Why is lab manipulation off the table? WIV openly admits that they were manipulating the viruses - there is even a proposal from Peter Daszak for funding for WIV to perform Gain of Function experiments. This type of experiment is common place - look at Ralph Baric's papers. Furthermore, those distributions from Trevor Bedford are horrendously wrong even for 2/2020, they should have alerted you that lab escape was a credible theory.
"manipulation" is a loaded word that implies intent and leads us to an impression that this pandemic was intentionally created, which I think is certainly untrue. There are possibilities of in-lab evolution that may change the virus without really qualifying as "manipulation". I'm unsure if GOF experiments were carried out on COVID-19, but it seems a bit of a leap from what we know right now.
You are the one that used the word manipulation and assigned to to the "Frankenstein Scenario" in the podcast. Who says that the "manipulation" leads to the impression that the pandemic was intentionally created? That is just part of the MSM assertions and attempts to link lab escape with hysteria. Call it engineering, call it manipulation - but I suggest that you pick a consistent term. Linking "engineering" with Lab Escape and "manipulation" with "Frankenstein" creations is lazy speech. I will send you Peter Daszak's proposal that was seeking funds for GOF. It is completely clear that WIV was involved in GOF experiments. There is no leap at all. Maybe you should talk to @VafaOmid about this - PhD from Georgetown in Biology/Biochemistry. He exchanges tweets with Alina. Another person to follow is @BillyBostickson - if you want a clear idea of what is going on in this space.
I listened to the recording with Alina Chan, I think that it is wrong to label the "Frankenstein" case of building SARS Cov 2 from scratch as "lab manipulation" and GOF experiments as some of the term. GOF experiments are also lab manipulation. Many people are not going to understand this.
Also, I call BS on the assertion that most of the lab escape info comes from Fox News or Breitbart. Another BS smear on a serious subject. There are lots of pretty liberal scientists who are writing about lab escape and publishing this in various locations.
The first article, from Cornell University, says this theory is about "letting trump off the hook".
The second one is the infamous Intelligencer article.
The third is Fox, which is sympathetic to the theory
The forth is Newsweek, which calls it "very unlikely"
Next is the Sun, which is considered right wing, then the Washington Examiner, also fairly conservative, then Forbes, which claims that "lab escape" is synonymous with "deliberate bioterrorism", then NY Post (right wing), then LiveScience (states definitively that it did NOT), then NBC (says it's a far fetched theory), then CNet (says the zoonotic theory is the right one), then BMJ (medical journal) which says this theory is "ruled out", then The Scientist which says it "lacks evidence".
I appreciate that you call BS on this, but that's the honest impression that I have come to. You're welcome to come to a different honest impression that respects the decency and integrity of everyone in this thread.
First, duckduckgo? Are you really serious? Why don't you get real and learn how to use the sophisticated Google search tools? I see plenty of non-extreme right news sources that are reporting the need to examine the lab escape theory. On some searches, Fox and Breitbart are not even on the first page. Second, there are plenty of scientists who believe that the lab escape needs to be investigated: https://youtu.be/ZMGWLLDSA3c is one interview that you should look at. I gave you a couple of others @VafaOmid and @BillyBostickson on Twitter. Another person to check is @quay_dr. I am sorry, but I do not think that you had an honest impression. I think that you went looking for data to prove this radical split between the Zoonotic folks and the Lab Release folks so that you could exercise your vocabulary. The world does not need this now. We need people using precise language with precise terms.
If you think I'm coming at this from a partisan or dishonest perspective, that's not a problem that I can fix for you.
If you go looking for a specific thing, the miracle of the internet is that you will find it. If you want to convince yourself of something, there is more than enough evidence out there.
Even the Vox article that talks about Gain of Function research makes a point that they think lab escape is a conspiracy theory, saying (incorrectly) that "almost all disease outbreaks in history have been" zoonotic outbreaks
A counter example here and there do not overcome the overwhelming sense that I've gotten that right-wing sources are more energetic about promoting the lab escape theory and mainstream & left-wing sources push back on this idea, dismissing it too quickly.
I can only tell you what I've seen and the sense I've gotten, I cannot lie to you and tell you I don't see this. Nor can I be embarrassed or shamed into shying away from an impression I've honestly come to.
I agree with your point that there is a divide between the Zoonosis proponents and the people of the Lab Escape faith. However, if you go to Twitter, where the REAL informed and unbiased scientific work is being published, you will see that it is the Zoonosis folks are just as active in creating this divide. @BillyBostickson has been extremely adept at exposing their deceit. They use their power over Lancet to publish articles with incorrect information and attack from what seems to be a scientific platform. It is unfortunate, and even Alina says this, that Breitbart and other hyper conservative news outlets came out with such extreme accusations without firm proof. It is unfortunate that Dr. Li-Meng came out with such outrageous remarks without a more vetted paper. But the Zoonotic folks are just as bad. Look Alina's posts about PhDs who publish and do not correct. I am not asking you to change your perspective. I am asking you to be more careful with the words that you use. Help the world resolve this by providing carefully worded statements rather than becoming the God of trolling the right.
"Not going to say it's aliens...but it's aliens!" ;)
Interesting points on the lack of (expected) evidence on animal->human transmission. Sometimes, in controversial situations, there's a way of looking at something that nobody seems to think about (or care to point out) that shifts the perception, of those who consider the new viewpoint seriously, away from one or more narratives that are otherwise very popular.
Why is lab manipulation off the table? WIV openly admits that they were manipulating the viruses - there is even a proposal from Peter Daszak for funding for WIV to perform Gain of Function experiments. This type of experiment is common place - look at Ralph Baric's papers. Furthermore, those distributions from Trevor Bedford are horrendously wrong even for 2/2020, they should have alerted you that lab escape was a credible theory.
"manipulation" is a loaded word that implies intent and leads us to an impression that this pandemic was intentionally created, which I think is certainly untrue. There are possibilities of in-lab evolution that may change the virus without really qualifying as "manipulation". I'm unsure if GOF experiments were carried out on COVID-19, but it seems a bit of a leap from what we know right now.
You are the one that used the word manipulation and assigned to to the "Frankenstein Scenario" in the podcast. Who says that the "manipulation" leads to the impression that the pandemic was intentionally created? That is just part of the MSM assertions and attempts to link lab escape with hysteria. Call it engineering, call it manipulation - but I suggest that you pick a consistent term. Linking "engineering" with Lab Escape and "manipulation" with "Frankenstein" creations is lazy speech. I will send you Peter Daszak's proposal that was seeking funds for GOF. It is completely clear that WIV was involved in GOF experiments. There is no leap at all. Maybe you should talk to @VafaOmid about this - PhD from Georgetown in Biology/Biochemistry. He exchanges tweets with Alina. Another person to follow is @BillyBostickson - if you want a clear idea of what is going on in this space.
I listened to the recording with Alina Chan, I think that it is wrong to label the "Frankenstein" case of building SARS Cov 2 from scratch as "lab manipulation" and GOF experiments as some of the term. GOF experiments are also lab manipulation. Many people are not going to understand this.
Also, I call BS on the assertion that most of the lab escape info comes from Fox News or Breitbart. Another BS smear on a serious subject. There are lots of pretty liberal scientists who are writing about lab escape and publishing this in various locations.
I went looking for a lot of information on this & that was my impression.
Take this search result, for example:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=COVID+lab+escape+&atb=v258-1&ia=web
The first article, from Cornell University, says this theory is about "letting trump off the hook".
The second one is the infamous Intelligencer article.
The third is Fox, which is sympathetic to the theory
The forth is Newsweek, which calls it "very unlikely"
Next is the Sun, which is considered right wing, then the Washington Examiner, also fairly conservative, then Forbes, which claims that "lab escape" is synonymous with "deliberate bioterrorism", then NY Post (right wing), then LiveScience (states definitively that it did NOT), then NBC (says it's a far fetched theory), then CNet (says the zoonotic theory is the right one), then BMJ (medical journal) which says this theory is "ruled out", then The Scientist which says it "lacks evidence".
I appreciate that you call BS on this, but that's the honest impression that I have come to. You're welcome to come to a different honest impression that respects the decency and integrity of everyone in this thread.
First, duckduckgo? Are you really serious? Why don't you get real and learn how to use the sophisticated Google search tools? I see plenty of non-extreme right news sources that are reporting the need to examine the lab escape theory. On some searches, Fox and Breitbart are not even on the first page. Second, there are plenty of scientists who believe that the lab escape needs to be investigated: https://youtu.be/ZMGWLLDSA3c is one interview that you should look at. I gave you a couple of others @VafaOmid and @BillyBostickson on Twitter. Another person to check is @quay_dr. I am sorry, but I do not think that you had an honest impression. I think that you went looking for data to prove this radical split between the Zoonotic folks and the Lab Release folks so that you could exercise your vocabulary. The world does not need this now. We need people using precise language with precise terms.
If you think I'm coming at this from a partisan or dishonest perspective, that's not a problem that I can fix for you.
If you go looking for a specific thing, the miracle of the internet is that you will find it. If you want to convince yourself of something, there is more than enough evidence out there.
Even the Vox article that talks about Gain of Function research makes a point that they think lab escape is a conspiracy theory, saying (incorrectly) that "almost all disease outbreaks in history have been" zoonotic outbreaks
https://www.vox.com/2020/5/1/21243148/why-some-labs-work-on-making-viruses-deadlier-and-why-they-should-stop
A counter example here and there do not overcome the overwhelming sense that I've gotten that right-wing sources are more energetic about promoting the lab escape theory and mainstream & left-wing sources push back on this idea, dismissing it too quickly.
I can only tell you what I've seen and the sense I've gotten, I cannot lie to you and tell you I don't see this. Nor can I be embarrassed or shamed into shying away from an impression I've honestly come to.
I agree with your point that there is a divide between the Zoonosis proponents and the people of the Lab Escape faith. However, if you go to Twitter, where the REAL informed and unbiased scientific work is being published, you will see that it is the Zoonosis folks are just as active in creating this divide. @BillyBostickson has been extremely adept at exposing their deceit. They use their power over Lancet to publish articles with incorrect information and attack from what seems to be a scientific platform. It is unfortunate, and even Alina says this, that Breitbart and other hyper conservative news outlets came out with such extreme accusations without firm proof. It is unfortunate that Dr. Li-Meng came out with such outrageous remarks without a more vetted paper. But the Zoonotic folks are just as bad. Look Alina's posts about PhDs who publish and do not correct. I am not asking you to change your perspective. I am asking you to be more careful with the words that you use. Help the world resolve this by providing carefully worded statements rather than becoming the God of trolling the right.
"Not going to say it's aliens...but it's aliens!" ;)
Interesting points on the lack of (expected) evidence on animal->human transmission. Sometimes, in controversial situations, there's a way of looking at something that nobody seems to think about (or care to point out) that shifts the perception, of those who consider the new viewpoint seriously, away from one or more narratives that are otherwise very popular.