new clothes and that was a child.


You don't have to automatically believe them but you shouldn't automatically dismiss them either. Listen to what they have to say, analyze it. See if it's plausible. You have the time I'm sure.


Is it possible that the virus is man-made? I don't know but there are a lot of scientists who also dismiss the notion that it originated in bats.


If the official narrative was that it was man-made but a few random scientist came out and said "no, it came from bats" who would you believe? Would you get behind the the man-made narrative and ridicule the "bat" scientists?

Consensus sorts it out for you. If 1,000 scientists say X, and 3 say Y. Indeed, Y could be correct, but the *current consensus* is that it's X.

Aka to the best of our knowledge it's X, until demonstrated otherwise

Faulty thinkers, denialists and conspiracy theorists consistently do the opposite to this, they go with the e.g. 3% of scientists who doubt climate change, they go with the isolated experts who claim 9/11 was an inside job, they go with the handful of doctors/physicians who deny vaccines work, they go with the tiny amount of historians who deny the Holocaust, etc, etc.

Right now, to the best of our knowledge, the consensus is that this virus came from animal to human transmission.

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

No. It means he has a profit motive for falsifying and exaggerating claims.
You are accusing the vast majority of scientists of being complicit in a massive conspiracy based purely on a supposed motive.

This seems like a double standard on your part.

Have you read the book? What peer review did it go through? What evidence does it provide?


And other scientists have claimed that SARS, MERS, Zika and AIDs are all man made.
Do you believe those scientists?


But they already have done this.
What research have you read and why do you reject it?

And it's also possible that's it's a natural virus.
It's more possible because there's tons examples of natural viruses.

You can also make this exact same argument for any disease, so does that mean you also believe AIDs is a man made illness? SARS? MERS?

That's the issue you keep avoiding. Your claim has been made before. It's just a recycling of a decades old conspiracy theory.

You say that he has a profit motive. That smacks of you just looking for reasons to disavow what he says rather then examining the possibility that he might be speaking the truth,

There's the possibility that the scientists who are going with the official narrative also have a profit motive in that they were paid handsomely to develop this virus, no?

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

There's the possibility that the scientists who are going with the official narrative also have a profit motive in that they were paid handsomely to develop this virus, no?

Are you suggesting a majority of scientists were paid (!) to develop this virus? that's an actual possibility to you?

Based on what logic/evidence?

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

Ok. You haven't read it and don't know what peer review it went through if any.
You don't know what verifiable evidence he's supplied if any.

You also have dodged the point about the fact he has a profit motive for lying and exaggerating. I take that to mean you can't address that either.

So we're left with the fact the only reason you have to believe his guy is his authority.

And this leads back to the other points you've dodged.
Many scientists equally as authoritive as him have claimed that SARS, MERS, Zika, Ebola, AIDs et al are also man made.
You haven't addressed this point and you haven't said that you believe these people and these conspiracies.
I will take that to mean that you don't believe them and you realise that such claims are ridiculous.

So rather than chase you down on points you aren't going to address:

Why do you believe the conspiracy theories about Covid-19 when they are exactly the same as the ones about every other major disease in the last few decades?

How many books were published exposing the false case for the Iraq War, The Pentagon Papers, Bloody Sunday? Were they all tomes of drivel driven by a profit motive and ergo ought to be lambasted and ridiculed because the author stood to make a buck?


Some people actually write books to educate people, to get the word out regardless of whether they get rich from the exercise or not.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Are you suggesting a majority of scientists were paid (!) to develop this virus? that's an actual possibility to you?

Based on what logic/evidence?

It's based on nothing just like the conjecture that a scientist wrote a book claiming that the virus was man-made purely to make money.

But scientists sell their souls all the time. For every scientist who uses his or her academic prowess to improve the human condition there's another who gets paid to develop new and improved ways of killing people. You think every scientist benignly stumbled across a new technological development only to have it re-purposed by shady forces in the weapons industry? Scientists all the time work out more innovative ways of killing, new types of explosives, munitions, devices to melt your skin, blind you, deafen you, sicken you, drug you.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Consensus sorts it out for you. If 1,000 scientists say X, and 3 say Y. Indeed, Y could be correct, but the *current consensus* is that it's X.

Aka to the best of our knowledge it's X, until demonstrated otherwise

Faulty thinkers, denialists and conspiracy theorists consistently do the opposite to this, they go with the e.g. 3% of scientists who doubt climate change, they go with the isolated experts who claim 9/11 was an inside job, they go with the handful of doctors/physicians who deny vaccines work, they go with the tiny amount of historians who deny the Holocaust, etc, etc.

Right now, to the best of our knowledge, the consensus is that this virus came from animal to human transmission.

There was a time when the consensus was that the Sun circled the Earth and the tiny minority who said otherwise were pilloried at best or executed at worst.



It's not an easy thing to stand alone in the face of ridicule and discreditation. Just because the majority say one thing and a minority say another shouldn't be grounds alone for dismissal of the minority consensus.



How many scientitsts abstained from voicing their opinions for fear of being ostracized or simply by saying "What's the point? Nobody will believe me." ?

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

It's based on nothing just like the conjecture that a scientist wrote a book claiming that the virus was man-made purely to make money.

It's not hard to spot woo merchants, there are the usual tell-tale signs and red flags - they typically have a radical idea, they have no consensus, they are making videos/books for sale instead of publishing the information for peer review like other credible experts, they regularly appear in crank outlets (the conspiracy circuit), they produce similar fringe material on other subjects, etc

If an individual "expert" is making an off-beat claim, it's good to check. 99% of the time (in my experience) it turns out it's someone with a spurious claim, usually saddled with a history of such claims and fringe views.

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

It's not an easy thing to stand alone in the face of ridicule and discreditation. Just because the majority say one thing and a minority say another shouldn't be grounds alone for dismissal of the minority consensus.

It's a very easy thing, and can be quite profitable. Pundits and crank "experts" can make a lot of money and garner a lot of attention from spreading their false beliefs, there is nearly always a willing audience of idiots.

A US architect makes 60k to 80k per year denying that 9/11 was an inside job. Alex Jones makes millions. Anti-vax groups make a fortune in donations. It's a lucrative mini-industry.

Don't pretend to yourself that just because someone says something different, or something that adheres to a particular fringe world view you maintain, that they are some maverick with "special info".

The vast majority of scientists maintain that the current virus was transmitted by animals.

There will always be a minority (for profit or otherwise) who will always go against the grain, whatever the subject, no matter how absurd.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's not hard to spot woo merchants, there are the usual tell-tale signs and red flags - they typically have a radical idea, they have no consensus, they are making videos/books for sale instead of publishing the information for peer review like other credible experts, they regularly appear in crank outlets (the conspiracy circuit), they produce similar fringe material on other subjects, etc

If an individual "expert" is making an off-beat claim, it's good to check. 99% of the time (in my experience) it turns out it's someone with a spurious claim, usually saddled with a history of such claims and fringe views.

All you've done is cherry-picked what I have written.


Is the scientist who wrote this book a member of a lunatic fringe? I don't know. Do you?
Have you read the book? I haven't.



All I have said is that there are those who question/doubt the consensus as you put it. For them to not be in the majority is good enough for you to dismiss them. For me, their numbers is NOT a reason alone to dismiss them. I'm not saying they are right but you are saying emphatically that they are wrong based on how many or how few of them there are.


The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a lie and was promulgated by a majority consensus. There was a minority who said otherwise and were/are correct. Are you still going with the majority purely because they have/had the weight of numbers?

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Is the scientist who wrote this book a member of a lunatic fringe? I don't know. Do you?
Have you read the book? I haven't.

Consensus sorts it for you.

Are you a virologist? No. Can you distinguish between two virologists with two differing positions? No.

Therefore you go with the consensus of other experts, scientists and virologists on the subject. Why? As a lay-person you aren't in a position to determine otherwise. Is the consensus automatically correct? No, but it's the best information we have, so by definition it's the most correct information until proven otherwise. This is why peer review, etc exists.

And if you are making an argument "but people thought the sun went around the earth", no, prevailing notions and speculation from the dark ages is not a comparison to modern science.

For them to not be in the majority is good enough for you to dismiss them. For me, their numbers is NOT a reason alone to dismiss them. I'm not saying they are right but you are saying emphatically that they are wrong based on how many or how few of them there are.

No I'm not, and if you maintain that then you are misunderstanding the points

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's a very easy thing, and can be quite profitable. Pundits and crank "experts" can make a lot of money and garner a lot of attention from spreading their false beliefs, there is nearly always a willing audience of idiots.

A US architect makes 60k to 80k per year denying that 9/11 was an inside job. Alex Jones makes millions. Anti-vax groups make a fortune in donations. It's a lucrative mini-industry.

Don't pretend to yourself that just because someone says something different, or something that adheres to a particular fringe world view you maintain, that they are some maverick with "special info".

The vast majority of scientists maintain that the current virus was transmitted by animals.

There will always be a minority (for profit or otherwise) who will always go against the grain, whatever the subject, no matter how absurd.

You've missed the point and you're being facetious, DJ.


You maintain that writing a book about something is for profit and hence the book's contents should be shunned.


If that's the case then by your logic no book should be believed. That's akin to a non sequitur.

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

You maintain that writing a book about something is for profit and hence the book's contents should be shunned.

I didn't maintain that book was written from profit, reread my posts a little more carefully.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Consensus sorts it for you.

Are you a virologist? No. Can you distinguish between two virologists with two differing positions? No.

Therefore you go with the consensus of other experts, scientists and virologists on the subject. Why? As a lay-person you aren't in a position to determine otherwise. Is the consensus automatically correct? No, but it's the best information we have, so by definition it's the most correct information until proven otherwise. This is why peer review, etc exists.

And if you are making an argument "but people thought the sun went around the earth", no, prevailing notions and speculation from the dark ages is not a comparison to modern science.



No I'm not, and if you maintain that then you are misunderstanding the points

Millennia prior to Medieval Times (not even the Middle Ages or the Dark Ages which were earlier) it was proven that the Earth orbited the Sun. The notion that this was untrue was spread by religious zealots, politial hucksters and iconoclasts well into the 17th Century when science was a hell of a lot more modern than it was during the BC druidic times.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's a very easy thing, and can be quite profitable. Pundits and crank "experts" can make a lot of money and garner a lot of attention from spreading their false beliefs, there is nearly always a willing audience of idiots.

A US architect makes 60k to 80k per year denying that 9/11 was an inside job. Alex Jones makes millions. Anti-vax groups make a fortune in donations. It's a lucrative mini-industry.

Don't pretend to yourself that just because someone says something different, or something that adheres to a particular fringe world view you maintain, that they are some maverick with "special info".

The vast majority of scientists maintain that the current virus was transmitted by animals.

There will always be a minority (for profit or otherwise) who will always go against the grain, whatever the subject, no matter how absurd.

You say it's very easy. It wasn't very easy and certainly not very profitable for the likes of Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden to stand alone in the face of ridicule, wouldn't you say?

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Are you suggesting a majority of scientists were paid (!) to develop this virus? that's an actual possibility to you?

Based on what logic/evidence?

Why would it be any more outlandish than the notion that a scientist stands to profit from writing a book stating what he does?


That's an actual possibility for you?

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

You say it's very easy. It wasn't very easy and certainly not very profitable for the likes of Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden to stand alone in the face of ridicule, wouldn't you say?

This is nothing to do with whistle-blowing or "going against the grain". It's scientific method and logic. If someone's claims have merit, then the evidence, peer review, etc should generally demonstrate that

If however there are the usual red flags, then indeed it should be treated with skepticism until properly demonstrated.

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Why would it be any more outlandish than the notion that a scientist stands to profit from writing a book stating what he does?

.....

The notion that a majority of the world's virologists and related experts secret were secretly paid to create a virus under the guise it came from natural causes is in the same boat as someone selling a false claim to profit from book sales to you?

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

.....

The notion that a majority of the world's virologists and related experts secret were secretly paid to create a virus under the guise it came from natural causes is in the same boat as someone selling a false claim to profit from book sales to you?

DJ, you're digging your heels in and losing your temper.


It was you or King Mob who stated that a scientist should not be believed for publishing a book the contents of which go against the grain purely because the motive is profit.



All I did was ask that if financial gain was the overriding factor then why would any book be believed. I also stated, or rather, posited the question that while there might be monetary gain to be gleaned from making allegations that this virus was man-made there equally might be monetary gains to be harvested by decamping on the other side of the so called fence.



You are saying NO to one and PROBABLY to the other.


I'm saying YES/NO/MAYBE to both.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

.....

The notion that a majority of the world's virologists and related experts secret were secretly paid to create a virus under the guise it came from natural causes is in the same boat as someone selling a false claim to profit from book sales to you?

And again...the majority doesn't prove or disprove. It is merely, as you mentioned, a consensus.


I'm not refuting the majority OR confirming the minority.


You, however, are refusing to even listen to the minority. I don't know why. Nobody is trying to hypnotise you.



Just listen to opposing views rather than stamping your feet.