Liste des Groupes | Revenir à e design |
On 8/03/2024 8:05 pm, The Natural Philosopher wrote:"More than three years have passed since the first case of a new coronavirus infection (SARS-CoV-2) in the city of Wuhan (Hubei, China). The Wuhan Institute of Virology was founded in that city in 1956 and the country’s first biosafety level 4 laboratory opened within that center in 2015. The coincidence that the first cases of infection emerged in the city where the virology institute’s headquarters is located, the failure to 100% identify the virus’ RNA in any of the coronaviruses isolated in bats, and the lack of evidence on a possible intermediate animal host in the contagion’s transmission make it so that at present, there are doubts about the real origin of SARS-CoV-2. This article will review two theories: SARS-CoV-2 as a virus of zoonotic origin or as a leak from the high-level biosafety laboratory in Wuhan."On 08/03/2024 07:09, Bill Sloman wrote:There's no information there. There are a few American senators who know what they want to believe, but no facts at all.On 8/03/2024 4:48 am, The Natural Philosopher wrote:that site is the information dearieOn 07/03/2024 15:15, GB wrote:>On 07/03/2024 15:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:As far as I know, yes.On 07/03/2024 15:05, Bill Sloman wrote:>There's not a shred of evidence that Covid-19 was any kind of laboratory-developed virus, and virus labs are actually pretty good at keeping dangerous viruses safely locked up. It's a stupid idea, but Cursitor Doom and Jan Panteltje like it.>
Actually its pretty much the main stream consensus that the virus was cooked up in a lab, and escaped.
>
Is that the consensus amongst people who really know what they are talking about?
>
>
But you don't know much, and don't go to any trouble to find out evidence that you'd prefer not to know about.
>https://oversight.house.gov/release/covid-origins-hearing-wrap-up-facts-science-evidence-point-to-a-wuhan-lab-leak%EF%BF%BC/>
>
is a fairly good overview. The problem is that accusing China of being uber sloppy was not politically *convenient*. So the default position initially was a 'we just dont know'
>
Apparently now, we know a lot more...
But you can't point to any of this "new"information.
>
>
https://oversight.house.gov/release/covid-origins-hearing-wrap-up-facts-science-evidence-point-to-a-wuhan-lab-leak%EF%BF%BC/
>
Don't bully me. Take it up with them.
Here is a fact or two that I posted earlier.
https://news.yahoo.com/nih-admits-funding-gain-function-125103852.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACPGaZ5dUJFM3q5AfcrA5yai45fdGG3fYRStdwAE3MyFcIuuVbjhdODrC9uQ1A6LkPTUjWl_y8le4SgMvvACZ5x16IR1_pOPgESFBYUgzj4cwPwtZk-heYt6_aG9uwn6DGb2nG0XNAx5OppmF3ArrFkja-d9TWqB8_U1lS1BLWYu
That wasn't "gain of function" research. The question examined was whether "“spike proteins from naturally occurring bat coronaviruses circulating in China were capable of binding to the human ACE2 receptor in a mouse model.”
The naturally occurring bat coronaviruses weren't modified in any way. The question was whether they were potentially dangerous to humans, and it got the right answer, though nobody seems to have acted on the information obtained - not that they could have done much.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.