Gold Member EvilBird Posted March 10, 2023 Gold Member Share Posted March 10, 2023 6 hours ago, spin_dry said: Zero evidence of this being a lab leak. Total conjecture. No one has brought forth even a shred of proof. Ok. Keep thinking some Chinese dude ate a Bat 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 18 hours ago, Carlos Danger said: Well that is half true. The evidence of a lab leak is the cleavage sites on the virus it self. Many of the experts including the head of the CDC said these would be easy to recreate in the lab and as of yet undiscovered in nature. The problem is that the cleavage sites don’t seem to be engineered for humans. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2211107119 Now, this isn’t to say that the cleavage site isn’t/wasn’t engineered, but the understanding of how it operates shows that it’s a single step in a series of genetic processes that work on a cascading style. None of the other gene based processes seem to have any engineering done to them. Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 11 hours ago, EvilBird said: Ok. Keep thinking some Chinese dude ate a Bat There is no definitive evidence either way. We just don’t know presently. Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 10, 2023 Author Share Posted March 10, 2023 16 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said: The problem is that the cleavage sites don’t seem to be engineered for humans. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2211107119 Now, this isn’t to say that the cleavage site isn’t/wasn’t engineered, but the understanding of how it operates shows that it’s a single step in a series of genetic processes that work on a cascading style. None of the other gene based processes seem to have any engineering done to them. Neal Yea a paper by UNC and the Wuhan institute of virology. No bias there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 13 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: Yea a paper by UNC and the Wuhan institute of virology. No bias there. Huh? Robert F. Garry Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70112 Global Viral Network, Baltimore, MD 21201 Zalgen Labs, Frederick, MD 21703 Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 10, 2023 Author Share Posted March 10, 2023 1 minute ago, NaturallyAspirated said: Huh? Robert F. Garry Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70112 Global Viral Network, Baltimore, MD 21201 Zalgen Labs, Frederick, MD 21703 Neal Great did you hear what Dr Wade said at the hearings? The science community has painted it self into a corner in as much as it only publishes points of view that stick with the narrative so that they can continue to receive funding. I don't know Robert F Garry and like most I am in no position to critique his work I just know that without a debate of his peers I don't take his conclusions as gospel. That does not make me anti science just uneasy with the political nature that has been baked in to the current scientific debate. A million Americans have died so a short one sided answer is not going to cut it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 Sidney Powell should be on this…….RELEASE THE KRAKEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 Just now, Carlos Danger said: Great did you hear what Dr Wade said at the hearings? The science community has painted it self into a corner in as much as it only publishes points of view that stick with the narrative so that they can continue to receive funding. I don't know Robert F Garry and like most I am in no position to critique his work I just know that without a debate of his peers I don't take his conclusions as gospel. That does not make me anti science just uneasy with the political nature that has been baked in to the current scientific debate. A million Americans have died so a short one sided answer is not going to cut it. Sure did. Why did you claim my post paper was a UNC Wuhan? You seem to treat Dr Wade differently though… I do agree there is no short one sided answer, thus my posts stating we don’t have definitive evidence for either hypothesis presently. Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 10, 2023 Author Share Posted March 10, 2023 Just now, NaturallyAspirated said: Sure did. Why did you claim my post paper was a UNC Wuhan? You seem to treat Dr Wade differently though… I do agree there is no short one sided answer, thus my posts stating we don’t have definitive evidence for either hypothesis presently. Neal This is the whole thing Neal.....Fauchi does not have a definitive scientific consensus and yet he has repeatedly stated with conviction that the lab leak idea is a complete fallacy going as far as to make up scientific papers and attacking Scientist with opposing views. You would think that the entire scientific community would want to exhaust all avenues of discovery in what amounts to a once in 100 year pandemic but that does not seem to be the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 Just now, Carlos Danger said: This is the whole thing Neal.....Fauchi does not have a definitive scientific consensus and yet he has repeatedly stated with conviction that the lab leak idea is a complete fallacy going as far as to make up scientific papers and attacking Scientist with opposing views. You would think that the entire scientific community would want to exhaust all avenues of discovery in what amounts to a once in 100 year pandemic but that does not seem to be the case. Your claims are a bit boisterous. Fauci didn’t make up a paper, he, along with others (including Francis Collins) commissioned a paper. A precursory review of the virus showed it to be a zoonosis origin. It can be argued that Fauci and others may have argued that into the only conclusion. Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 10, 2023 Author Share Posted March 10, 2023 9 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said: Your claims are a bit boisterous. Fauci didn’t make up a paper, he, along with others (including Francis Collins) commissioned a paper. A precursory review of the virus showed it to be a zoonosis origin. It can be argued that Fauci and others may have argued that into the only conclusion. Neal I think i would have been more forgiving if Fauchi did not go on the offensive against those with opposing view points. It is pretty clear with the question of Funding to the Whuhan lab that Fauchi was no longer just a man of science when he set out to discredit other scientist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 2 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: I think i would have been more forgiving if Fauchi did not go on the offensive against those with opposing view points. It is pretty clear with the question of Funding to the Whuhan lab that Fauchi was no longer just a man of science when he set out to discredit other scientist. I think that those opposing scientists could/do have just as much bias or desire to discredit Fauci. I think the scales are equally balanced in that regard. That is why it is hard to get meaningful information conveyed. Shit look how fast you erroneously jumped on my reply with bias that what I posted was some UNC/Wuhan paper and have yet to correct the record. Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 10, 2023 Author Share Posted March 10, 2023 12 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said: I think that those opposing scientists could/do have just as much bias or desire to discredit Fauci. I think the scales are equally balanced in that regard. That is why it is hard to get meaningful information conveyed. Shit look how fast you erroneously jumped on my reply with bias that what I posted was some UNC/Wuhan paper and have yet to correct the record. Neal I don't agree with that at all. I think the original conference call that Fauchi put together early in the Pandemic is telling. In 4 days time people Fauchi put on the list as trusted voices in the Virology community went from hero to enemy if they did not toe the line with the narrative. Plus lets look at the other side of this that is not pure science the lab in Whuhan went from self management by scientist to lock down under direct military control within a few days of the early signs of the Pandemic. So clearly the Chinese government thinks a lab leak is plausible maybe even probable If not in statement but in actions. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 Poor Neal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: I don't agree with that at all. I think the original conference call that Fauchi put together early in the Pandemic is telling. In 4 days time people Fauchi put on the list as trusted voices in the Virology community went from hero to enemy if they did not toe the line with the narrative. Plus lets look at the other side of this that is not pure science the lab in Whuhan went from self management by scientist to lock down under direct military control within a few days of the early signs of the Pandemic. So clearly the Chinese government thinks a lab leak is plausible maybe even probable If not in statement but in actions. That’s because you have a bias. To me it seems you are being over the top in your descriptions, IMO, relying on testimony from those with bias against Fauci, bias breeding bias. At present we don’t have definitive evidence supporting either hypothesis. That is something that neither side can seem to admit. Neal Edited March 10, 2023 by NaturallyAspirated 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 6 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said: That’s because you have a bias. To me it seems you are being over the top in your descriptions, IMO, relying on testimony from those with bias against Fauci, bias breeding bias. At present we don’t have definitive evidence supporting either hypothesis. That is something that neither side can seem to admit. Neal This is funny. Follow the $$$$$$ moron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 12 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said: That’s because you have a bias. To me it seems you are being over the top in your descriptions, IMO, relying on testimony from those with bias against Fauci, bias breeding bias. At present we don’t have definitive evidence supporting either hypothesis. That is something that neither side can seem to admit. Neal And you have a bias. And here we are. One side has evidence supporting their claims. One has a narrative that you've been suckling for the past 3 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Jimmy Snacks Posted March 10, 2023 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted March 10, 2023 4 minutes ago, DriftBusta said: And you have a bias. And here we are. One side has evidence supporting their claims. One has a narrative that you've been suckling for the past 3 years. Your side which consists of AC has talked in circles for months and does nothing but call people names. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Steve753 Posted March 10, 2023 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted March 10, 2023 4 minutes ago, DriftBusta said: And you have a bias. And here we are. One side has evidence supporting their claims. One has a narrative that you've been suckling for the past 3 years. I haven't seen any actual evidence. Just claims. A huge mess of claims that are easily debunked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 3 minutes ago, DriftBusta said: And you have a bias. And here we are. One side has evidence supporting their claims. One has a narrative that you've been suckling for the past 3 years. I don’t, I’m not suckling any narrative. I have said many times now there isn’t definitive evidence for either hypothesis. I’ve also said I am not a big fan of Fauci, no one cares to accept that either constantly saying I swallow the government load. Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 10, 2023 Author Share Posted March 10, 2023 22 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said: That’s because you have a bias. To me it seems you are being over the top in your descriptions, IMO, relying on testimony from those with bias against Fauci, bias breeding bias. At present we don’t have definitive evidence supporting either hypothesis. That is something that neither side can seem to admit. Neal You have a bias as well....who doesn't is my point. The whole point is China is never going to allow for accountability at the Whuhan lab and has taken steps to insure what ever truth was to be had has been removed. The best chance for the natural causes crowd would have been to find the virus out in the open but in 3 years time no such discovery has been made. Now we are starting to see government agencies lean towards lab leak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deephaven Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 28 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said: This is funny. Follow the $$$$$$ moron. Speaking of funny you state to follow the $$$$$ but you can't tell us where it went. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaturallyAspirated Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 3 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: You have a bias as well....who doesn't is my point. The whole point is China is never going to allow for accountability at the Whuhan lab and has taken steps to insure what ever truth was to be had has been removed. The best chance for the natural causes crowd would have been to find the virus out in the open but in 3 years time no such discovery has been made. Now we are starting to see government agencies lean towards lab leak. We should all be biased towards truth, IMO. It’s much easier to jump into blame and dislike or hate for opposing views. We just have no good evidence to support either hypothesis presently. Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 8 minutes ago, Deephaven said: Speaking of funny you state to follow the $$$$$ but you can't tell us where it went. Like the 9 million reasons idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deephaven Posted March 10, 2023 Share Posted March 10, 2023 Obviously you have no faith in your own statement if you won't make it and end with a personal attack instead. Nice work! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.