The new Corona virus, should we worry?

LesBolstad

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,302
Reaction score
1,086
Points
113
Osterholm is a #VirusPorn fraud of course...we've known this from the start.

 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,852
Reaction score
4,839
Points
113
AFAIK the earliest genome shared with the west was from a Wuhan patient admitted Jan 4. The hundreds of confirmed and suspected COV+ in Dec (or earlier) again AFAIK are not available. The mutations of samples from different clusters of infections can be sequenced, compared to estimate when the virus originated, where, etc.
Thanks. Again, doesn't look good, but doesn't prove anything in of itself.

To be clear, I’m not convinced it was a lab leak, or wasn’t. I’m reacting solely to what is by all appearances a white wash by a small band of conflicted researchers and the Chinese government. Your BS meter isn’t maxing out?
You're saying it's a white wash. You want it to be a cover up. Again, I don't know why.

There isn't any evidence that it actually is that. What if a computer/server that has that data just got destroyed or even lost (physically lost in the shuffle)? It is possible. We don't know that answer, yet. May never.

OK, your turn. American pig eye yankee propaganda for the communists here. Please refute each of these points.
I will go through each point and comment.

But first: it is interesting that you had to link to this from the US Embassy in Georgia. (the Russian puppet state, not the US state) Hmmmmm. Doing a quick Google search on this "fact" sheet, reveals that the original link was: https://www.state.gov/fact-sheet-activity-at-the-wuhan-institute-of-virology/

Not there anymore, is it? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Ah. Released Jan 15, 2021. Huh. I wonder what that date might have to do with this "fact" sheet? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Let's think on that one, and maybe come back to it at some point.

1. Illnesses inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV):
  • The U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses. This raises questions about the credibility of WIV senior researcher Shi Zhengli’s public claim that there was “zero infection” among the WIV’s staff and students of SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-related viruses.
Has reason to believe? So, not a fact. What evidence?
  • Accidental infections in labs have caused several previous virus outbreaks in China and elsewhere, including a 2004 SARS outbreak in Beijing that infected nine people, killing one.
This could be a fact, if it is true. Is it? Let's say it is true. 2004. Plenty of time to fix the mistakes of an unfortunate event from 17 years ago.

  • The CCP has prevented independent journalists, investigators, and global health authorities from interviewing researchers at the WIV, including those who were ill in the fall of 2019. Any credible inquiry into the origin of the virus must include interviews with these researchers and a full accounting of their previously unreported illness.
Could also be a fact that interviews have been refused. Not established as a fact that some researchers were ill in the fall of 2019.

2. Research at the WIV:
  • Starting in at least 2016 – and with no indication of a stop prior to the COVID-19 outbreak – WIV researchers conducted experiments involving RaTG13, the bat coronavirus identified by the WIV in January 2020 as its closest sample to SARS-CoV-2 (96.2% similar). The WIV became a focal point for international coronavirus research after the 2003 SARS outbreak and has since studied animals including mice, bats, and pangolins.
Says who? Evidence? The last sentence could be a fact, but it doesn't at all establish the first sentence as a fact.

  • The WIV has a published record of conducting “gain-of-function” research to engineer chimeric viruses. But the WIV has not been transparent or consistent about its record of studying viruses most similar to the COVID-19 virus, including “RaTG13,” which it sampled from a cave in Yunnan Province in 2013 after several miners died of SARS-like illness.
It has a published record?? Let's see those publications, then. Right? Isn't GoF research highly controversial and possible illegal? Again, where is the evidence for this claim. Not a fact without evidence.

  • WHO investigators must have access to the records of the WIV’s work on bat and other coronaviruses before the COVID-19 outbreak. As part of a thorough inquiry, they must have a full accounting of why the WIV altered and then removed online records of its work with RaTG13 and other viruses.
If it did (altered and removed). What establishes that it did? How would they know that something was missing, if it was never there? Hmmm.

3. Secret military activity at the WIV:
  • Secrecy and non-disclosure are standard practice for Beijing. For many years the United States has publicly raised concerns about China’s past biological weapons work, which Beijing has neither documented nor demonstrably eliminated, despite its clear obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention.
This is a "fact"? Says who? Evidence?

  • Despite the WIV presenting itself as a civilian institution, the United States has determined that the WIV has collaborated on publications and secret projects with China’s military. The WIV has engaged in classified research, including laboratory animal experiments, on behalf of the Chinese military since at least 2017.
Says who? Evidence?

  • The United States and other donors who funded or collaborated on civilian research at the WIV have a right and obligation to determine whether any of our research funding was diverted to secret Chinese military projects at the WIV.
This is a "fact"? It seems more like an opinion. I would say, on the surface, a reasonable one. But it's never so simple, of course.


Not a very impressive "fact" sheet.

More like: a hurried, lazy job by Trump's dept of state to put something out as a list of "official" doubts.


Quite obviously, you eat this stuff up. You badly want it to be the truth. And some of it certainly could be true.

But if you, Trump, or anyone else actually had evidence of this stuff, it would've already been out there. You do not.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,523
Reaction score
1,859
Points
113
Thanks. Again, doesn't look good, but doesn't prove anything in of itself.


You're saying it's a white wash. You want it to be a cover up. Again, I don't know why.

There isn't any evidence that it actually is that. What if a computer/server that has that data just got destroyed or even lost (physically lost in the shuffle)? It is possible. We don't know that answer, yet. May never.


I will go through each point and comment.

But first: it is interesting that you had to link to this from the US Embassy in Georgia. (the Russian puppet state, not the US state) Hmmmmm. Doing a quick Google search on this "fact" sheet, reveals that the original link was: https://www.state.gov/fact-sheet-activity-at-the-wuhan-institute-of-virology/

Not there anymore, is it? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Ah. Released Jan 15, 2021. Huh. I wonder what that date might have to do with this "fact" sheet? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Let's think on that one, and maybe come back to it at some point.



Has reason to believe? So, not a fact. What evidence?


This could be a fact, if it is true. Is it? Let's say it is true. 2004. Plenty of time to fix the mistakes of an unfortunate event from 17 years ago.



Could also be a fact that interviews have been refused. Not established as a fact that some researchers were ill in the fall of 2019.



Says who? Evidence? The last sentence could be a fact, but it doesn't at all establish the first sentence as a fact.



It has a published record?? Let's see those publications, then. Right? Isn't GoF research highly controversial and possible illegal? Again, where is the evidence for this claim. Not a fact without evidence.



If it did (altered and removed). What establishes that it did? How would they know that something was missing, if it was never there? Hmmm.



This is a "fact"? Says who? Evidence?



Says who? Evidence?



This is a "fact"? It seems more like an opinion. I would say, on the surface, a reasonable one. But it's never so simple, of course.


Not a very impressive "fact" sheet.

More like: a hurried, lazy job by Trump's dept of state to put something out as a list of "official" doubts.


Quite obviously, you eat this stuff up. You badly want it to be the truth. And some of it certainly could be true.

But if you, Trump, or anyone else actually had evidence of this stuff, it would've already been out there. You do not.
My takeaway of ^

You’re skeptical of American propaganda but not Chinese, or the veracity of researchers with close ties to GOF research and other financial interweavings and enterprises within China - got it.

Again, I don’t know. But they don’t necessarily know either, or haven’t presented evidence on why they feel the possibility is so implausible. Other experts in the field say it’s plausible. 🤷‍♂️
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,523
Reaction score
1,859
Points
113
I hadn’t seen this last week - Fauci and Osterholm butting heads over the second dose discussion. To be fair, there are prominent experts on both sides of the debate but only one side is following the known science and the other is making an educated guess which should be questionable policy. After 2020 I guess we should be accustomed to shooting from the hip and asking questions later.


Fauci also addressed recent arguments suggesting the U.S. should delay the second dose of the vaccine in order to offer more Americans the first shot. Epidemiologist Michael Osterholm, who appeared on “Meet the Press” last week, has argued for more research on any issues associated with delaying a second — but Fauci says the existing data supports sticking to the current timetable.

“If you want to really study it to see that — the amount of time that it will take, the amount of people you would have to put into the study — by that time, we will already be in the arena of having enough, having enough vaccines to go around anyway. So from a theoretical standpoint, it would be nice to know, if you just give one dose, how long the durability lasts and what is the level of effect," Fauci said on "Meet the Press."

“But what we have right now and what we must go with, is the scientific data that we’ve accumulated, and it’s really very solid. We know that with each of these, it’s either 21 days or 28 days. You can do both. You can get as many people in their first dose at the same time as adhering, within reason, to the timetable of the second dose. So, it’d be great to have the study, but I don’t think we could do it in time.”

In terms of manufacturing, Fauci emphasized that the doses are “coming off the line as quickly as we can.” He specifically cited an uptick in available Moderna and Pfizer doses heading into March and April, as well as the Johnson & Johnson single-dose vaccine that is expected to be made available in the coming months.

 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,852
Reaction score
4,839
Points
113
You’re skeptical of American propaganda but not Chinese
I'm skeptical of all claims that don't have evidence.

The US says that something did occur, but has no evidence.
The Chinese say that it didn't occur. How do you present evidence that something didn't occur??

the veracity of researchers with close ties to GOF research and other financial interweavings and enterprises within China
What are you talking about? If you had something to share on this, why wouldn't you have already shared it?

But they don’t necessarily know either, or haven’t presented evidence on why they feel the possibility is so implausible.
How do you present evidence that something didn't happen?
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,523
Reaction score
1,859
Points
113
I'm skeptical of all claims that don't have evidence.

The US says that something did occur, but has no evidence.
The Chinese say that it didn't occur. How do you present evidence that something didn't occur??


What are you talking about? If you had something to share on this, why wouldn't you have already shared it?


How do you present evidence that something didn't happen?
Youre not making any sense and contradicting yourself, but that’s what happens when you make nonsensical, illogical arguments to begin with. If you have principles you can avoid these problems.

There have been numerous articles, op-eds, and even US government moratoriums around gain of function activity which includes serial selective breeding of wild coronaviruses. Don’t expect me to do your research for you. It’s inherently risky. I will post a video of Daszak (his father is Ukrainian by the way, reference to your wierd Georgia comment) explaining their activities in China (and elsewhere) and mostly useless bat surveys and experimentation and an article explaining why it’s a bad idea to trust security measures at BSL3+ facilities to contain pandemic-causing pathogens. Accidents happen.

Furthermore, alarms have been raised for years around staffing, security, and subservient culture in China as an increased risk for accidents. I have no “proof” other than documented accidents and purported US government cables.

Starts at 29:30 or so





Paper from 2014 on gain of function research risks and probabilities of lab leaks:


There are prominent scientists who agree that there are potential serious dangers to this work and agree that a risk assessment process is needed but who are opposed to a moratorium being imposed while such a risk assessment process is undertaken. They believe that a moratorium should be avoided for reasons that include the potential damage it can do to the funding and work of that lab and to the careers of those involved in the work.

We have a different view. A substantial number of scientists agree that there are extraordinary potential consequences of the work (15). There is no rigorous, objective, credible risk assessment process to judge the risks and benefits of proceeding with it. We believe that the responsible course is to take a research pause until such a risk assessment process is established, which creates a stronger basis for decisions and actions. This is not solely a scientific issue. It is a scientific and public health and safety issue, and it is an issue in which the public itself has an abiding interest.

We have no interest in stopping scientists from doing their work or preventing laboratories from receiving funding. The narrow and defined area of GOF research intended to create novel potential pandemic strains should be put on pause until the risk assessment process is completed. The same laboratories and scientists whose work has been stopped by the moratorium are free and able to pursue all other avenues of infectious disease research except for that narrowly defined by the GOF definition in the new policy; to the extent that other activities not meeting the narrow definition in the pause have been included in letters to principal investigators ordering or requesting work stoppage, the boundaries of the funding pause should be quickly clarified to allow important alternative work on flu to continue. We note that there are more than 250 NIH-funded projects listed as active with titles containing MERS, SARS, coronavirus, or influenza (28), of which 18 have been affected by the funding pause. The number that remain on pause may be further reduced by negotiations between investigators and the NIH, which are now under way, that will define which projects truly are within the scope of the moratorium and which do not meet its terms and can resume.





 
Last edited:

John Galt

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
10,511
Reaction score
1,549
Points
113
Check out his gem from our very own Poobah, Jam Jam himself:

3/23/20

"If you want straight talk out of a political leader, including discussions on restarting the economy as quickly and efficiently as feasible, check out any Andrew Cuomo daily briefing. He's on top of everything in NY, speaks in specifics (none of this "under the bold and decisive leadership of President Trump..." crap that Pence vomits daily) and he's realistic on the expectations front. If the management of this crisis could be turned over to Cuomo, Fauci and Birx, the country would be in better shape."

Own this one Poobah!!!!

:ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:
Ouch!
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,544
Reaction score
2,142
Points
113
There also seems to be quit a back log of tests as they processed 38,000 tests from 10,000 people. I assume the difference is from tests collected from prior days and just run yesterday.
"number of people tested" is the number of individuals who have been tested. If you get tested 10 times, that is 10 tests, but only 1 person tested.

What the numbers mean is that a lot of people are being tested multiple times for whatever reason. I work with a guy who is a hypochondriac. Every time he gets the sniffles, he thinks it's covid and he gets tested again.
 

From the Parkinglot

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,282
Reaction score
599
Points
113
"number of people tested" is the number of individuals who have been tested. If you get tested 10 times, that is 10 tests, but only 1 person tested.

What the numbers mean is that a lot of people are being tested multiple times for whatever reason. I work with a guy who is a hypochondriac. Every time he gets the sniffles, he thinks it's covid and he gets tested again.
Thanks for the clarification.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,544
Reaction score
2,142
Points
113
The background music for today's covid report is being provided by Bruce Springsteen and the Seeger Sessions Band - live at Wembley Arena, London - Nov 11, 2006. Great version of "Blinded by the Light." I may rue the day I found a website where you can order CD's of Springsteen concerts. There goes the retirement fund.....

MN Covid-19 Update - Sat, Feb 13

data reported by 4pm the previous day.

Positive Cases 451,122 +821. Including probable cases 472,791.

Health-Care workers with positive cases 37,203 +1,133.

Active Cases 7,930 -200.

Deaths 6,104 +7. Including probable deaths 6,369.

Deaths at long-term care and assisted living 3,888.

Total patients Hospitalized-cumulative 25,116 +69.

Total patients in ICU-cumlative 5,183 +7.

Total Tests processed 6,563,488 +28,057.

Number of people tested 3,355,005 +7,962.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
1,900
Points
113
My takeaway of ^

You’re skeptical of American propaganda but not Chinese, or the veracity of researchers with close ties to GOF research and other financial interweavings and enterprises within China - got it.

Again, I don’t know. But they don’t necessarily know either, or haven’t presented evidence on why they feel the possibility is so implausible. Other experts in the field say it’s plausible. 🤷‍♂️
You seem to be falling down the rabbit hole of conspiracy theories throughout the latter part of this thread, my friend. Be careful where you are treading. I'm not saying nothing you say here is correct; I'm just saying. Let this play out a bit. There is zero reason for America to hold back if in fact solid evidence of anything other than natural origins for Covid-19, so perhaps it's best to lay back here and let the experts do their work before jumping to conclusions.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,523
Reaction score
1,859
Points
113
You seem to be falling down the rabbit hole of conspiracy theories throughout the latter part of this thread, my friend. Be careful where you are treading. I'm not saying nothing you say here is correct; I'm just saying. Let this play out a bit. There is zero reason for America to hold back if in fact solid evidence of anything other than natural origins for Covid-19, so perhaps it's best to lay back here and let the experts do their work before jumping to conclusions.
I haven’t jumped to any conclusions, as I’ve pointed out at least twice. I’m criticizing those that have actually jumped to conclusions without a proper investigation. The stakes are high in a dangerous game.

Fukushima had another shaker today. Another example of our limited ability to foresee bad outcomes. Placing backup generators of a nuclear power plant below the surge level of a 100 year flood was, in hindsight, a poor decision.

Similarly, going out into the deep jungle and harvesting unknown viruses from bats and other hosts, experimenting on methods to make the novel viruses more pathogenic seems like hubris and a bit insane. It serves no real purpose except the vanity of the individual researchers and perhaps some governmental interests.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,523
Reaction score
1,859
Points
113
The bestest science of all. I’m sure nobody congregated in small enclosed homes or backyards or garages and watched the game instead 🙄. It’s a parody. A farce. Get ready for a lot more with the new crew at the helm. Did you see the school guidelines....
 

Plausible Deniability

Coffee is for closers
Joined
Sep 19, 2016
Messages
1,142
Reaction score
623
Points
113
Will we ever hear Sleepy Joe be critical of China? Over the virus or really anything at all? I mean, you can't really bite the hand that feeds you, can you?
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,523
Reaction score
1,859
Points
113
Will we ever hear Sleepy Joe be critical of China? Over the virus or really anything at all? I mean, you can't really bite the hand that feeds you, can you?
Well, it looks like I may not be the only skeptical one engaging in alleged conspiracy theories. To be sure, I don’t expect anything to come of it, even if they catch them red-handed. I remember the Obama administration’s approach and “enforcement” actions after the 2008 financial crisis, after all. An abomination only Barack could sell.


 

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
22,060
Reaction score
2,038
Points
113
You seem to be falling down the rabbit hole of conspiracy theories throughout the latter part of this thread, my friend. Be careful where you are treading. I'm not saying nothing you say here is correct; I'm just saying. Let this play out a bit. There is zero reason for America to hold back if in fact solid evidence of anything other than natural origins for Covid-19, so perhaps it's best to lay back here and let the experts do their work before jumping to conclusions.
Reading through his posts it seemed quite similar to the election fraud conspiracy nonsense. Lots of "could be's" and "asking questions" and "we don't knows," with no facts and credible sources.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
1,900
Points
113
Reading through his posts it seemed quite similar to the election fraud conspiracy nonsense. Lots of "could be's" and "asking questions" and "we don't knows," with no facts and credible sources.
Yes, this is the scary part. Scarier is that he appeared to be happy to associate with PD just a couple of posts ago. Yikes!
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
14,130
Reaction score
1,647
Points
113
Will we ever hear Sleepy Joe be critical of China? Over the virus or really anything at all? I mean, you can't really bite the hand that feeds you, can you?
I have been asking when Joe and the GT will take China to task for their lies and coverups, as well s the deaths and trillion of $$ they imparted on the USA and the world......

Not a word so far.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,523
Reaction score
1,859
Points
113
Reading through his posts it seemed quite similar to the election fraud conspiracy nonsense. Lots of "could be's" and "asking questions" and "we don't knows," with no facts and credible sources.
Do you understand the first thing you’re talking about here? It is nothing like the election fraud conspiracy nonsense. If the states were completely uncooperative, weren’t willing to allow observers, recounts and the like you may have a shred of a rational point. You don’t.

The origins and management, disclosure of the early pandemic are not known. China isn’t sharing. They are being incredibly evasive for reasons unknown. They only allowed a small team in over a year later when headed by a researcher who depends on GOF research for his funding and career standing whose organization is part and parcel of the the funding and activities of the WIV. This is akin to putting Lloyd Blankfein in charge of investigating Goldman Sachs in 2009-2010.

It makes no sense, which is why the Biden administration is concerned the WHO is losing credibility as noted in the statement I posted above.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,852
Reaction score
4,839
Points
113
There have been numerous articles, op-eds, and even US government moratoriums around gain of function activity which includes serial selective breeding of wild coronaviruses.
...
and an article explaining why it’s a bad idea to trust security measures at BSL3+ facilities to contain pandemic-causing pathogens. Accidents happen.
...
Paper from 2014 on gain of function research risks and probabilities of lab leaks:

There are prominent scientists who agree that there are potential serious dangers to this work and agree that a risk assessment process is needed but who are opposed to a moratorium being imposed while such a risk assessment process is undertaken. They believe that a moratorium should be avoided for reasons that include the potential damage it can do to the funding and work of that lab and to the careers of those involved in the work.

We have a different view. A substantial number of scientists agree that there are extraordinary potential consequences of the work (15). There is no rigorous, objective, credible risk assessment process to judge the risks and benefits of proceeding with it. We believe that the responsible course is to take a research pause until such a risk assessment process is established, which creates a stronger basis for decisions and actions. This is not solely a scientific issue. It is a scientific and public health and safety issue, and it is an issue in which the public itself has an abiding interest.

We have no interest in stopping scientists from doing their work or preventing laboratories from receiving funding. The narrow and defined area of GOF research intended to create novel potential pandemic strains should be put on pause until the risk assessment process is completed. The same laboratories and scientists whose work has been stopped by the moratorium are free and able to pursue all other avenues of infectious disease research except for that narrowly defined by the GOF definition in the new policy; to the extent that other activities not meeting the narrow definition in the pause have been included in letters to principal investigators ordering or requesting work stoppage, the boundaries of the funding pause should be quickly clarified to allow important alternative work on flu to continue. We note that there are more than 250 NIH-funded projects listed as active with titles containing MERS, SARS, coronavirus, or influenza (28), of which 18 have been affected by the funding pause. The number that remain on pause may be further reduced by negotiations between investigators and the NIH, which are now under way, that will define which projects truly are within the scope of the moratorium and which do not meet its terms and can resume.


None of this proves in the slightest that the WIV was conducting GoF research on coronaviruses. You're just saying that they shouldn't do that. OK, they probably shouldn't. Were they? No evidence.

People shouldn't drink and drive. It's not a good idea. And?

I will post a video of Daszak
...
explaining their activities in China (and elsewhere) and mostly useless bat surveys and experimentation
...
Starts at 29:30 or so

I did watch this from 29:30 onward, for a few minutes to get the idea.

He only talks about "spillover", which is meant to say that villiagers living near bats need to be careful about how they interact with them, to help reduce the risk of pandemics from coronaviruses. And that he thinks there are constantly "spillover" occasions that don't result in pandemics.

I don't see how this supports your ideas, at all. If anything, it supports the idea that Sars2 did not come from lab experiments. If there were parts earlier in the video that you think do support your ideas, then you should tell me which parts.

(his father is Ukrainian by the way, reference to your wierd Georgia comment)
You had to resort to linking the "fact" sheet from the Georgian embassey because it's no longer hosted on any kind of regular US state dept website. No need to be dishonest about that.

Furthermore, alarms have been raised for years around staffing, security, and subservient culture in China as an increased risk for accidents. I have no “proof” other than documented accidents and purported US government cables.
Well and good.

Proves that Sars2 was created and accidentally released from WIV? No.

But you believe and want that to be the origin. I have no Earthly idea why. But you seem to be pretty well indoctrinated on that. Maybe not the level of a fanatic, yet.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,523
Reaction score
1,859
Points
113
Daszak responds to the Biden administration skepticism. Eventually he may have to answer why his research is necessary or beneficial at all (it has minimal upside and depths of hell downside). There are other areas of science to transition into, but old dogs, etc etc.



 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,523
Reaction score
1,859
Points
113
Thanks for sharing this.

I support the Biden admin's desire to push harder on China, to get them to open up more and be more transparent.

This doesn't support any of your ideas.
What are “my ideas”? I’m far from alone in wanting answers and a legitimate investigation into the origin story.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,852
Reaction score
4,839
Points
113
If the states were completely uncooperative
China just allowed the WHO to do an investigation in China. That by definition can't be "completely" uncooperative.

The origins and management, disclosure of the early pandemic are not known. China isn’t sharing. They are being incredibly evasive for reasons unknown.
What if they don't know either?

How are they supposed to prove that they don't know something and/or don't have something to share?

They only allowed a small team in over a year later when headed by a researcher who depends on GOF research for his funding and career standing whose organization is part and parcel of the the funding and activities of the WIV.
It's akin to making an allegation of fraud and academic dishonesty, of an established scientist, with no evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever.

Who are you to make such allegations? What credibility do you possess?
 
Top Bottom