Announcement

Collapse

Health Science 101 Guidelines

Greetings! Welcome to Health Science.

Here's where we talk about the latest fad diets, the advantages of vegetarianism, the joy of exercise and good health. Like everywhere else at Tweb our decorum rules apply.

This is a place to exchange ideas and network with other health conscience folks, this isn't a forum for heated debate.
See more
See less

FBI Has 'Moderate Confidence' in Lab Leak Theory

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

    How would a phylogenist or molecular virologist know if the virus escaped from the lab? They might be able to tell if a virus was genetically modified, but if the lab merely used exposure to human cells in order to use selective breeding to create the virus then there would be no genetic markers. And if that escaped from a lab there would be no way for a virologist to tell. It would take investigating the lab itself, interviewing scientists or finding records in order to prove a lab leak. We may never know. But the circumstantial evidence and the Chinese government's reaction sure points that way.
    So your argument is that the scientists in Wuhan may have been doing a type of research different from that described in scientific papers and funded by the US, and that all the stuff about EcoHealth Alliance's research is just a red herring.

    I agree that we probably can't rule that out, but there is no evidence for it. And one thing the intelligence community was able to reach broad agreement on is that the lack of cooperation of the Chinese government does not indicate that the lab-leak hypothesis is true.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Stoic View Post

      So your argument is that the scientists in Wuhan may have been doing a type of research different from that described in scientific papers and funded by the US, and that all the stuff about EcoHealth Alliance's research is just a red herring.

      I agree that we probably can't rule that out, but there is no evidence for it. And one thing the intelligence community was able to reach broad agreement on is that the lack of cooperation of the Chinese government does not indicate that the lab-leak hypothesis is true.
      That was not my argument. Is it your standard practice to invent straw man arguments in order to try to pretend you were right all along?

      My argument was clearly described above. Fauci appealing to unknown authorities was a logical fallacy as those experts would have no idea if there was a lab leak or not unless they were there at the lab when COVID-19 broke out.

      As for what research they have been doing, I and others have shown that they were doing gain of function research on similar viruses. It is not a large leap to figure out they did the same with Sars-Cov-2.


      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Sparko View Post

        That was not my argument. Is it your standard practice to invent straw man arguments in order to try to pretend you were right all along?

        My argument was clearly described above. Fauci appealing to unknown authorities was a logical fallacy as those experts would have no idea if there was a lab leak or not unless they were there at the lab when COVID-19 broke out.
        What Fauci says is no more of a fallacy than what Paul says.

        As for what research they have been doing, I and others have shown that they were doing gain of function research on similar viruses. It is not a large leap to figure out they did the same with Sars-Cov-2.
        I remember a proposal to DARPA that was turned down because they thought it could be gain of function research. But that didn't show that they were doing gain of function research on similar viruses.

        So where did you and others show this?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Stoic View Post
          What Fauci says is no more of a fallacy than what Paul says.


          I remember a proposal to DARPA that was turned down because they thought it could be gain of function research. But that didn't show that they were doing gain of function research on similar viruses.

          So where did you and others show this?
          Go back and read the threads again yourself. I am tired of repeating myself to you only to have you pretend you never saw it later. It matters not a whit to me what you think at this point. You are merely a nuisance.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
            Go back and read the threads again yourself. I am tired of repeating myself to you only to have you pretend you never saw it later.
            That's ironic, given your tendency to ask me questions that I've already answered for you.

            It matters not a whit to me what you think at this point. You are merely a nuisance.
            Okay.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              The disease was first found in the same location as the Wuhan Virus Lab.
              It came from a bat.
              The lab was experimenting with bat corona viruses and trying to infect humanized mice.
              The Chinese government won't let inspectors in to check the lab or their records while denying they had anything to to with a leak, and even tried to blame the USA!

              I don't believe in that many coincidences.
              Try this one on for size
              In November of 2019, 25 medical research students returned to my area from Wuhan, all sick with the same "flu". And guess who had Covid Antibodies before we should've had antibodies according to when the virus was first "discovered"?
              Not one person I worked with 2 years ago disputes China's responsibility.
              A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
              George Bernard Shaw

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                The majority of the public has "high confidence"
                Argument by by popularity of the 'clueless' majority.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  FBI Has 'Moderate Confidence' in Lab Leak Theory Following 90-Day Review

                  So, after the "FAKE NEWS" of a Lab Leak, it's looking more and more like BigTech and MSM were wrong. Again.

                  The Federal Bureau of Investigations has concluded that it has "moderate confidence" in the origin of the coronavirus being an accidental leak from a Chinese laboratory, making it the only agency with such a belief following a 90-day investigation into the virus' origins, according to an intelligence report.

                  "One [intelligence community] element assesses with moderate confidence that COVID-19 most likely resulted from a laboratory-associated incident involving WIV or other researchers—either through exposure to the virus during experiments or through sampling," the report noted.

                  The 17-page report, declassified Friday, notes that only one agency endorsed the lab-leak theory following the review but does not identify which agency came to this conclusion. However, The New York Times found the FBI to be the sole agency to back the lab-leak theory. Wuhan, China, the city where the COVID-19 pandemic started, has a number of virology laboratories, including the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where bat coronaviruses were studied.

                  The Office of the Director of National Intelligence's report comes after President Joe Biden ordered a 90-day review earlier this year to determine how COVID-19 originated. A summary was released in August, which stated that agencies were unable to produce conclusive evidence about whether the coronavirus stemmed from an animal or a laboratory.

                  Friday's report noted that four agencies within the intelligence community, along with the National Intelligence Council, concluded, with "low confidence," that the pandemic began with the coronavirus jumping from an animal to a human while several other agencies failed to reach a conclusion.

                  "Although the [intelligence community] has no indications that WIV research involved Sars-Cov-2 [the virus that causes Covid-19] or a close progenitor virus, these analysts note that it is plausible that researchers may have unwittingly exposed themselves to the virus without sequencing it during experiments or sampling activities, possibly resulting in asymptomatic or mild infection," the report reads.
                  I do not consider this significant news. There has always been the possibility of a lab leak or transmission from animals in the Market. The subjective 'Moderate Confidence?' does not add to the evidence. At present the evidence is inconclusive. and asI have read recently the research is ongoing concerning the possible genetic links to the wild source and the lab leak.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    At present the source remains unresolved.I acknowledge the lack of cooperation and interference of the Chinese makes it difficult, but I believe the genetic research in the end will answer the question.

                    Source: https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/uarizona-researcher-releases-new-report-on-origin-of-covid-19




                    UArizona researcher releases new report on origin of COVID-19

                    By Bailey Miller
                    Published November 22, 2021 4:12PM


                    PHOENIX - Since COVID-19 began, the question of where it all started has persisted, and the debate over where the virus began has been sparked once more, thanks to a scientist in Arizona.

                    A researcher at the University of Arizona says the first known case was found at a market in Wuhan, in China's Hubei province. The report was released on Thursday, Nov. 18, and reveals that the World Health Organization (WHO) and others have gotten the timeline of the pandemic wrong. The report also shows where the deadly virus began in the first place.
                    Sponsored LinksMebane: Startup Is Changing the Way People RetireSmartAsset
                    "You can't dismiss this pattern of all these cases linked to a wet market," said Dr. Michael Worobey, the head of the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at UArizona. "That market is the most likely site of origin, and it probably happened from an animal sold live in the market infected with the virus, and it crossed into humans."

                    Dr. Worobey combed through data, news reports, recovered health documents and interviews with patients and doctors for months to find his conclusion. He says in the city of 11 million people, half of the cases are linked to that small area, indicating it came from the wet market. Dr. Worobey also adds that he also researched the theory that the virus was produced in a lab.

                    "If the evidence pointed strongly to a lab origin, then I would be shouting from rooftops about that, but it doesn't," said Dr. Worobey. "So much evidence is stacked against that, and at this point, we need to focus on this wet market origin, and what we are going to do about it."

                    On top of Dr. Worobey's origin research, he also uncovered that the first known patient was a vendor in the animal market, and not the initially reported patient zero.

                    © Copyright Original Source






                    https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/ua...in-of-covid-19
                    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                    go with the flow the river knows . . .

                    Frank

                    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                      Argument by by popularity of the 'clueless' majority.
                      That's a rather snide viewpoint. But then, Leftists think the majority are fools and need to be led by the nose.
                      "You should just assume going forward that if I am ever wrong it is a typo" - Backup
                      "
                      Reality simply does not change based upon consensus or desire." - rogue

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Ronson View Post

                        That's a rather snide viewpoint. But then, Leftists think the majority are fools and need to be led by the nose.
                        No just uninformed concerning the science involved. I doubt any poll involving science of the pub;ic. To many non-scientific agendas. Such as: abput 30-40%+ pf the public reject evolution.

                        When I post I refer to the science.
                        Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-26-2021, 09:43 AM.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                          No just uninformed concerning the science involved. I doubt any poll involving science of the pub;ic. To many non-scientific agendas. Such as: abput 30-40%+ pf the public reject evolution.
                          Assuming your percentage is accurate, the majority accept it. So, what's your beef?

                          When I post I refer to the science.
                          There's no science involved here - it is a matter of common sense. A new type of signature explosive is being studied in Podunk, Montana. Suddenly, the same type of signature explosion occurs in Podunk, Montana. "It's a coincidence. Someone shot a missile at Podunk!"
                          "You should just assume going forward that if I am ever wrong it is a typo" - Backup
                          "
                          Reality simply does not change based upon consensus or desire." - rogue

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Ronson View Post

                            Assuming your percentage is accurate, the majority accept it. So, what's your beef?
                            Demonstrates that non-scientific public opinion is unreliable. The same is true for Global warming and the nature of Covid-19 and the pandemic



                            There's no science involved here - it is a matter of common sense. A new type of signature explosive is being studied in Podunk, Montana. Suddenly, the same type of signature explosion occurs in Podunk, Montana. "It's a coincidence. Someone shot a missile at Podunk!"
                            Common sense is not as common .as you suggest. Agendas and bias often rule public opinion

                            No, it is matter of science concerning the genetic origins of the COVID-19 is science, and NOT public opinion. For example as cited in the research article.
                            Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-26-2021, 11:35 AM.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Source: https://www.newsweek.com/covid-origin-study-scientists-react-new-date-first-known-case-china-wuhan-1651105



                              Scientists React to COVID Origin Study Suggesting New Date for First Known Case

                              BY ED BROWNE ON 11/19/21


                              Anew perspective on the origins of COVID has been released in a report that suggests the earliest known case of the disease occurred at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan.

                              According to the report, the earliest confirmed case of COVID was a seafood vendor, whose illness started on December 11, 2019.

                              The study was written by Michael Worobey, head of the ecology and evolutionary biology department at the University of Arizona, and published in the journal Science on Thursday.

                              It goes against previous analysis that concluded the "earliest" COVID case was a 41-year-old male accountant who had no connection to the Huanan Market and lived 30 kilometers (18.6 miles) away, Worobey wrote: That man's illness onset was reported as December 8, but Worobey's analysis of hospital records and interviews from the early stages of the pandemic showed that the December 8 illness was actually a dental problem and that the man's fever didn't start until December 16.


                              "His symptom onset came after multiple cases in workers at Huanan Market, making a female seafood vendor there the earliest known case, with illness onset 11 December," the report states.

                              Worobey concluded that the earliest symptomatic COVID cases were linked to Huanan Market, providing "strong evidence" that the pandemic has a live-animal market origin as opposed to a laboratory leak or otherwise.

                              He also pointed to the SARS coronavirus outbreak in 2003, in which there were "multiple independent jumps" of the virus from animals to humans due to live animal markets.

                              Worobey's new analysis appears contrary to a report from the South China Morning Post in March 2020 that stated the first confirmed case of COVID could have occurred as far back as November 17 in a Hubei resident aged 55, based on government data. Other proposed dates have been even earlier.
                              Praise and Criticism

                              Scientists have reacted to his report with praise and criticism.

                              Dr Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the Georgetown University Center for Global Health Science and Security who is focusing on SARS-CoV-2, said on Twitter of Worobey's analysis: "There's been a lot of hand waving and water-muddying from random 'internet sleuths' who do this as a hobby, but this is what happens when a brilliant scientist specializing in pandemic pathogens and viral evolution decides to apply actual expertise to the sleuthing."

                              Joshua Powell, a molecular virologist studying inter-species transmission of influenza at the National Animal Disease Center, said the research was "articulate, factual, logical, and backed by solid phylogenetic data."

                              © Copyright Original Source







                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                                At present the source remains unresolved.I acknowledge the lack of cooperation and interference of the Chinese makes it difficult, but I believe the genetic research in the end will answer the question.

                                Source: https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/uarizona-researcher-releases-new-report-on-origin-of-covid-19




                                UArizona researcher releases new report on origin of COVID-19

                                By Bailey Miller
                                Published November 22, 2021 4:12PM


                                PHOENIX - Since COVID-19 began, the question of where it all started has persisted, and the debate over where the virus began has been sparked once more, thanks to a scientist in Arizona.

                                A researcher at the University of Arizona says the first known case was found at a market in Wuhan, in China's Hubei province. The report was released on Thursday, Nov. 18, and reveals that the World Health Organization (WHO) and others have gotten the timeline of the pandemic wrong. The report also shows where the deadly virus began in the first place.
                                Sponsored LinksMebane: Startup Is Changing the Way People RetireSmartAsset
                                "You can't dismiss this pattern of all these cases linked to a wet market," said Dr. Michael Worobey, the head of the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at UArizona. "That market is the most likely site of origin, and it probably happened from an animal sold live in the market infected with the virus, and it crossed into humans."

                                Dr. Worobey combed through data, news reports, recovered health documents and interviews with patients and doctors for months to find his conclusion. He says in the city of 11 million people, half of the cases are linked to that small area, indicating it came from the wet market. Dr. Worobey also adds that he also researched the theory that the virus was produced in a lab.

                                "If the evidence pointed strongly to a lab origin, then I would be shouting from rooftops about that, but it doesn't," said Dr. Worobey. "So much evidence is stacked against that, and at this point, we need to focus on this wet market origin, and what we are going to do about it."

                                On top of Dr. Worobey's origin research, he also uncovered that the first known patient was a vendor in the animal market, and not the initially reported patient zero.

                                © Copyright Original Source






                                https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/ua...in-of-covid-19
                                This isn't science. he is just giving an opinion based on news reports and publicly released data. Data released by the Chinese government. Basically he is just believing what the Chinese government wants people to believe. His opinion is no more valid than anyone else's.


                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X