Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Covid-19 likely to be man made

1…4344464849…75

Comments

  • #1352
    geospatial
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 200 ✭✭geospatial


    Deleted User wrote: »
    That vanity fair article points to a cover up..

    I just read it. It's a solid piece of investigative reporting and the sources are likely credible as we know that the Trump administration leaked like a sieve. There was clearly huge concern about US funded gain of function research in Wuhan becoming public, but it would have been far better to get out ahead of the story rather than trying to bury it. It's a mess now and will only be resolved via an open investigation, as a broad spectrum of people just don't believe they are being told the truth.


  • #1353
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    geospatial wrote: »
    You are misrepresenting everything I have stated. Literally everything. Having read back a bit on this thread, you do it to everyone who disagrees with you.
    Lol. You're claiming this, yet I can point out a bunch of examples where you've actually done it.
    Can you point out where I have done so?
    geospatial wrote: »
    Here is my position on the US investigation, for the 15th time.

    I welcome a full open and transparent investigation. Do you?

    I expect it to actually investigate the possibility of a lab leak. Do you?
    Yes and yes. Never said anything to the contrary.
    geospatial wrote: »
    To investigate that possibility I believe the US govt need to get access to WIV data. Do you?
    No I don't think that this is the only way to investigate the possibility. The data would be helpful, sure, but I don't think that it would render the investigation void if they aren't able to get access to it.
    geospatial wrote: »
    I expect the findings to be publicly announced with supporting evidence. Do you?
    Yup.
    geospatial wrote: »
    I have defined this evidence as the lab data from WIV and location data on the first few hundred actual cases of Covid in Wuhan. Is this a reasonable expectation?
    No, I think it's a bit of a artificial limitation on the investigation.

    Are you saying that if the investigation uses other evidence and reasoning without this specific data set, you'll reject the investigation's conclusion?
    geospatial wrote: »
    I believe a finding of "we found no evidence of a lab leak", with no actual data secured from the WIV would be a very poor outcome. Do you agree?
    No, I don't agree. I believe that there could be other sources of evidence and reasoning beyond this data.
    I believe that if they announce the finding that "we found no evidence of a lab leak" and use other evidence and reasoning, I think this is a fair outcome. Do you?

    I suspect that you will not think this outcome is good. I think you will use the fact that they didn't use this specific set of data will be an excuse for yourself to reject any other reasoning or evidence the investigation uses as false or inadequate. I suspect then, you will then start claiming that the investigation was part of a cover up.


  • #1354
    astrofool
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,507 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    geospatial wrote: »
    There is no damage to the scientific community? Scientists have been receiving death threats, would you regard that as damaging? Gain of function research is very much in the spotlight, with groups of scientists taking very strong positions on both sides. What's your opinion of gain of function research that most certainly could have led to a virus like SARS-2, and most certainly could have leaked from a lab as there have been numerous leaks of dangerous pathogens from labs.

    Can you summarize the scientific evidence that the SARS-CoV 2 virus is zootonic in nature and rules out it being the result of signal passaging experiments or genetic engineering experiments in a lab. The evidence is that the virus is a chimera and has unique features not seen in other bat coronaviruses, it could have come from a natural source via recombination or been created in a lab. A virus as the result of lab serial passaging would look no different genomically to a zootonic virus and it is doubtful if one genetically engineered would look different.

    As I said my personal belief is the evidence favors a natural source, but both should be investigated.

    Just to come back on this, death threats should absolutely not be tolerated.

    I have no doubt that gain of function research is happening and will continue to happen. The evidence that SARS-COV2 emerged from GOF research is non existent, not even weak. The only reason it's still in play as a theory is that it fits narratives rather than being evidential based. The technology review article you posted seems to hinge on one area, that being the ACE2 receptor that has occurred naturally before in other recent virus, shows no evidence of tampering in it's genome (being probably the most studied receptor in human history) and itself has mutated since the virus emerged.

    The WHO investigation eliminated lab leak due to lack of evidence (if you take the WHO scientists at face value, but if you don't you are only likely to get answers by travelling to Wuhan and performing the investigation yourself) and because of lack of evidence didn't investigate it further.

    A year on it's questionable if the USA investigation into a virus originating in China will turn up anything new, the most likely outcome is a reinforcing of the results from the WHO investigation with much the same evidence, possibly a bit of extra detail from the WIV. If that was the outcome, would you accept it?


  • #1355
    tara73
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,380 ✭✭✭tara73


    King Mob wrote: »
    But they did investigate the possibility of a lab leak.


    show us the link, the prove to it! prove us that they seriously investigated the possibility of a lab leak.
    also who is they? give us a link who investigated the possibility of the lab leak as you claim.


  • #1356
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    tara73 wrote: »
    show us the link, the prove to it! prove us that they seriously investigated the possibility of a lab leak.
    also who is they? give us a link who investigated the possibility of the lab leak as you claim.
    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00865-8
    There you go.


  • Advertisement
  • #1357
    astrofool
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,507 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    tara73 wrote: »
    show us the link, the prove to it! prove us that they seriously investigated the possibility of a lab leak.
    also who is they? give us a link who investigated the possibility of the lab leak as you claim.

    who investigated the lab leak (?)


  • #1358
    tara73
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,380 ✭✭✭tara73


    King Mob wrote: »
    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00865-8
    There you go.


    an article in the 'nature'. what's that for a magazine? jut written down from a magazine?


    also this, the head from the WHO, says this in your nice little article:


    --after the report’s publication, the WHO director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who was not directly involved with the investigation, posted a statement saying that he looks forward to future studies of the coronavirus’s animal origins — but that he wasn’t content with the examination of a potential laboratory leak. “I do not believe that this assessment was extensive enough,” he wrote. “This requires further investigation, potentially with additional missions involving specialist experts, which I am ready to deploy.”--


    hahaha, ridiculous.....with this article you've actually just proven that all is in the open, and that they NOT exclude the lab leak theory and want to investigate it further...
    god, this 4-5 posters here, just a complete waste of time to discuss with.


  • #1359
    Mic 1972
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    geospatial wrote: »
    You are misrepresenting everything I have stated. Literally everything. Having read back a bit on this thread, you do it to everyone who disagrees with you.

    Here is my position on the US investigation, for the 15th time.

    I welcome a full open and transparent investigation. Do you?

    I expect it to actually investigate the possibility of a lab leak. Do you?

    To investigate that possibility I believe the US govt need to get access to WIV data. Do you?

    I expect the findings to be publicly announced with supporting evidence. Do you?

    I have defined this evidence as the lab data from WIV and location data on the first few hundred actual cases of Covid in Wuhan. Is this a reasonable expectation?

    I believe a finding of "we found no evidence of a lab leak", with no actual data secured from the WIV would be a very poor outcome. Do you agree?


    Mate, stop engaging with him, we've all went through the same with him before. He asks the same questions over and over accusing you of dodging the questions. Eventually you'll be the one getting a warning from the mods


  • #1360
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,096 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    Mate, stop engaging with him, we've all went through the same with him before. He asks the same questions over and over accusing you of dodging the questions. Eventually you'll be the one getting a warning from the mods

    Ignoring posters who challenge your views and now encouraging others to ignore posters.


  • #1361
    biddyearley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 129 ✭✭biddyearley


    Man made or man-modified, I believe the Chinese either deliberately released it, or if accidentally, decide"fcuk it let's see what happens."


  • Advertisement
  • #1362
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,096 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    tara73 wrote: »
    show us the link, the prove to it! prove us that they seriously investigated the possibility of a lab leak.
    also who is they? give us a link who investigated the possibility of the lab leak as you claim.

    The lab-leak theory was investigated by the joint WHO investigation - they found it to be "extremely unlikely"

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55996728
    https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/report-finds-coronavirus-probably-emerged-bats-extremely-unlikely-resu-rcna536


  • #1363
    tara73
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,380 ✭✭✭tara73


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    Mate, stop engaging with him, we've all went through the same with him before. He asks the same questions over and over accusing you of dodging the questions. Eventually you'll be the one getting a warning from the mods


    that's how it is. crazy stuff happening here I would say..


  • #1364
    Danzy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,068 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    The lab-leak theory was investigated by the joint WHO investigation - they found it to be "extremely unlikely"

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55996728
    https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/report-finds-coronavirus-probably-emerged-bats-extremely-unlikely-resu-rcna536


    In fairness the Who have next to now credibility at this state in regard to Covid.

    They know who writes the cheques.


  • #1365
    tara73
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,380 ✭✭✭tara73


    King Mob wrote: »
    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00865-8
    There you go.


    and btw, you know the WHO is heavily sponsored by the chinese government ?
    so it is highly likely they will never state something that incrimintes China.

    Yes, you don't need to answer, I know your answer already:

    conspiracy theory!! provide a link the WHO is heavily sponsored by China!!..:rolleyes:


  • #1366
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    tara73 wrote: »
    an article in the 'nature'. what's that for a magazine? jut written down from a magazine?
    Nature is one of the foremost science publications in the world.

    It's not "Just written down in a magazine".
    tara73 wrote: »
    hahaha, ridiculous.....with this article you've actually just proven that all is in the open, and that they NOT exclude the lab leak theory and want to investigate it further...
    Ok And? Who said otherwise?

    Sorry, but you're not making a ton of sense here.
    tara73 wrote: »
    and btw, you know the WHO is heavily sponsored by the chinese government ?
    so it is highly likely they will never state something that incrimintes China.

    Yes, you don't need to answer, I know your answer already:

    conspiracy theory!! provide a link the WHO is heavily sponsored by China!!..:rolleyes:
    Yes. I would like to see some evidence that shows that China controls the WHO.
    Why is that an unreasonable request?
    Should I just believe what I'm told by randos on the internet without question?

    Since you believe that China is under the control of China, why did their report not discount the lab leak theory entirely?


  • #1367
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,096 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    tara73 wrote: »
    and btw, you know the WHO is heavily sponsored by the chinese government ?
    so it is highly likely they will never state something that incrimintes China.

    Yes, you don't need to answer, I know your answer already:

    conspiracy theory!! provide a link the WHO is heavily sponsored by China!!..:rolleyes:

    It was a joint WHO-China investigation, every article on this points out the fact. Everyone is aware of the conflict of interest, hence the US is having another investigation (which could have it's own conflicts of interest)

    This is why international investigations are often conducted by independent third parties - but with a country as closed and controlled as China that is unlikely


  • #1368
    NSAman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,496 ✭✭✭NSAman


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It was a joint WHO-China investigation, every article on this points out the fact. Everyone is aware of the conflict of interest, hence the US is having another investigation (which could have it's own conflicts of interest)

    This is why international investigations are often conducted by independent third parties - but with a country as closed and controlled as China that is unlikely

    So basically all the ‘evidence” you posted is crap! Even by your own admission above?


  • #1369
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,096 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    NSAman wrote: »
    So basically all the ‘evidence” you posted is crap! Even by your own admission above?

    I was responding to the posters requests for details of the investigation, which they didn't seem to know about.

    Personally, do I 100% trust a WHO-China study investigation? No, of course not. Unfortunately, for the moment, it's all we have.


  • #1370
    Mic 1972
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    it's kind of disturbing that an issue of this magnitude is still being discussed in the conspiracy theory section.
    There is a major mainstream discussion taking place at the moment in places that would have normally censored the issue right away.


  • #1371
    shil.mar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15 ✭shil.mar


    We never gonna know the truth... :(


  • Advertisement
  • #1372
    patnor1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,304 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    geospatial wrote: »
    I should have listened.

    Not just that. In one post he said he think he know that you believe in something and then tried to expand on that. Couple posts later he may be claiming it was you who actually said that.
    If you ask him something he will say dunno or proclaim that you should answer his questions first. Oh yes, and if you want to answer then dunno is not acceptable. Simple yes or no and if you try to say something more here we go again - you are dodging questions.
    Constantly muddying waters with statements that you are dodging or refuse to answer questions is good tactic. You are not the first one who been there - done that.


  • #1373
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    it's kind of disturbing that an issue of this magnitude is still being discussed in the conspiracy theory section.
    There is a major mainstream discussion taking place at the moment in places that would have normally censored the issue right away.
    This particular topic is here in the conspiracy theories section because people were and are suggesting ridiculous conspiracy theories.

    For example, people have been suggesting things beyond the simple lab leak idea, like the idea that the virus was manufactured from scratch or that it is a bioweapon.
    Most recently, people have been claiming that China secretly control the WHO.


  • #1374
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,096 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    I still haven't seen any credible evidence that the virus was "manufactured". Someone submitted a paper, but it left that out in it's final conclusion. So we're still at zero with topic of the thread.


  • #1375
    Mic 1972
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    patnor1011 wrote: »
    Not just that. In one post he said he think he know that you believe in something and then tried to expand on that. Couple posts later he may be claiming it was you who actually said that.
    If you ask him something he will say dunno or proclaim that you should answer his questions first. Oh yes, and if you want to answer then dunno is not acceptable. Simple yes or no and if you try to say something more here we go again - you are dodging questions.
    Constantly muddying waters with statements that you are dodging or refuse to answer questions is good tactic. You are not the first one who been there - done that.


    Correct.
    Ultimately he is spamming the thread, making it impossible for others to have an organic conversation. Often it's just straight out bullying


  • #1376
    quickbeam
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 16,287 Mod ✭✭✭✭quickbeam


    patnor1011 wrote: »
    Not just that. In one post he said he think he know that you believe in something and then tried to expand on that. Couple posts later he may be claiming it was you who actually said that.
    If you ask him something he will say dunno or proclaim that you should answer his questions first. Oh yes, and if you want to answer then dunno is not acceptable. Simple yes or no and if you try to say something more here we go again - you are dodging questions.
    Constantly muddying waters with statements that you are dodging or refuse to answer questions is good tactic. You are not the first one who been there - done that.
    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    Correct.
    Ultimately he is spamming the thread, making it impossible for others to have an organic conversation. Often it's just straight out bullying
    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    Mate, stop engaging with him, we've all went through the same with him before. He asks the same questions over and over accusing you of dodging the questions. Eventually you'll be the one getting a warning from the mods


    Mod: too right you will! Knock off the personal attacks. Engage in debate or ignore, but quit the sniping.


  • #1377
    patnor1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,304 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    I still haven't seen any credible evidence that the virus was "manufactured". Someone submitted a paper, but it left that out in it's final conclusion. So we're still at zero with topic of the thread.

    Ok, no credible evidence for lab escape and so far no credible evidence of natural evolution or jumping species. All we have is maybe, probably and highly likely.
    So, isn't it a little premature to call people conspiracy theorists if they go for possible lab leak theory?


  • #1378
    patnor1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,304 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    quickbeam wrote: »
    Mod: too right you will! Knock off the personal attacks. Engage in debate or ignore, but quit the sniping.

    Understood. Ignore is working fine for me.


  • #1379
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    patnor1011 wrote: »
    Ok, no credible evidence for lab escape and so far no credible evidence of natural evolution or jumping species.
    But again, this isn't true.
    There's many papers that detail the zoonotic origin for the virus.

    Ignoring things don't stop them from existing unfortunately.


  • #1380
    patnor1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,304 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    it's kind of disturbing that an issue of this magnitude is still being discussed in the conspiracy theory section.
    There is a major mainstream discussion taking place at the moment in places that would have normally censored the issue right away.

    Well, seeing how things evolve and how "facts" change at a whim depending on situation or "need" we should be quite happy we can discuss some topics.
    Simple mentioning of certain topics few months ago would result in scores of insults, personal attacks and ultimately a thread ban.


  • Advertisement
  • #1381
    geospatial
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 200 ✭✭geospatial


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It was a joint WHO-China investigation, every article on this points out the fact. Everyone is aware of the conflict of interest, hence the US is having another investigation (which could have it's own conflicts of interest)

    It was an investigation completely controlled by the CCP, they set the rules, they provided the data that they choose to provide, they determined what access the investigators would have or not have.

    Two quotes from the attached CNN article: "Dominic Dwyer a member of the WHO team told Reuters last week that the team had requested raw patient data on the 174 early cases and been refused, and were instead provided a summary". Why would the CCP refuse to provide this data? Because maybe it shows the early cases were centered around the WIV?

    On the lab leak hypothesis: Here's our ubiquitous friend Peter Daszak again "We found no tangible evidence or real leads on that, despite asking really hard question of the WIV". Really hard questions? Like can we see your data that was taken down from your servers in Nov 2019, and see your lab notebooks, and see your lab safety records". Nope, didn't ask for any of that. Just asked did anyone at the WIV test positive for Covid, answer was no, case closed.

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/asia/who-report-criticism-intl-hnk/index.html


Advertisement