Covid-19 likely to be man made

26-05-2021 01:59PM

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The current consensus among virologists and related experts is that this virus looks like it was organically transmitted via animals. There's not enough evidence to support the lab-leak theory, but it cannot be ruled out.

It also need to be repeated: There's a difference between the idea of a lab leak and the idea of the virus being man made.

When Fauci and other experts are talking about the possibility of a lab leak, this isn't an endorsement of the idea that the virus was man made.
People seem to be conflating these things when it suits.

And then there's the fact that there's a difference between the idea that the virus was bred in a lab, that the virus was developed as a bioweapon and the idea that the virus was created purposefully to be released intentionally to create a pandemic.
These ideas are also adopted or dropped depending on which is the most advantageous at the time.

astrofool · 26-05-2021 04:42PM

PuddingBreath wrote: »

i'm embarrassed for you buddy, trump didn't say inject bleach into yourself, he said scientists were looking at different things, ways to disinfect internally, suddenly the heal light was scrubbed off the internet wherever possible.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131022102227.htm

have you heard of manuka honey ? i suppose Holland and barrett should be shut down for peddling conspiracy products. if you hate trump you took it up as he's telling people to drink bleach, if you don't hate him you'd just accept it as him trying to give off a positive vibe about different treatments that might be coming down the line.

my thoughts on Trump is that he was useful to give the system a jolt when he got elected, this world is an unmerciful sh1tshow and it's not his fault(DEMS and GOP in usa are the same scum) however, i don't want to see him re-elected. he was step 1 of 1000s of steps needed to turn this world around from the hell it is, the systems in place don't want real change.
any chance we can stop all the plastic going into the oceans, stop polluting and littering in general, have ALL the people in the planet having clean drinking water, a toilet ? enough to eat ? we could do it with ease but bill clinton didn't sort it, barack obama didn't, joe biden won't, the UN won't. FF or FG won't (we now see after 100 years they're two cheeks of the same arse).

he is probably right about this coming from a lab in wuhan, he is probalby right to blame the chinese and some in the USA helped them. therein lies the problem.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/reporters-blame-trump-finding-wuhan-lab-theory-credible
it's trumps fault that reported didn't do their job!!!

he's a bad, bad, man
oh FFS

This is pretty typical of a trumpeter.

trump recommends disinfectant and using light as a treatment to use on people against the virus (after reading it on a poster before hand, thanks for this as it makes trumps ineptitude even more hilarious).

Holland and Barrett sell manuka honey.

Trumpeter sees these two things exactly the same.

The fact that you equate both is an indication of a pretty huge problem in your cognitive reasoning,

SafeSurfer · 26-05-2021 07:20PM

King Mob wrote: »

I did not say that. You are misrepresenting me again because you are becoming desperate for points to make or score.

I did not say the case was closed.
I'm saying that there are many studies that support a zoonotic origin.
There doesn't seem to be many studies that support a lab based origin. There doesn't seem to be any in fact as you have to resort to a lot of dishonesty and bluster to avoid admitting to this.

My mind is more than open. But you will not change it by avoiding points, being dishonest and throwing out misrepresentations, excuses and insults.

One thing that would start convince me and other people would be studies that support a lab based origin.

Do you understand that such studies are impossible because access to the Wuhan lab and it’s data is being denied?

There are two competing theories on the origin of Covid. One is the zoonotic origin, the other a lab leak.
There is no direct evidence to conclusively support either.

From the very start, Daszaks canvassing of supporters to sign the letter in the Lancet which declared “We declare no competing interests” was patently untrue.

26-05-2021 10:41PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Do you understand that such studies are impossible because access to the Wuhan lab and it’s data is being denied?
.

There would be other ways to indicate the virus was manufactured or otherwise wasn't able to develop naturally.

Do you now agree that there are no studies supporting the idea of a lab origin?
You still don't seem to be willing to actually admit this directly.

SafeSurfer wrote: »

There is no direct evidence to conclusively support either.
.

Sorry no. This is a lie.
I posted several studies that support the zoonotic origin. You have done everything you can to pretend they don't exist. You ignored them. You claimed they weren't peer reviewed. You claimed they were fraudulent. You claimed they said things they didn't.
Now you're back to claiming they don't exist.

This is bizarre.

26-05-2021 11:15PM

thecretinhop wrote: »

does king mog live in bejing?

No I don't.
If you have an accusation please make it directly. Don't hide behind innuendo.
Or better yet if your accusation has any merit and isn't just a random baseless suspicion, take it to the mods.

According to some, I am a paid shill who is also several posters here at once.
I guess now I'm also a Chinese agent...

lucernarian · 27-05-2021 10:58AM

King Mob wrote: »

And then there's the fact that there's a difference between the idea that the virus was bred in a lab, that the virus was developed as a bioweapon and the idea that the virus was created purposefully to be released intentionally to create a pandemic.
These ideas are also adopted or dropped depending on which is the most advantageous at the time.

That last sentence is the very example of conflation of opinions that you have complained of in this thread, despite a) the ignoring of other hypotheses, like the simple escape of a wild-type sample that was incorrectly stored and more importantly b) the studies that are published that have raised question marks over the limited evidence that supported a purely-natural origin hypothesis in the first place.

27-05-2021 11:44AM

lucernarian wrote: »

That last sentence is the very example of conflation of opinions that you have complained of in this thread, despite a) the ignoring of other hypotheses, like the simple escape of a wild-type sample that was incorrectly stored and more importantly

What are you talking about?
I don't conflate anything in any of the sentences you quote.

Nor has the idea of a natural virus being leaked been ignored. I specifically point out that as an example in that post.

What do you believe is the most likely hypothesis of those options or which one do you believe is what happened?
A natural virus escaping?
A virus altered or created to be a bioweapon escaping?
A virus altered and released intentionally to cause a pandemic for various nefarious purposes.

lucernarian wrote: »

b) the studies that are published that have raised question marks over the limited evidence that supported a purely-natural origin hypothesis in the first place.

What studies?
Which studies positively support the idea of a lab origin?

27-05-2021 11:50AM

lucernarian wrote: »

That last sentence is the very example of conflation of opinions that you have complained of in this thread, despite a) the ignoring of other hypotheses, like the simple escape of a wild-type sample that was incorrectly stored and more importantly b) the studies that are published that have raised question marks over the limited evidence that supported a purely-natural origin hypothesis in the first place.

People aren't posting hypotheses, though? What's going on is posters are:
-claiming things as fact, when they are anything but
-misrepresenting the position of qualified people to twist their words to suit their own narrative
-dodging and avoiding anything which challenges that narrative
-jumping on any little thing which supports their stance and cherry-picking stuff to back it up, while ignoring everything else that pokes holes in thier opinion
-shouting others down / calling them names / declaring mutliple time that they're finished discussing the matter nanananananana-can't-hear-you like toddlers
-posting links and claiming the link proves their point, only to abandon that link and offer a new one when it's pointed out they're incorrect
-falsely claiming they're being bullied when someone has the temerity to not swallow their garbage opinions
-refusing to engage in a debate....e,g, claiming something as fact as per the first point in this list then refusing to provide anything to back it up
-asking for proof or links or studies that have already been provided, then going around in circles two days later and doing the same
-infantile jabs at other posters "does he live in Beijing hurrr durrr"
-avoiding questions by answering different questions which weren't asked

That's a million miles away from what a hypothesis looks like........"I think that X happened in Y country which resulted in Z for everybody else, and here's why I think that".

Instead, we have the above....with posters looking like cranks who jump on the smallest nugget that confirms their already entrenched beliefs and ignoring that which does not.

lucernarian · 27-05-2021 12:09PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

People aren't posting hypotheses, though? What's going on is posters are:
-claiming things as fact, when they are anything but
-misrepresenting the position of qualified people to twist their words to suit their own narrative
-dodging and avoiding anything which challenges that narrative
-jumping on any little thing which supports their stance and cherry-picking stuff to back it up, while ignoring everything else that pokes holes in thier opinion
-shouting others down / calling them names / declaring mutliple time that they're finished discussing the matter nanananananana-can't-hear-you like toddlers
-posting links and claiming the link proves their point, only to abandon that link and offer a new one when it's pointed out they're incorrect
-falsely claiming they're being bullied when someone has the temerity to not swallow their garbage opinions
-refusing to engage in a debate....e,g, claiming something as fact as per the first point in this list then refusing to provide anything to back it up
-asking for proof or links or studies that have already been provided, then going around in circles two days later and doing the same
-infantile jabs at other posters "does he live in Beijing hurrr durrr"
-avoiding questions by answering different questions which weren't asked

That's a million miles away from what a hypothesis looks like........"I think that X happened in Y country which resulted in Z for everybody else, and here's why I think that".

Instead, we have the above....with posters looking like cranks who jump on the smallest nugget that confirms their already entrenched beliefs and ignoring that which does not.

All of that has been happening, on both sides but a greater proportion of the "lab-origin" side have been the entrenched ones and inclined to posting speculation.

In saying that, reducing things down to "garbage" opinions doesn't really add anything to the discussion. The primary problem IMO is that to merely express the hypothesis that there was a lab origin to SARS-CoV-2 because of proximity to a lab, missing data, and a lack of transparency / ulterior motives on the part of the local and national government, was itself branded as a conspiracy in the earliest days of the outbreak.

As for the Beijing question, whatever. If it's about the poster and not the post, it should be reported instead of backseat modded.

Your reply, mostly consisting of portrayals about people in this thread, and beyond, doesn't really go into the necessity for a deep and meaningful need for an investigation. It doesn't help that this conversation is happening, in of all places, Conspiracy Theories, and started because of a shoddy "paper" published by some attention-seeker.

There is currently little "evidence" of the genetic variety to really establish any coherent narrative on its origin. Presumably that's why the US is ordering an urgent in-depth investigation into its origin in the last 24 hours. As the BBC's former correspondent to China found out, trying to access either the WIV or the Mojiang caves is an impossibility to those outside the relevant corridors of power in China.

27-05-2021 12:10PM

Deleted User wrote: »

People aren't posting hypotheses, though? What's going on is posters are:
-claiming things as fact, when they are anything but
-misrepresenting the position of qualified people to twist their words to suit their own narrative
-dodging and avoiding anything which challenges that narrative
-jumping on any little thing which supports their stance and cherry-picking stuff to back it up, while ignoring everything else that pokes holes in thier opinion
-shouting others down / calling them names / declaring mutliple time that they're finished discussing the matter nanananananana-can't-hear-you like toddlers
-posting links and claiming the link proves their point, only to abandon that link and offer a new one when it's pointed out they're incorrect
-falsely claiming they're being bullied when someone has the temerity to not swallow their garbage opinions
-refusing to engage in a debate....e,g, claiming something as fact as per the first point in this list then refusing to provide anything to back it up
-asking for proof or links or studies that have already been provided, then going around in circles two days later and doing the same
-infantile jabs at other posters "does he live in Beijing hurrr durrr"
-avoiding questions by answering different questions which weren't asked

That's a million miles away from what a hypothesis looks like........"I think that X happened in Y country which resulted in Z for everybody else, and here's why I think that".

Instead, we have the above....with posters looking like cranks who jump on the smallest nugget that confirms their already entrenched beliefs and ignoring that which does not.

Know what I haven't seen?

Someone directly stating "I think most of the conspiracy claims are bull****, but I believe that X theory is plausible for Y reasons".

I think this is mostly due to the fact that most conspiracy mongers on twitter and youtube etc, don't like making definitive statements.

27-05-2021 02:27PM

lucernarian wrote: »

All of that has been happening, on both sides but a greater proportion of the "lab-origin" side have been the entrenched ones and inclined to posting speculation.

Nope, sorry. I've yet to see one person claim that the virus definitely, 100% occurred naturally and was definitely not man-made. You can't "both sides" this one. All I've seen from that side is links to studies which identify it as the most plausible explanation, and the lab grown theory as the least likely. Multiple people have been asked why they think these studies are flawed. None have responded.

lucernarian wrote: »

In saying that, reducing things down to (1) "garbage" opinions doesn't really add anything to the discussion.

(2) The primary problem IMO is that to merely express the hypothesis that there was a lab origin to SARS-CoV-2 because of proximity to a lab, missing data, and a lack of transparency / ulterior motives on the part of the local and national government, was itself branded as a conspiracy in the earliest days of the outbreak. Your reply, mostly consisting of portrayals about people in this thread, and beyond, doesn't really go into the necessity for a deep and meaningful need for an investigation. It doesn't help that this conversation is happening, in of all places, Conspiracy Theories, and started because of a shoddy "paper" published by some attention-seeker.

1) Calling out garbage opinions is ESSENTIAL to furthering the discussion. Getting bogged down with having to deal with some of the rubbish that gets posted hinders any real progress and serves only to inflame others. Posting links to respected institutions while claiming they back you up, only for others to look at your link and find out that it doesn't back you up at all, and contradicts your stance, only to then run away and find a new link which you think will do the job is garbage and should be called out every time.
2) hmmmmmm......a theory that the Chinese government conspired to produce the virus artificially in a lab......if only there was a name for such theories.....and a place to discuss them

lucernarian wrote: »

There is currently little "evidence" of the genetic variety to really establish any coherent narrative on its origin. Presumably that's why the US is ordering an urgent in-depth investigation into its origin in the last 24 hours. As the BBC's former correspondent to China found out, trying to access either the WIV or the Mojiang caves is an impossibility to those outside the relevant corridors of power in China.

Exactly. and that's what King Mob, Dohnjoe et al have been saying. They're not claiming it is definitely 'natural', just that the experts believe, so far, that it is much more likely to have originated that way than in a lab. To attempt to discredit such experts, you need a lot more than has been shown in this thread. Instead, we have mostly garbage.

lucernarian · 27-05-2021 07:03PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Nope, sorry. I've yet to see one person claim that the virus definitely, 100% occurred naturally and was definitely not man-made. You can't "both sides" this one. All I've seen from that side is links to studies which identify it as the most plausible explanation, and the lab grown theory as the least likely. Multiple people have been asked why they think these studies are flawed. None have responded.

There's so much conflation in that, it's hard to know where to start. What some prominent virologists have said is that it's extremely unlikely. Others in the field, Peter Desziak and various media outlets have overtly described lab-origin explanations as a conspiracy theory. If that isn't a 100% certain declaration, then what is?

I thought I tried to explain earlier in this thread, the scientific issues with the proximal origins of SARS-CoV-2 by Andersen et al, the most glaring of which is the whataboutery of how "better" the spike protein could bind to the huACE2 receptor if it had been pre-designed, which didn't address how this high-affinity binding came to be in the first place, nor the implicit assumption that the virus could not be chimeric. I guess the comparison is like having a ford Mondeo when you could have a Ferrari - and the truth in this is that I see a lot more ford Mondeos driving around than I see Ferraris, while the binding of the virus and its variants are more than able to go from A to B in terms of functionality.

But that's not an argument for any side, just a strikingly bad argument to make in a scientific paper and to make it through review.

Realistically the biggest issue with the natural-origin hypothesis, from the genetic level, is the furin cleavage site within the spike protein. CoV-2 seems to share homology with a sample spike protein identified by the WIV in the past, except for this cleavage site. It's an extra 12 base pairs, and they code for amino acids in a particular way (RXXR) in a pattern that are frankly not readily found in the known betacoronavirus repotoire.

Other furin binding sites have been found in betacoronaviruses, like MERS, but the RNA coding for those few known examples is different.

This fundamental question remains unexplained, and would need an intermediary strain identified, thorough investigation of endemic viruses. We're currently nowhere near finding the evidence to demonstrate immediate prior ancestors, not even a starting point has been found (bats directly has been mostly rebuffed, pangolins were rebuffed in more recent papers). There is honestly a lot more to it, and inherently unsuited to this forum. Most experts wouldn't even bother commenting on a thread that has made its way here, and the leading experts in the field are busy, well, researching SARS-CoV-2 and a cure / way out of the crisis / working with govts on pandemic management etc, on top of whatever preexisting projects and grants they were worrying about.

Edit: strictly speaking this thread is about a trash paper that got published in a rag, not the wider topic. The explicit acknowledgement of the current US administration that it is a possibility, no more less, alongside Anthony Fauci and Ralph Baric, the world's leading expert on betacoronaviruses, is not exactly "conspiracy theory" level, it needs to be discussed scientifically and rationally.

splashuum · 27-05-2021 07:36PM

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Nothing has come out.

Are you deaf or blind? Or both perhaps?

splashuum · 27-05-2021 07:37PM

So if the Wuhan lab leak theory is confirmed to be true, mainstream media & social media censorship helped facilitate one of the biggest cover-ups in modern history.

All in the name of "stopping misinformation."

Why should they be trusted to be the arbiters of truth ever again?

splashuum · 27-05-2021 07:37PM

So if the Wuhan lab leak theory is confirmed to be true, mainstream media & social media censorship helped facilitate one of the biggest cover-ups in modern history.

All in the name of "stopping misinformation."

Why should they be trusted to be the arbiters of truth ever again?

-Pjw

Timberrrrrrrr · 27-05-2021 07:39PM

You have gone from

Pretty hilarious seeing the truth come out. The “DeBuNkeRZ” must be raging.

splashuum wrote: »

So if the Wuhan lab leak theory is confirmed to be true, mainstream media & social media censorship helped facilitate one of the biggest cover-ups in modern history.

All in the name of "stopping misinformation."

Why should they be trusted to be the arbiters of truth ever again?

So nothing confirmed but you're posting as if it's conclusive:rolleyes:

splashuum · 27-05-2021 07:40PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You have gone from

So nothing confirmed but you're posting as if it's conclusive:rolleyes:

Stick to your “bat” story. It obviously helps you sleep at night.

lucernarian · 27-05-2021 07:46PM

splashuum wrote: »

So if the Wuhan lab leak theory is confirmed to be true, mainstream media & social media censorship helped facilitate one of the biggest cover-ups in modern history.

All in the name of "stopping misinformation."

Why should they be trusted to be the arbiters of truth ever again?

-Pjw

It's unlikely to be confirmed true, there would need to be more evidence than the one US intelligence report and a year is plenty of time for a facility to remedy any faults, evidence to be lost etc. In the context of the pandemic and US politics, Trump made any honest skepticism into its origins politically toxic and the likes of Peter Deszac was given a platform in the Guardian that he shouldn't have been even from a journalistic ethics perspective.

The best way to restore trust is exactly what Joe Biden is doing, by announcing a serious examination of the evidence and possibilities that stem from that. There are not many true experts in the immediate field and most of them coalesce around one of two labs, including the WIV. It is hard to ask trust to be placed in various experts, and stay at home, while simultaneously undermining the work of the foremost experts in the field with potentially world-changing allegations.

Timberrrrrrrr · 27-05-2021 08:04PM

splashuum wrote: »

Stick to your “bat” story. It obviously helps you sleep at night.

And you keep living in fear that the big bad bogey men are out to get you :pac:

mcsean2163 · 27-05-2021 08:24PM

thecretinhop wrote: »

does king mog live in bejing?

There are no published papers, to my knowledge, to support that claim.

It's possible he lives in a man cave with a lot of tissue paper and a very sticky inner wall and door but there are no papers published in journals to that effect to my knowledge.

mcsean2163 · 27-05-2021 08:27PM

lucernarian wrote: »

There's so much conflation in that, it's hard to know where to start. What some prominent virologists have said is that it's extremely unlikely. Others in the field, Peter Desziak and various media outlets have overtly described lab-origin explanations as a conspiracy theory. If that isn't a 100% certain declaration, then what is?

I thought I tried to explain earlier in this thread, the scientific issues with the proximal origins of SARS-CoV-2 by Andersen et al, the most glaring of which is the whataboutery of how "better" the spike protein could bind to the huACE2 receptor if it had been pre-designed, which didn't address how this high-affinity binding came to be in the first place, nor the implicit assumption that the virus could not be chimeric. I guess the comparison is like having a ford Mondeo when you could have a Ferrari - and the truth in this is that I see a lot more ford Mondeos driving around than I see Ferraris, while the binding of the virus and its variants are more than able to go from A to B in terms of functionality.

But that's not an argument for any side, just a strikingly bad argument to make in a scientific paper and to make it through review.

Realistically the biggest issue with the natural-origin hypothesis, from the genetic level, is the furin cleavage site within the spike protein. CoV-2 seems to share homology with a sample spike protein identified by the WIV in the past, except for this cleavage site. It's an extra 12 base pairs, and they code for amino acids in a particular way (RXXR) in a pattern that are frankly not readily found in the known betacoronavirus repotoire.

Other furin binding sites have been found in betacoronaviruses, like MERS, but the RNA coding for those few known examples is different.

This fundamental question remains unexplained, and would need an intermediary strain identified, thorough investigation of endemic viruses. We're currently nowhere near finding the evidence to demonstrate immediate prior ancestors, not even a starting point has been found (bats directly has been mostly rebuffed, pangolins were rebuffed in more recent papers). There is honestly a lot more to it, and inherently unsuited to this forum. Most experts wouldn't even bother commenting on a thread that has made its way here, and the leading experts in the field are busy, well, researching SARS-CoV-2 and a cure / way out of the crisis / working with govts on pandemic management etc, on top of whatever preexisting projects and grants they were worrying about.

Edit: strictly speaking this thread is about a trash paper that got published in a rag, not the wider topic. The explicit acknowledgement of the current US administration that it is a possibility, no more less, alongside Anthony Fauci and Ralph Baric, the world's leading expert on betacoronaviruses, is not exactly "conspiracy theory" level, it needs to be discussed scientifically and rationally.

In fairness she is a doctor of virology and very much out of her natural environment in the US. As far as I can tell she acted in good faith based on the intelligence she had. However, she really didn't do herself any favours by aligning with Trump...

lucernarian · 27-05-2021 08:55PM

mcsean2163 wrote: »

In fairness she is a doctor of virology and very much out of her natural environment in the US. As far as I can tell she acted in good faith based on the intelligence she had. However, she really didn't do herself any favours by aligning with Trump...

Who aligned with trump?

mcsean2163 · 27-05-2021 09:24PM

lucernarian wrote: »

Who aligned with trump?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li-Meng_Yan

She teamed up with Steve Bannon which was not well received, especially last year. Amazing how quiet politics is now that Trump is gone....

mcmoustache · 27-05-2021 10:20PM

splashuum wrote: »

So if the Wuhan lab leak theory is confirmed to be true, mainstream media & social media censorship helped facilitate one of the biggest cover-ups in modern history.

All in the name of "stopping misinformation."

Why should they be trusted to be the arbiters of truth ever again?

Is the evidence for the lab leak just that some lab workers in an area with covid got covid?

BorneTobyWilde · 27-05-2021 11:28PM

The amount of brainwashing that has taken place regarding everything Trump makes everyone believe anything linked to Trump is a lie.

mcsean2163 · 28-05-2021 12:31AM

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

The amount of brainwashing that has taken place regarding everything Trump makes everyone believe anything linked to Trump is a lie.

Not true. Lots of people continued to investigate the lab leak theory despite Trump. In saying that, some people really hate Trump.

patnor1011 · 28-05-2021 12:42AM

mcmoustache wrote: »

Is the evidence for the lab leak just that some lab workers in an area with covid got covid?

Of course not. Purely coincidental. From what we know they probably ordered bat soup takeaway from wuhan wet market.
"Science" and current consensus among majority say it could not happen any other way.

28-05-2021 06:00AM

lucernarian wrote: »

There's so much conflation in that, it's hard to know where to start. What some prominent virologists have said is that it's extremely unlikely. Others in the field, Peter Desziak and various media outlets have overtly described lab-origin explanations as a conspiracy theory. If that isn't a 100% certain declaration, then what is?

Well this seems to be conflation. As the investigation lead by Desziak was the source of your quote of "extremely unlikely".

I have also asked you what your stance is but you seem to have missed the question.
Which do you believe is the real explanation? Or which explanation do you believe is the most likely?
Was it a virus with a natural origin?
Did it have a natural origin, but then escaped from a lab?
Did it have a natural origin, was altered artificially, then escaped?
Was it altered or created as a bioweapon and then escaped?
Was it altered or created as part of a plot to cause a pandemic for some reason?

Do you believe something between these options?

At which point in this list do the options become conspiracy theories that aren't worth considering?

lucernarian wrote: »

I thought I tried to explain earlier in this thread, the scientific issues with the proximal origins of SARS-CoV-2 by Andersen et al, the most glaring of which is the whataboutery of how "better" the spike protein could bind to the huACE2 receptor if it had been pre-designed, which didn't address how this high-affinity binding came to be in the first place, nor the implicit assumption that the virus could not be chimeric. I guess the comparison is like having a ford Mondeo when you could have a Ferrari - and the truth in this is that I see a lot more ford Mondeos driving around than I see Ferraris, while the binding of the virus and its variants are more than able to go from A to B in terms of functionality.

But from my limited understanding was that this indicated that the virus wasn't altered in the most efficient and obvious way that viruses are typically altered.
Is there some reason why it would be altered in a suboptimal way?
Why buy a mondeo when you can afford a Ferrari?

lucernarian wrote: »

But that's not an argument for any side, just a strikingly bad argument to make in a scientific paper and to make it through review.

Why do you believe it made it through review when this argument should have got it rejected?

lucernarian wrote: »

Realistically the biggest issue with the natural-origin hypothesis, from the genetic level, is the furin cleavage site within the spike protein. CoV-2 seems to share homology with a sample spike protein identified by the WIV in the past, except for this cleavage site. It's an extra 12 base pairs, and they code for amino acids in a particular way (RXXR) in a pattern that are frankly not readily found in the known betacoronavirus repotoire.

Other furin binding sites have been found in betacoronaviruses, like MERS, but the RNA coding for those few known examples is different.

Ok.
Which studies use this argument to conclude the virus was altered?

Are all the other papers and studies that support the idea of a zoonotic origin incorrect?

thecretinhop · 28-05-2021 10:00AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/us-sitting-raft-unexamined-virus-origin-intel-former-official-says-almost-no-evidence

a rag etc blah blah

28-05-2021 10:45AM

thecretinhop wrote: »

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/us-sitting-raft-unexamined-virus-origin-intel-former-official-says-almost-no-evidence

a rag etc blah blah

Yes. It's a rag that seems to peddle crap.

Why should we take this seriously?

Especially when the author of the article appears to be "Tyler Durden".

Covid-19 likely to be man made

Comments