Covid-19 likely to be man made

King Mob · 13-09-2020 11:49pm

Odin Sticky Scapula wrote: »

This rather worringly, simply re-demonstrates your approach to everything e.g. 100% non-stop and constant closed-mind denial.
*I.e. (you) are 'assuming the outcome' of a future, (i.e. a 'yet to occur' event).

Why use the term 'when', when 'if' is more appropriate?
That in itself is a conspiracy, that you alone have now created.

Surely any intelligent and reasonable person on the other hand, would say, 'well let's wait and see what she produces' (after telling 1.3 million loose wimin viewers, across 10mins of interview time, that evidence would be produced in a few days time).

Either i) she produces the goods, or ii) she doesn't.
A very simple black or white event.
There is no real conspiracy to be had outside of that (in regards to Dr. Li-Meng).

Because we've seen these conspiracy claims before.
Also if she had real evidence she'd be publishing it in journals and wouldn't be going on chat shows and the like first. That's not how scientific claims are made.
It's how sensational bull**** claims are made though.

Also not sure why you're spelling it "wimin" it's very odd.

4068ac1elhodqr · 14-09-2020 12:31am

King Mob wrote: »

Because we've seen these conspiracy claims before..

Where exactly before, has a Chinese Virologist, on a live national tv daytime show, claimed they have and will supply the covid genome sequence?
It's a fairly specific claim, perhaps explaining the ITV prime-time booking.

All you are doing here (and perhaps for 10yrs now), is assuming because you don't like some claim, some time before, by someone else, about something or other else.... that everything in the future (i.e. not yet presented) 'will' thus be a conspiracy by default and prejudice.

I.e. Setting precedence and bias, without any consideration whatsoever.

This is very strange and bizzare behaviour indeed, her evidence has not yet been presented.
How can it be dismissed prior to this, as a CT (pre-event).

Either the Dr will present something or she won't, it really can't get any more simple than that.
Sure if we don't hear back from her next week, we can then, (at that future point in time) assume she enjoyed her 10mins of fame, and life goes on.

King Mob · 14-09-2020 12:37am

Odin Sticky Scapula wrote: »

Where exactly before, has a Chinese Virologist, on a live national tv daytime show, claimed they have and will supply the covid genome sequence?
It's a fairly specific claim, perhaps explaining the ITV prime-time booking.

We've seen plenty of people with sensational conspiracy claims about a scientific topic bypassing standards and peer review and going to sensationalist media instead.

And again we've had virologists publish papers in journals showing that the virus is not man made using the genetics of the virus.
Why are you discounting those experts for this one solitary expert?
Are those experts in on it?

You also keep highlighting that this virologist is Chinese. Does this somehow give her a special insight?

4068ac1elhodqr · 14-09-2020 12:44am

King Mob wrote: »

We've seen plenty of people with sensational conspiracy claims about a scientific topic bypassing standards and peer review and going to sensationalist media instead.

So some people, some where else about something so and so.

But no Chinese Virologist on a national daytime primetime tv show, actually make the very specific claim of having the original lab based covid genome sequence at hand.

Why won't you wait a few days and see what the lady has to say for herself?
Sounds like you've made up your mind (again) prior to her date of disclosure.

It's a very, very repetitive pattern this. A conspiracy to assume a future event's result, that you have now presented us today.

I'm looking for the exact lotto numbers for Friday, perhaps you have them handy, what with all this 'pre-event result forecasting capability'?

King Mob · 14-09-2020 12:53am

Odin Sticky Scapula wrote: »

So some people, some where else about something so and so.

Yes, but pretty much the same in every way that matters.
An expert presenting a conspiratorial claim to an unquestioning media source who cares more about sensationalism rather than facts so the expert can bypass scrutiny and standards.

The specifics of the claims don't really matter when the behaviour is the same.

Odin Sticky Scapula wrote: »

It's a very, very repetitive pattern this.

Yes. Because cranks keep making claims like this in the same way and conspiracy theorists like yourself keep falling for it.

4068ac1elhodqr · 14-09-2020 3:58am

King Mob wrote: »

Yes. Because cranks keep making claims like this in the same way and conspiracy theorists like yourself keep falling for it.

(Another) falsehood. If you read^ above it clearly implies the best and sane option would be to 'withhold any judgement', until the lady presents her evidence (as she promised) in the coming days, or if she does not. It can go either way. It would certainly not be the 1st case of a Chinese Virologist breaking exclusive news and revelations in regards to covid.

The crazy thing would be to draw a conclusion in the meantime, unless you are some sort of psychic or something? It's a strange thing to fall for, this constant relentless state of denail, and wear it as a strange badge honour.

Perhaps the only true crank here, appears to be the chap with 8,000posts trying to close down each and every theory, for the last 10yrs, it's rather bizzare indeed, to say the least.

King Mob · 14-09-2020 4:29am

Odin Sticky Scapula wrote: »

(Another) falsehood. If you read^ above it clearly implies the best and sane option would be to 'withhold any judgement', until the lady presents her evidence (as she promised) in the coming days, or if she does not. It can go either way. It would certainly not be the 1st case of a Chinese Virologist breaking exclusive news and revelations in regards to covid.

But again, this isn't how science discoveries are announced and published.
The only time people do it this way is when they are trying to avoid scrutiny and peer review because their claims are crap.

At the same time, we have had expert who did publish their findings in the correct way. And their conclusion was that it wasn't man made.

All indications are that this isn't going to be the big reveal conspiracy theorists are hoping for. It never is.

But hey we should hear out every traveling medicine man. Maybe this time his snake oil is the real deal.

4068ac1elhodqr · 14-09-2020 3:58pm

King Mob wrote: »

But again, this isn't how science discoveries are announced and published.
The only time people do it this way is when they are trying to avoid s....

...Trying to avoid Chinese authorities, by fleeing to another country and is currently hiding in a secret location in the US.

It's not as if other outspoken Chinese Virologists have had accidents or have disappeared is it?

Virologist Dr Li Meng-Yan was part of a team choosen to investigate the early outbreak of a modified version of CC45 and ZXC41.

Perhaps this is why why she was invited on a prime time tv show for 1.5m viewers for 10mins, and the reason why a conspiracy theorist such as KMob wasn't, with his own persistant theory, that 'there simply are no theories'. Ever.

Dr Li added,

“The genome sequence is like a human fingerprint, so based on this you can recognise, identify these things. So, I used the evidence that exists in the genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 to tell people why this has come from China and why they are the only ones to make it.”

Li-Meng also revealed that there are two reports which support her claim and said that one of them will be published in “several days”, which will reveal all the scientific evidence to prove that the virus is man-made.

So either she will produce the goods, or she or won't.

Furthermore, she had added that her own institute, the School of Public Health in University of Hong Kong, which was also affiliated with the World Health Organization (WHO), had asked her to stay silent about it.

https://theprint.in/world/covid-virus-developed-in-wuhan-lab-highly-mutant-hong-kong-virologist-says-she-has-evidence/502237/
https://www.itv.com/loosewomen/articles/virologist-dr-li-meng-yan-coronavirus-cover-up-claims
https://www.foxnews.com/world/chinese-virologist-coronavirus-cover-up-flee-hong-kong-whistleblower
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8631159/Coronavirus-scientist-reveals-fled-home-family-tell-world-truth.html
https://gulfnews.com/world/covid-19-was-made-in-wuhan-lab-claims-chinese-virologist-1.1600085334025
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/252484/20200911/chinese-whistleblower-dr-li-meng-yan-to-release-scientific-proof-that-coronavirus-came-from-wuhan-lab-not-at-a-wet-market.htm

King Mob · 14-09-2020 4:02pm

Odin Sticky Scapula wrote: »

...Trying to avoid Chinese authorities, by fleeing to another country and is currently hiding in a secret location in the US.

Which also conveniently lets her bypass peer review and scrutiny.

But why would we doubt someone promoting a conspiracy theory? They never lie or make stuff up or believe crazy ****.

Dohnjoe · 14-09-2020 4:05pm

Odin Sticky Scapula wrote: »

Virologist Dr Li Meng-Yan was part of a team choosen to investigate the early outbreak of a modified version of CC45 and ZXC41.

You've found a scientist who possibly supports the notion that the virus is man-made (which theoretically it could be). However the majority of scientists believe it is natural.

Therefore scientific consensus is that it's natural.

enno99 · 14-09-2020 4:07pm

The Lancet has made one of the biggest retractions in modern history. How could this happen?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/05/lancet-had-to-do-one-of-the-biggest-retractions-in-modern-history-how-could-this-happen

At its best, peer review is a slow and careful evaluation of new research by appropriate experts. It involves multiple rounds of revision that removes errors, strengthens analyses, and noticeably improves manuscripts.

At its worst, it is merely window dressing that gives the unwarranted appearance of authority, a cursory process which confers no real value, enforces orthodoxy, and overlooks both obvious analytical problems and outright fraud entirely.

So calling for peer review is just a way to dismiss it out of hand

Bearing in mind saying that lots of other experts disagree would they even accept the paper in this case

It would call into question their expertise

Dohnjoe · 14-09-2020 4:12pm

enno99 wrote: »

So calling for peer review is just a way to dismiss it out of hand

Peer review is an essential part of evaluating academic work

Typically when a scientist goes against scientific consensus, and they do so without peer review - then we have to be more skeptical about their claim

King Mob · 14-09-2020 4:14pm

enno99 wrote: »

The Lancet has made one of the biggest retractions in modern history. How could this happen?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/05/lancet-had-to-do-one-of-the-biggest-retractions-in-modern-history-how-could-this-happen

So calling for peer review is just a way to dismiss it out of hand

Bearing in mind saying that lots of other experts disagree would they even accept the paper in this case

It would call into question their expertise

Ah ok.
So peer review doesn't work.
That's also convenient for conspiracy cranks.

So guys, I've got this bridge I need to sell...

4068ac1elhodqr · 14-09-2020 4:16pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You've found a scientist who possibly supports the notion that the virus is man-made (which theoretically it could be). However the majority of scientists believe it is natural.

You've also ignored the fact this (Chinese Virologist) Dr Li Meng-Yan was hand selected to be part of a team choosen to investigate the early outbreak of a modified version of CC45 and ZXC41 at WuhanL4 (for what is now covid19). And is currently on the run from the Chinese.

Dohnjoe · 14-09-2020 4:21pm

Odin Sticky Scapula wrote: »

You've also ignored the fact

I addressed it directly. Most kids in secondary school understand the principle. I've never seen confusion over it anywhere but conspiracy theory forums

It's pretty simple, if one scientist claims X, and one hundred scientists claim Y - then Y is the scientific consensus.

enno99 · 14-09-2020 4:23pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Peer review is an essential part of evaluating academic work

Typically when a scientist goes against scientific consensus, and they do so without peer review - then we have to be more skeptical about their claim

It has to be accepted for peer review before that can happen

Dohnjoe · 14-09-2020 4:26pm

enno99 wrote: »

It has to be accepted for peer review before that can happen

Treat information with skepticism

Again if one scientist is claiming X, and 100 are claiming Y.

And X is a potentially exciting conspiracy theory. I don't need to tell you what type of people argue for X under those circumstances.

King Mob · 14-09-2020 4:27pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I addressed it directly. Most kids in secondary school understand the principle. I've never seen confusion over it anywhere but conspiracy theory forums

It's pretty simple, if one scientist claims X, and one hundred scientists claim Y - then Y is the scientific consensus.

Well those one hundred scientists are obviously part of a giant unprovable, nonsensical conspiracy.

And of course it doesn't matter that the one scientist has a direct profit motive for taking the opposite opinion. They're a scientist. They're incorruptable.

enno99 · 14-09-2020 4:30pm

King Mob wrote: »

Ah ok.
So peer review doesn't work.
That's also convenient for conspiracy cranks.

So guys, I've got this bridge I need to sell...[/QUOTE

loads of evidence where it failed miserably

This new study may explain why peer review in science often fails

Academics vet the work of their peers — for free, in their spare time — in a process that is supposed to weed out junk science before it’s published. But researchers say the task is thankless, that it slows down the publication process. To make matters worse, this cornerstone of the scientific method has surprisingly little evidence for its effectiveness, and many mysteries about how it works.

In an effort to better understand peer review, researchers have been trying to study the process itself. And one such new study may help explain why peer review fails, and why it may not ensure quality in science. Its main finding is that a small minority of researchers are shouldering most of the burden of peer review.

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2016/11/23/13713324/why-peer-review-in-science-often-fails

King Mob · 14-09-2020 4:36pm

enno99 wrote: »

loads of evidence where it failed miserably

Ok gotcha.
Peer review doesn't work. So whatever random scientists claim must always be true cause they're scientists and can't possibly be wrong.

Unless they don't support a conspiracy theory, at which point they're part of a conspiracy.

So the only scientists we can trust are the mavericks who are promoting conspiracy claims.

Like Dr. Judy Wood?

Dohnjoe · 14-09-2020 4:37pm

enno99 wrote: »

loads of evidence where it failed miserably

Peer review as a process works pretty well. You are just attacking it because it threatens to type of thinking you use to justify conspiracy theories and unsupported claims

King Mob · 14-09-2020 4:44pm

enno99 wrote: »

This new study may explain why peer review in science often fails

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2016/11/23/13713324/why-peer-review-in-science-often-fails

This is also a pretty perfect example of how conspiracy theorists will drown out and abuse legitimate concerns and issues.

Some people believe that there are undue influences in scientific research, particularly in medicine, and back that up with research and informed opinion.

Conspiracy theorists take this to mean that it's all a giant satanic conspiracy lead by Bill Gates to implant us with microchips as part of a plot to depopulate the world.

enno99 · 14-09-2020 4:48pm

King Mob wrote: »

Well those one hundred scientists are obviously part of a giant unprovable, nonsensical conspiracy.

And of course it doesn't matter that the one scientist has a direct profit motive for taking the opposite opinion. They're a scientist. They're incorruptable.

Has to be a safer way to make a few bucks

Barging into your home, threatening your family, or making you disappear: Here's what China does to people who speak out against them

The Chinese Communist Party has long sought to suppress ideas that could undermine the sweeping authority it has over its 1.4 billion citizens — and the state can go to extreme lengths to maintain its grip.

In just the past few years, the government has attempted to muzzle critics by making them disappear without a trace, ordering people to physically barge into their houses, or locking up those close to critics as a kind of blackmail.

Even leaving China isn't always enough. The state has continued to clamp down on dissent by harassing and threatening family members who remain in the country.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-china-deals-with-dissent-threats-family-arrests-2018-8?op=1&r=US&IR=T

King Mob · 14-09-2020 4:52pm

enno99 wrote: »

Has to be a safer way to make a few bucks

Barging into your home, threatening your family, or making you disappear: Here's what China does to people who speak out against them

You keep posting links that don't really have much to do with your bizarre conspiracy beliefs.

Are you just googling them and posting the first one that pops up for the search term?

enno99 · 14-09-2020 5:05pm

King Mob wrote: »

You keep posting links that don't really have much to do with your bizarre conspiracy beliefs.

Are you just googling them and posting the first one that pops up for the search term?

No they are to point out your silly claim that profit was a motive

King Mob · 14-09-2020 5:26pm

enno99 wrote: »

No they are to point out your silly claim that profit was a motive

Ah gotcha.
Misrepresenting again. Cool.

enno99 · 14-09-2020 7:56pm

https://twitter.com/LiMengYAN119?s=21

the Chinese doctors twitter account

https://zenodo.org/record/4028830#.X19xByXZglR

Her paper is here

4068ac1elhodqr · 14-09-2020 8:53pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's pretty simple, if one scientist claims X, and one hundred scientists claim Y - then Y is the scientific consensus.

It's pretty simple to compute, and one that even kids in secondary school can understand.

The Dr. (Chinese Virologist) was hand-picked to investigate the early outbreak of a modified version of CC45 and ZXC41, evolving to COVID19 (at) WuhanL4 (where she had direct access).

Her direct access and specific knowledge of something she worked directly upon, would superseed e.g. 1,000 random folks in white coats down in Sao Paulo, who likely only heard about this, after Chinese authorities drip-feeded bits of information they wanted released, in early 2020.

Quality, not quantity.

Dohnjoe · 15-09-2020 1:01am

Odin Sticky Scapula wrote: »

It's pretty simple to compute

You then put one scientist ahead of the consensus. You clearly don't have any notion what scientific consensus is.

splashuum · 16-09-2020 9:44am

Dr. Yan has since had to flee to the US in fear of the CCP.
The incredibly detailed report can be found here :https://www.scribd.com/document/475993573/

It is now fair to say that its a conspiracy theory to believe this virus was entirely natural.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/5903613/chinese-defector-virologist-publishes-explosive-proof-coronavirus-man-made/

https://www.itv.com/loosewomen/articles/virologist-dr-li-meng-yan-coronavirus-cover-up-claims

Covid-19 likely to be man made

Comments