Covid-19 likely to be man made

Dohnjoe

Dohnjoe wrote: »

This has come up in this thread already. The final paper they produced didn't acknowledge any man-made link.

Why do you think they changed their mind?..

geospatial

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Most of the experts looking at the genome see no evidence it's been tampered with. That's the overwhelming scientific view. Are you saying it's just as likely this virus is "man-made"?

What evidence would you expect to see? First of all if SARS-2 evolved via passaging in a lab there would be no way to distinguish it genomically from one that evolved via passaging say on a mink farm, or via recombination within another animal. It's even arguable that if it evolved via a splicing experiment, it would be very difficult to detect tampering due to the techniques used.

I don't think any scientist is saying it is "man made" as in made from scratch, even though it could be done. What credible scientists like Alina Chan, David Relman, Nikolai Petrovsky and others are saying is that it could have been manipulated and this may be the most parsimonious explanation for how well adapted it is to humans. If you add that to all the other circumstantial evidence it's not a weak hypothesis.

I hope we find it came from nature, and think that's the most likely, but it's head in the sand stuff claiming it couldn't have been manipulated. What's the evidence for that? The fact we've made many similar chimera viruses in labs
since 2003, and most of that recent work (at least that we know of) has been done in Wuhan. One of the additional pieces of circumstantial evidence is that the BSL-4 lab opened in WIV in 2018, did they start working on more dangerous pathogens and experiments then?

astrofool

cnocbui wrote: »

That is not true. The Norwegian virologist Dr Birger Sorensen and professor Angus Dalgleish in the UK published a paper a year ago stating Covid-19 was likely man made in a lab. They were shut down pretty hard at the time. Now they look like being vindicated.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/06/07/controversial-coronavirus-lab-origin-claims-dismissed-by-experts/

Another few choice quotes:

The report’s authors also claim the lack of mutation in the virus since its discovery, suggests it was already fully adapted to humans. However, there have been several published studies noting evolution and mutation among SARS-CoV-2 strains.

Highlighting this one again:

Virologists, however, note that similar sections appear naturally in other viruses.

Grødeland also says that Sørensen's paper offered no biological confirmation on the relevance of positively charged patches.

A follow up paper was promised, but I don't believe that has been forthcoming yet (edit: it was forthcoming and had an entirely different conclusion) and new articles have been written based on the same June 2020 paper whose hypothesis was discounted as wrong by virologists as the sections of the spike protein that were meant to be man made do actually occur already in nature.

This also seems to be the basis for GeoSpatial's gain of function argument, but it is not built from any evidence that this occurred.

This is a waste of time..

astrofool

Deleted User wrote: »

Why do you think they changed their mind?..

Why do you think they changed their mind?

I mean, in their first paper the conclusion was based on faulty data that the sections of the spike protein didn't exist in nature, this was proven 100% false, unless they had new evidence then the second paper was of course going to have a different conclusion.

That's how science works.

geospatial

astrofool wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the WHO investigation only discounted a lab leak after the investigation, not beforehand. If the US investigation sees the same evidence it's highly likely they will reach the same conclusion and discount the lab leak theory as well.

The WHO were denied access to the relevant data to rule out a lab leak, or didn't ask for it. The lead investigator for that portion of the investigation had already decided in early 2020 that a lab leak was impossible, "pure baloney" he called it.

astrofool

astrofool wrote: »

Why do you think they changed their mind?

I mean, in their first paper the conclusion was based on faulty data that the sections of the spike protein didn't exist in nature, this was proven 100% false, unless they had new evidence then the second paper was of course going to have a different conclusion.

That's how science works.

The vanity fair article details the pressure that was applied to anyone who went against the natural origin hypothesis..

It's funny how, even after the acceptance of the lab leak theory, and the details of the cover up, people are still being berated for that viewpoint..

Science?..some of you wouldn't know what science was if it bit you..

astrofool

geospatial wrote: »

The WHO were denied access to the relevant data to rule out a lab leak, or didn't ask for it. The lead investigator for that portion of the investigation had already decided in early 2020 that a lab leak was impossible, "pure baloney" he called it.

OK, so you're basing the lab leak theory on the basis that the lead investigator from the WHO into the origins is either not to be trusted or is unfit to do their job.

Ignoring that other investigators would have to go along with this as well and also not challenge the results of the investigation and not leak this to anyone (I mean there's the cover up there if you wanted to pursue it), it just doesn't seem anyway likely.

astrofool

Deleted User wrote: »

The vanity fair article details the pressure that was applied to anyone who went against the natural origin hypothesis..

It's funny how, even after the acceptance of the lab leak theory, and the details of the cover up, people are still being berated for that viewpoint..

Science?..some of you wouldn't know what science was if it bit you..

So you think other scientists forced them to publish another paper reaching a different conclusion, ignoring the fact that the one piece of evidence they used in their original paper was in fact completely wrong?

Come on CQD, explain science and how it works. Stop reaching for the insults immediately when you're challenged.

Well..it's not going with whatever is politically expedient..

geospatial

astrofool wrote: »

OK, so you're basing the lab leak theory on the basis that the lead investigator from the WHO into the origins is either not to be trusted or is unfit to do their job.

Ignoring that other investigators would have to go along with this as well and also not challenge the results of the investigation and not leak this to anyone (I mean there's the cover up there if you wanted to pursue it), it just doesn't seem anyway likely.

I'm saying they weren't seriously investigating a lab leak theory, the lead investigator has already made up his mind. As he was the lead investigator on the lab questions they would have deferred to him.

astrofool

Deleted User wrote: »

Well..it's not going with whatever is politically expedient..

Sure, but can you explain what it is?

Here's the scenario, explain how the same conclusion can be reached:

Paper A published based on evidence X and conclusion 1
evidence X is then found to be wrong

Follow up paper B published excluding evidence X and reaches conclusion 2

astrofool

geospatial wrote: »

I'm saying they weren't seriously investigating a lab leak theory, the lead investigator has already made up his mind. As he was the lead investigator on the lab questions they would have deferred to him.

So you're saying that the lead investigator of the WHO didn't do their job properly and that no one around that person challenged them to do a better job for whatever reason.

You're then basing your hypothesis around this, despite there being no evidence of this occurring and no evidence of the lab leak happening (accepting that there could have been withheld evidence that somehow hasn't been leaked by the multitude of people who would have been involved).

patnor1011

astrofool wrote: »

So you're saying that the lead investigator of the WHO didn't do their job properly and that no one around that person challenged them to do a better job for whatever reason.

You're then basing your hypothesis around this, despite there being no evidence of this occurring and no evidence of the lab leak happening (accepting that there could have been withheld evidence that somehow hasn't been leaked by the multitude of people who would have been involved).

This is ironic. Multitudes of people involved and not a single whistleblower or white knight therefore it couldn't happen.

Are you familiar with Tuskegee Syphilis Study? That also fit your "multitude of people involved" and yet it lasted 40 years.
It seems you completely dismiss possibility that governments may have enough of incentive and power to cover up something if they decide it is in their interest.

Oh sorry for forgetting to add link before someone say magical "Link?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a waste of time..

it's like beating a dead horse !

geospatial

astrofool wrote: »

So you're saying that the lead investigator of the WHO didn't do their job properly and that no one around that person challenged them to do a better job for whatever reason.

You're then basing your hypothesis around this, despite there being no evidence of this occurring and no evidence of the lab leak happening (accepting that there could have been withheld evidence that somehow hasn't been leaked by the multitude of people who would have been involved).

No evidence of what occuring?

The lead investigator on the lab question was Peter Daszak, director of Eco Health who have been funding the WIV and collaborating with them for years. Here's a sample of what he said in an April 2020 interview: "The idea that this virus escaped from a lab is just pure baloney. There was no cultured virus that was anything related to SARS-2. These are very well run labs, they do not have a problem with security or controls".

There is so much bs in this statement it is hard to know where to start. How about starting with the fact that a year later and after the WHO investigation 18 very credible scientists (including Ralph Baric) wrote a letter calling for a proper investigation of a lab leak. Are they full of baloney? How about the fact that the WIV collected a virus in Yunnan in 2013 and have studied it's genome and found it to be a 96% match to SARS-2, SARS-1 is 79.5% and MERS 50%, so it is almost certainly an ancestor of SARS-2. How about the fact that the US state department visited the WIV lab in 2018 and expressed serious concerns about safety and training of staff.

Nowhere in the interview does he mention gain of function research and the fact WIV were conducting this type of research long before they had a BSL-4 lab, they were doing it in BSL-2 and 3 labs, literally the definition of insanity unless you wanted to start a pandemic. He is one of the strongest proponents of gain of function research and campaigned strongly against a moratorium on such research in 2014.

This is the scientist chosen to lead the investigation of a lab leak? Someone who had publicly said the idea was baloney, and had a clear conflict of interest?

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4119101

astrofool

geospatial wrote: »

No evidence of what occuring?

The lead investigator on the lab question was Peter Daszak, director of Eco Health who have been funding the WIV and collaborating with them for years. Here's a sample of what he said in an April 2020 interview: "The idea that this virus escaped from a lab is just pure baloney. There was no cultured virus that was anything related to SARS-2. These are very well run labs, they do not have a problem with security or controls".

There is so much bs in this statement it is hard to know where to start. How about starting with the fact that a year later and after the WHO investigation 18 very credible scientists (including Ralph Baric) wrote a letter calling for a proper investigation of a lab leak. Are they full of baloney? How about the fact that the WIV collected a virus in Yunnan in 2013 and have studied it's genome and found it to be a 96% match to SARS-2, SARS-1 is 79.5% and MERS 50%, so it is almost certainly an ancestor of SARS-2. How about the fact that the US state department visited the WIV lab in 2018 and expressed serious concerns about safety and training of staff.

Nowhere in the interview does he mention gain of function research and the fact WIV were conducting this type of research long before they had a BSL-4 lab, they were doing it in BSL-2 and 3 labs, literally the definition of insanity unless you wanted to start a pandemic. He is one of the strongest proponents of gain of function research and campaigned strongly against a moratorium on such research in 2014.

This is the scientist chosen to lead the investigation of a lab leak? Someone who had publicly said the idea was baloney, and had a clear conflict of interest?

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4119101

That's your opinion and it's fine, at least we're at the point where you're actively saying that the previous investigation was lead by someone who you don't believe is credible because they had a lot of knowledge of WIV before the investigation was even carried out. As noted, all current evidence points to a zoonotic origin, the one paper published that pointed at a non-zoonotic origin was effectively dismissed by it's own authors and 18 scientists want further investigation into the lab (even though actual evidence uncovered so far means this is unlikely, and I guess those 2 scientists are now afraid, but the 18 aren't according to CQD).

Again it comes back to the same thing, if the US investigation is lead by someone else, are you happy to accept their investigation results?

astrofool

patnor1011 wrote: »

This is ironic. Multitudes of people involved and not a single whistleblower or white knight therefore it couldn't happen.

Are you familiar with Tuskegee Syphilis Study? That also fit your "multitude of people involved" and yet it lasted 40 years.
It seems you completely dismiss possibility that governments may have enough of incentive and power to cover up something if they decide it is in their interest.

Oh sorry for forgetting to add link before someone say magical "Link?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study

That was government, singular (the US government) what you're proposing with man-made COVID is multiple governments who actively oppose each other and who would make gain from such information and the scientists in those countries all coming to the same conclusion with publicly verifiable information, all being part of a giant cover-up.

This would be harder than faking the moon landings, and at what gain, what would the goal of this be? All the reasons for government conspiracy behind COVID have unraveled over the last few months.

And just to note that man-made COVID is independent of the lab leak theory.

geospatial

astrofool wrote: »

That's your opinion and it's fine, at least we're at the point where you're actively saying that the previous investigation was lead by someone who you don't believe is credible because they had a lot of knowledge of WIV before the investigation was even carried out. As noted, all current evidence points to a zoonotic origin, the one paper published that pointed at a non-zoonotic origin was effectively dismissed by it's own authors and 18 scientists want further investigation into the lab (even though actual evidence uncovered so far means this is unlikely, and I guess those 2 scientists are now afraid, but the 18 aren't according to CQD).

Again it comes back to the same thing, if the US investigation is lead by someone else, are you happy to accept their investigation results?

I don't believe he was credible given he funded the lab so had a conflict of interest, and was on record before the investigation saying a lab leak was baloney (it isn't) and the lab had high safety standards (it didn't).

I am very confident the current investigation is comprised of individuals who do not have a conflict of interest nor a clear bias. I genuinely hope they can get access to the data needed to rule out a lab leak. If China refuse to disclose it it's another clear sign of a cover up by the CCP.

We shouldn't forget the lead investigator from China providing their data to the WHO, Feng Zijian. He was one of the authors of a communication in Feb 2020 to all Chinese health officials and scientists warning them not to share any data or documents related to the outbreak, citing "prioritize the interests of the country" and warning of violators being "dealt with severely". I think we know what that means. It was sent out after two Wuhan university students published a report with the title "the coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory", a report that was quickly withdrawn and journalists jailed for "picking quarrels and provoking trouble". Or Prof Chaunhua from Wuhan Biostatistics dept who was interviewed by Health Times in China in Feb and said he had 47,000 cases of Covid in his data base, the first case in Sept 2019, 10x more than the official case number and 3 months earlier than the first official case. He called the next day to say his data was entered wrong.

King Mob

patnor1011 wrote: »

This is ironic. Multitudes of people involved and not a single whistleblower or white knight therefore it couldn't happen.

Are you familiar with Tuskegee Syphilis Study? That also fit your "multitude of people involved" and yet it lasted 40 years.
It seems you completely dismiss possibility that governments may have enough of incentive and power to cover up something if they decide it is in their interest.

Oh sorry for forgetting to add link before someone say magical "Link?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study

The Tuskegee Study was exposed when a whistleblower went to the main stream press.

patnor1011

astrofool wrote: »

That was government, singular (the US government) what you're proposing with man-made COVID is multiple governments who actively oppose each other and who would make gain from such information and the scientists in those countries all coming to the same conclusion with publicly verifiable information, all being part of a giant cover-up.

This would be harder than faking the moon landings, and at what gain, what would the goal of this be? All the reasons for government conspiracy behind COVID have unraveled over the last few months.

And just to note that man-made COVID is independent of the lab leak theory.

Yes, I have seen this bizarre argument about competing countries and "all of the countries and scientists" colluding in some conspiracy... You fail to see that governments for the most part are comprised of career politicians and many times like in our example even sons and daughters of politicians who think that they do have some qualification to "rule" just because their daddy used to be politician. They absolutely rely on outside financing or donations in order to mount successful campaign to secure that job. It then comes down to a handful of companies or corporations which then do have power to influence elections, policies and even science by the sheer power of deciding where their money will flow.
People should really stop talking about scientists like they are some bunch of holy deities. Some posters here love to use the term "scientific consensus" as if that was something set in stone. Guess what? Climate movement which started many decades ago to this day could not get it right despite many scientific consensuses about global cooling, then warming, then cooling again till they rebranded it to fantastic "climate change" argument so that whatever happens it will be right on with the plan.

Your global conspiracy impossibility argument do have big holes in it. If you take just our example that despite a lot of talk, shouting and beating around bushes it is just one person in Ireland who is deciding policies and we all know who it is. So if there is a global conspiracy, all they needed to make Ireland to follow up is to get that one person on board. The same thing happened in many more countries and in other countries politicians just followed example of neighbors or bigger countries simply because they did not know better. Some outliers like Sweden which did not conform to "consensus" had everything but a kitchen sink thrown at them till they fall in line.

astrofool

patnor1011 wrote: »

Yes, I have seen this bizarre argument about competing countries and "all of the countries and scientists" colluding in some conspiracy... You fail to see that governments for the most part are comprised of career politicians and many times like in our example even sons and daughters of politicians who think that they do have some qualification to "rule" just because their daddy used to be politician. They absolutely rely on outside financing or donations in order to mount successful campaign to secure that job. It then comes down to a handful of companies or corporations which then do have power to influence elections, policies and even science by the sheer power of deciding where their money will flow.
People should really stop talking about scientists like they are some bunch of holy deities. Some posters here love to use the term "scientific consensus" as if that was something set in stone. Guess what? Climate movement which started many decades ago to this day could not get it right despite many scientific consensuses about global cooling, then warming, then cooling again till they rebranded it to fantastic "climate change" argument so that whatever happens it will be right on with the plan.

Your global conspiracy impossibility argument do have big holes in it. If you take just our example that despite a lot of talk, shouting and beating around bushes it is just one person in Ireland who is deciding policies and we all know who it is. So if there is a global conspiracy, all they needed to make Ireland to follow up is to get that one person on board. The same thing happened in many more countries and in other countries politicians just followed example of neighbors or bigger countries simply because they did not know better. Some outliers like Sweden which did not conform to "consensus" had everything but a kitchen sink thrown at them till they fall in line.

Sure, but you're into the "everything is a conspiracy" rabbit hole there, which is fine to discuss, but probably not on this thread.

This thing happened in the past thus this new thing might be true is not a valid argument to make.

Edit: I would also note that it's not a bizarre argument to posit that countries with different goals would all harmoniously agree to cover up the biggest world pandemic in 100 years, again, there is precisely zero evidence of this happening with countries openly chastising China about access to Wuhan to investigate the origin. You're essentially saying that everyone in the world is in on it except you.

astrofool

King Mob wrote: »

The Tuskegee Study was exposed when a whistleblower went to the main stream press.

It was also an "of its time" case as they had been publishing the results in a medical journal, but very few had been flagging it or paying attention to it.

Unicorn Milk Latte

astrofool wrote: »

It was also an "of its time" case

in other words, it was blatantly racist.

It's important to keep in mind that the main motivator for blaming China and claiming, without scientific evidence, that the virus came from a lab back in the first half of 2020 was also racism - coming from the same people who used terms like 'China flu', and who use blatant racism as a defining characteristic of their politics.


Also important to keep in mind that part of the current 'culture' in the US is frequent physical attacks on asian looking people, also rooted in racist rhetoric.


Also important to keep in mind that the 'W' in WHO means 'world', which means funding comes from many different countries all over the world (like a 64.7 million US$ contribution from the UK in just 2018-2019), and pointing out that countries like China contributed out of nefarious reasons may also be an expression of racism.



Bottom line: it is essential to base an investigation of the SARS-COV-2 origins on work by a mixed, international group of collaborating scientists who operate in good faith - ideally without any input from politicians.

Mic 1972

Unicorn Milk Latte wrote: »

in other words, it was blatantly racist.

It's important to keep in mind that the main motivator for blaming China and claiming, without scientific evidence, that the virus came from a lab back in the first half of 2020 was also racism - coming from the same people who used terms like 'China flu', and who use blatant racism as a defining characteristic of their politics.

Also important to keep in mind that part of the current 'culture' in the US is frequent physical attacks on asian looking people, also rooted in racist rhetoric.

.

You are stating an opinion as it if was a fact.
The Trump administration had reasons to believe that the virus came from the Wuhan lab that have nothing to do with racism. Turns out, they weren't that far from the truth after all

geospatial

Unicorn Milk Latte wrote: »

Bottom line: it is essential to base an investigation of the SARS-COV-2 origins on work by a mixed, international group of collaborating scientists who operate in good faith - ideally without any input from politicians.

Agree 100%. It's difficult to do though when you have a regime that threatens to imprison any scientist who shares data they haven't approved. I think it's absolutely fair and maybe essential to call out the CCP for their lack of transparency, clamp down on information sharing and outright suppression of science. We do after all have over 3 million dead, most of them outside China.

So we are left with the genome, it's structure, evolution within humans, and how the disease has progressed. There is absolutely no question there could have been a far more balanced and independent investigation done if there had been international cooperation among scientists and hadn't been a rush to judgement so early among leading US research virologists.

No credible scientist would listen to any politician, much less a clown like Trump. The politicization of science in the media though became a huge issue in early to mid 2020, with dissenting opinions suppressed. It took great bravery for Alina Chan for example to question the established narrative, she was probably the key voice in pushing back on the unscientific claim that the virus could not have been manipulated in a lab.

astrofool

Mic 1972 wrote: »

You are stating an opinion as it if was a fact.
The Trump administration had reasons to believe that the virus came from the Wuhan lab that have nothing to do with racism. Turns out, they weren't that far from the truth after all

It had no reasons to believe it, zero, it made up stories to try and blame foreigners as all xenophobes do

astrofool

astrofool wrote: »

It had no reasons to believe it, zero, it made up stories to try and blame foreigners as all xenophobes do

This kind of thing is so old at this stage..

geospatial

Wow. Not just asking for the medical records of the WIV researchers, asking for the medical records of the six miners who fell sick in Yunnan in 2012. This is a stunning development.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/06/04/fauci-asks-beijing-to-release-medical-records-of-wuhan-lab-workers-who-fell-sick-in-2019/?sh=7249a8413773

astrofool

Deleted User wrote: »

This kind of thing is so old at this stage..

trumps administration had zero evidence, trump made it up to try and deflect attention away from his disastrous approach to the pandemic.

If you have any evidence to the contrary, post it instead of snipey little 1 liners.

Mic 1972

astrofool wrote: »

trumps administration had zero evidence, trump made it up to try and deflect attention away from his disastrous approach to the pandemic.

If you have any evidence to the contrary, post it instead of snipey little 1 liners.

what about you posting evidence that the Trump administration were all xenophobes who made this up?
as far as we know they could have been right all along about the man-made virus

King Mob

Mic 1972 wrote: »

what about you posting evidence that the Trump administration were all xenophobes who made this up?
as far as we know they could have been right all along about the man-made virus

What evidence did they have to show the virus was man made or escaped from a lab?
Why did they not provide it?

geospatial

King Mob wrote: »

What evidence did they have to show the virus was man made or escaped from a lab?
Why did they not provide it?

Those are actually fascinating questions. This fact sheet was released on January 15th, before Trump left office. What we don't know is how long they had this intelligence, why didn't they pursue it, and why they dropped it on January 15th. Also why it wasn't really reported on widely until May of 2021 when the new investigation was announced. Even stranger is why is Fachi now asking China to provide medical records relating to the first item on the fact sheet (the WIV researchers who fell ill) but also asking about an issue which is regarded as a conspiracy theory (the Yunnan miners from 2012).

The first question Fachi is asking relates to a lab leak, the second relates to whether they were working on a virus similar to SARS-2, essentially what the Yunnan miners conspiracy theory promotes. It's incredibly murky.

https://2017-2021.state.gov/fact-sheet-activity-at-the-wuhan-institute-of-virology/index.html

King Mob

geospatial wrote: »

Those are actually fascinating questions. This fact sheet was released on January 15th, before Trump left office.

Is it possible that Trump was just lying to shift blame to China?
We've seen he's willing to do this for other things and we've seen he's no issue with blurting out things that are aren't true if it suits him.

Do you agree that repeatedly calling it "The China Flu" etc is a bit racist?

geospatial

King Mob wrote: »

Is it possible that Trump was just lying to shift blame to China?
We've seen he's willing to do this for other things and we've seen he's no issue with blurting out things that are aren't true if it suits him.

Do you agree that repeatedly calling it "The China Flu" etc is a bit racist?

Of course it is, and it also sounded like classic deflection at the time. Trump was asked two questions at a press conference late April 2020, long after the consensus was reached that the virus was from natural origin in the wild. He answered yes to whether he thought it leaked from a lab in Wuhan and they had evidence but he couldn't share it, and he answered no to whether it was engineered.

What's fascinating though is why did they release this fact sheet with it's claims on January 15 2021, which looks like an intelligence dump, and why is Fachi now almost six months later pursuing the fact sheet's claims with China and also pursuing a conspiracy theory.

King Mob

geospatial wrote: »

Of course it is, and it also sounded like classic deflection at the time.

Well if it quacks like a duck and no one is able to show what evidence he was using...

geospatial wrote: »

and why is Fachi now

Is there a particular reason you're spelling Fauci's name this way?

geospatial

King Mob wrote: »

Well if it quacks like a duck and no one is able to show what evidence he was using...
Is there a particular reason you're spelling Fauci's name this way?

Typo. Should have read "why is Fauci now almost six months later pursuing the fact sheet's claims with China and also pursuing a conspiracy theory".

patnor1011

Dr. Chris Gottlieb, former commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration recently told CBS that lab leaks happen quite frequently.
“These kinds of lab leaks happen all the time, actually. Even here in the United States, we’ve had mishaps,” Gottlieb said. “And in China, the last six known outbreaks of SARS-1 have been out of labs, including the last known outbreak, which was a pretty extensive outbreak that China initially wouldn’t disclose that it came out of a lab.”
According to Gottlieb, uncovering the true origins of the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is key to helping identify potential gaps in safety protocols and reduce the risk of future pandemics.

So if SARS-1 can leak out of the lab SARS-2 seems likely candidate too, considering how many times it happened already. Confirmation if current virus was manipulated or not will likely take some more time.

I find it strange to demand evidence of what Trump admin knew about start of pandemic when we all know that such information will most likely come from some intelligence probably still classified report.

King Mob

patnor1011 wrote: »

I find it strange to demand evidence of what Trump admin knew about start of pandemic when we all know that such information will most likely come from some intelligence probably still classified report.

Not really. A lot of folks here are saying "Aha, Trump was right! Take that doubters!"

We're just asking how people know that he was actually right and basing his claims on evidence he actually had. How do people know that it wasn't just another lie (from a long list) that happened to get lucky.

astrofool

Mic 1972 wrote: »

what about you posting evidence that the Trump administration were all xenophobes who made this up?
as far as we know they could have been right all along about the man-made virus

a) the trump administration were xenophobes, as evidenced by their ban on immigration from muslim countries, the forced separation of families to deter border crossing on their southern border only, his collective calling of African countries as "sh1tholes" to name just 3.

b) the absence of evidence is evidence that they made it up, as you have already conceded, there is not one shred of evidence available to back up the man made assertion

Unless you want physical evidence of the lack of evidence? Would an empty box do?

Mic 1972

astrofool wrote: »

b) the absence of evidence is evidence that they made it up, as you have already conceded, there is not one shred of evidence available to back up the man made assertion

that's plain wrong


Absense of evidence may be due to other reasons


a) evidence hasnt been found so far
b) evidence has been concealed/removed and may never be found
c) a proper investigation hasn't been carried out
d) other

Trump pointed to the Wuhan lab leak right away because it was the most plausible option and probably he wasnt far from the truth

Igotadose

Absence of evidence is NEVER evidence of absence. Basic logic there, something missing badly from the CT universe though.

Nor can you prove a negative.

astrofool

Mic 1972 wrote: »

that's plain wrong


Absense of evidence may be due to other reasons


a) evidence hasnt been found so far
b) evidence has been concealed/removed and may never be found
c) a proper investigation hasn't been carried out
d) other

Trump pointed to the Wuhan lab leak right away because it was the most plausible option and probably he wasnt far from the truth

You're asking me to prove absence of evidence, the absence of a single shred of evidence as admitted by yourself is the proof of that lack of evidence.

We're not even talking about some evidence that requires further investigation, there is 0.

trump tried to blame China because he's a xenophobe and was trying to deflect attention from his utter incompetence, there is mountains of evidence of this, even Fauci, who for some reason all the trumpeters are now lauding as their savior on this, completely disagreed with basically everything he did around COVID with trump publicly disparaging him multiple times and making multiple threats to fire him.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

There is no evidence and i never said there was.
Stop asking for links to things I haven't said

King Mob

King Mob wrote: »

Not really. A lot of folks here are saying "Aha, Trump was right! Take that doubters!"

We're just asking how people know that he was actually right and basing his claims on evidence he actually had. How do people know that it wasn't just another lie (from a long list) that happened to get lucky.

You're getting into conspiracy theory yourself now..

They had the evidence we've seen since..According to Pompeo there's more that should come out too..

astrofool

Deleted User wrote: »

You're getting into conspiracy theory yourself now..

They had the evidence we've seen since..According to Pompeo there's more that should come out too..

C'Mon CQD, one single shred of evidence, maybe you're up to it, prove the thousands of researchers and virologists wrong.

And maybe you can give your explanation of what science is as well instead of running away again.

King Mob

Deleted User wrote: »

You're getting into conspiracy theory yourself now..

That a serial liar told a lie?
That's not exactly a far out idea.

Deleted User wrote: »

They had the evidence we've seen since...

Ok. How do you know this?

geospatial

astrofool wrote: »

b) the absence of evidence is evidence that they made it up, as you have already conceded, there is not one shred of evidence available to back up the man made assertion

There is claimed evidence of a lab leak, the claim from the US government that researchers at the WIV were hospitalized with Covid like or flu like symptoms in the autumn of 2019. This is presumably why Fauci is now asking for medical records of those researchers, to rule in or rule out that they had Covid. What we do not know is when did US intelligence learn this information.

There is no direct evidence that SARS-2 was a manipulated virus, just as there is no direct evidence that it is zootonic. There is circumstantial evidence that it is zootonic and there is circumstantial evidence that it was manipulated. Some of the circumstantial evidence that it could have been manipulated is in the US fact sheet (the reference to RaTG13 and gain of function research).

patnor1011

patnor1011 wrote: »

Yes, I have seen this bizarre argument about competing countries and "all of the countries and scientists" colluding in some conspiracy... You fail to see that governments for the most part are comprised of career politicians and many times like in our example even sons and daughters of politicians who think that they do have some qualification to "rule" just because their daddy used to be politician. They absolutely rely on outside financing or donations in order to mount successful campaign to secure that job. It then comes down to a handful of companies or corporations which then do have power to influence elections, policies and even science by the sheer power of deciding where their money will flow.
People should really stop talking about scientists like they are some bunch of holy deities. Some posters here love to use the term "scientific consensus" as if that was something set in stone. Guess what? Climate movement which started many decades ago to this day could not get it right despite many scientific consensuses about global cooling, then warming, then cooling again till they rebranded it to fantastic "climate change" argument so that whatever happens it will be right on with the plan.

Your global conspiracy impossibility argument do have big holes in it. If you take just our example that despite a lot of talk, shouting and beating around bushes it is just one person in Ireland who is deciding policies and we all know who it is. So if there is a global conspiracy, all they needed to make Ireland to follow up is to get that one person on board. The same thing happened in many more countries and in other countries politicians just followed example of neighbors or bigger countries simply because they did not know better. Some outliers like Sweden which did not conform to "consensus" had everything but a kitchen sink thrown at them till they fall in line.

Who's that then?

astrofool

geospatial wrote: »

There is claimed evidence of a lab leak, the claim from the US government that researchers at the WIV were hospitalized with Covid like or flu like symptoms in the autumn of 2019. This is presumably why Fauci is now asking for medical records of those researchers, to rule in or rule out that they had Covid. What we do not know is when did US intelligence learn this information.

There is no direct evidence that SARS-2 was a manipulated virus, just as there is no direct evidence that it is zootonic. There is circumstantial evidence that it is zootonic and there is circumstantial evidence that it was manipulated. Some of the circumstantial evidence that it could have been manipulated is in the US fact sheet (the reference to RaTG13 and gain of function research).

There is direct evidence of it's zoonotic origin, both the previous similar virus and the similar structures of the virus to already existing virus, for it to have been man made would require very advanced manipulation that was effectively able to hide that manipulation from all other researchers which would be a conspiracy (with no clear motive). I've no doubt GOF research is happening, but nothing in SARS-COV2 would support that claim.

For the evidence, we know that trump would have been shouting it from the roof tops if he had any (he tried anyway), he shouted about evidence of voter fraud that was proven multiple times to not exist after multiple audits by his own party. I'd be surprised if this latest investigation did anything other than rubber stamp the previous investigation but have a bit more detail tailored for an American audience.

geospatial

astrofool wrote: »

There is direct evidence of it's zoonotic origin, both the previous similar virus and the similar structures of the virus to already existing virus, for it to have been man made would require very advanced manipulation that was effectively able to hide that manipulation from all other researchers which would be a conspiracy (with no clear motive). I've no doubt GOF research is happening, but nothing in SARS-COV2 would support that claim.

Direct evidence of zoontonic origin would be finding an animal with a precursor to SARS-2 that would be very similar genomically, as was done with SARS-1 (civet cats) and MERS (camels). The only claim of finding such a source were one batch of smuggled pangolins in early 2020, the virus they were infected with was SARS-2 so they possibly got infected by humans. Hundreds of pangolins have been tested since then and all tested negative, so pangolins are now thought to be unlikely as the source. We know human to animal transmission is not just possible but highly likely, mink farms in Denmark for example. SARS-2 is well adapted to infect a wide range of mammals, ferrets and minks are as susceptible as humans.

Similarity to other viruses is circumstantial evidence, it's evidence that the virus started as a bat coronavirus. SARS-2 is actually not that similar to SARS-1, it shares 79.5% of it's genome. All we can say for certain is SARS-2 is a betacoronavirus that almost certainly originally came from a horseshoe bat. We do know of one virus that is quite similar though, RaTG13 which was collected by WIV researchers in Yunnan in 2013 along with 8 other similar bat coronaviruses, it's genome is 96.1% similar. The fact that the WIV tried to cover up that they had sequenced this virus years ago and only admitted it when proof was presented to them is suspicious. The only "man made" hypothesis that really has any weight is that SARS-2 evolved from this virus or a similar virus in the WIV, either in humans, or from passaging or splicing experiments, and leaked from the lab.

It is incorrect to say that it would require very advanced manipulation to get from an RaTG13 or similar virus to SARS-2 and this would be obvious to researchers. Passaging in a lab would look no different to passaging in nature, and inserting sequences from one virus into another would also leave no traces. That's what gain of function experiments do, essentially mimicking nature, recombination for example.

You do know I assume there are now several researchers who have openly said manipulation that resulted in SARS-2 is quite possible, these are credible scientists not cranks. Some of them have gone so far as to suggest the genomic evidence supports manipulation more than natural origin. The consensus that was established in early February 2020 on natural origin and ruling out a lab leak appears to have collapsed.

Anyone truly interested in this topic has to ask themselves the question why is Fauci asking for the medical records from miners who fell ill after working in a mine in Yunnan in 2012. Why would he ask China about a conspiracy theory?