Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

They Blinded Me With Science...

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Who is Peter Daszak, the nonprofit exec who sent taxpayer money to Wuhan lab?

    https://nypost.com/2021/06/04/who-is...-to-wuhan-lab/
    from that link:

    During Daszak’s efforts to arrange the Lancet statement, he reportedly emailed two scientists, including Dr. Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina, who’d worked with the lead coronavirus researcher at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology, located at the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak.

    Daszak told the scientists that they “should not sign this statement, so it has some distance from us and therefore doesn’t work in a counterproductive way,” Vanity Fair said, citing emails obtained by the group US Right to Know.

    “We’ll then put it out in a way that doesn’t link it back to our collaboration so we maximize an independent voice,” Daszak reportedly added.


    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Sparko View Post

      from that link:

      During Daszak’s efforts to arrange the Lancet statement, he reportedly emailed two scientists, including Dr. Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina, who’d worked with the lead coronavirus researcher at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology, located at the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak.

      Daszak told the scientists that they “should not sign this statement, so it has some distance from us and therefore doesn’t work in a counterproductive way,” Vanity Fair said, citing emails obtained by the group US Right to Know.

      “We’ll then put it out in a way that doesn’t link it back to our collaboration so we maximize an independent voice,” Daszak reportedly added.
      It was cover up!
      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by seer View Post

        Who is Peter Daszak, the nonprofit exec who sent taxpayer money to Wuhan lab?

        https://nypost.com/2021/06/04/who-is...-to-wuhan-lab/
        And guy on the WHO "covid investigative team" that determines its origins.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by seanD View Post

          And guy on the WHO "covid investigative team" that determines its origins.
          Some one needs to go to prison...
          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

          Comment


          • #20
            193525503_10220934067482203_4166698129926966074_n.jpg
            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by seer View Post

              Some one needs to go to prison...
              Yes. The actual "accident" (assuming it was even an accident) is bad enough, but the attempted cover-up makes it worse.

              Comment


              • #22
                Btw, the censorship was deeply rooted in the scientific community and not just with the Lancet (note that this article came out last year before all this recent information blew up)...

                Journals censor lab origin theory for SARS-CoV-2


                (also note that Kristian Andersen I believe is the guy in one of the emails suggesting to Fauci the possibility the virus was engineered)

                The main evidence for zoonotic origin for the virus is an article published in the journal Nature Medicine, titled "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2". The authors, Kristian Andersen and colleagues, dismissed out of hand the possibility of a lab origin and human manipulation of the virus, on the claimed basis that any lab-generated virus would have been designed differently, based on their computer predictions.

                Commenting on the paper, the virologist Dr Jonathan Latham described the evidence presented for a zoonotic origin as "extremely weak".

                Another scientist unconvinced by Andersen and his colleagues' argument was molecular geneticist Dr Michael Antoniou, who sent a letter to Nature Medicine explaining that "although the authors may indeed be correct in how they perceive SARS-CoV-2 to have arisen, the data they present does not exclude the possibility" that it was developed in a laboratory-based process.

                Dr Antoniou even described a well known way in which the virus could have been created, involving genetic engineering and selection. But Nature Medicine refused to publish his letter. It was left to the journalist Paolo Barnard to give Dr Antoniou a forum for his views on Italian TV.
                Scientist "pissed off" at Nature


                Dr Antoniou is not the only scientist who has come up against Nature's reluctance to publish any argument for the possibility of a lab origin. A scientist who identifies himself only as Henri had a similar experience, as he recounted on the website of the scientist (likely a Chinese native) who blogs anonymously as "NerdHasPower", seemingly concealing his identity in order to protect himself from possible retribution by the Chinese authorities.

                "NerdHasPower" had argued cogently not only that the virus is a genetically engineered lab creation but that evidence for its natural origin was fabricated. Henri, a proponent of the zoonosis theory, doesn't agree with Nerd's conclusions. But with admirable scientific objectivity, he wrote, "Whilst I am on the side of 'not lab made' I am also on the side of 'Nature magazine has a responsibility to further investigate possible scientific fraud'."

                No doubt because Nature Medicine doesn't accept letters to the editor, Henri wrote to its parent journal Nature, acting as an intermediary for NerdHasPower's arguments, which Nerd could not do himself due to his need to protect his anonymity.

                In due course Henri reported back, "The Letter to Nature was rejected outright. I appealed. The appeal failed. I now intend to take the matter up with the Editor-in-Chief." Two days later he wrote, "Radio silence from the Editor-in-Chief and Nature. Consequently, I am pissed off."
                "SARS-CoV-2 could come from a lab"


                Another scientist who believes that SARS-CoV-2 could have come from a lab is the independent consultant and materials scientist Dr Billy Zhang. Dr Zhang wrote a detailed critique of "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2" and sent it to Nature Correspondence – which refused to publish it, as Dr Zhang told GMWatch. So Dr Zhang published the article on his LinkedIn site, under the title, "SARS-CoV-2 could come from a lab – a critique of 'The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2' published in Nature Medicine".

                In the article, Dr Zhang pointed out that neither Andersen and colleagues' analyses nor the 30 published or preprint articles that the authors reviewed for their paper could rule out the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered in a lab or that it is a derivative strain of such a lab-manipulated virus.

                He added that a team of researchers from the WIV and the University of North Carolina in the US had as long ago as 2015 published a paper in Nature Medicine detailing how they "created in the lab a hybrid pathogenic virus that was highly infectious to humans".

                Yet, Dr Zhang wrote, this smoking gun of a paper was "conspicuously missing from the 30 references" cited by Andersen et al in their 2020 Nature Medicine article. That's in spite of the evidence it offers that SARS-CoV-2 could have been engineered – and that it could have been engineered in the WIV lab in particular.
                Nature blocks Twitter discussion of manmade origin


                Another example of the extent to which Nature is not tolerating any questioning of the official zoonotic origin narrative unfolded on Twitter.

                Nature’s Twitter account tweeted about how visualising SARS-CoV-2 proteins to understand their structures could help stop the pandemic, by disarming them with drugs. When someone replied that another way would be to "stop the scientists making dangerous chimeric viruses", Nature blocked their account. When someone else said they had been blocked too, a molecular geneticist quipped, "This is getting to be like street cred."
                Papers arguing for lab origin languish in pre-print


                Meanwhile several scientific papers putting forward the possibility of a lab origin and/or genetic engineering in the virus's history have languished on pre-print websites for some time. Pre-print websites give scientists a chance to air their findings publicly and obtain feedback from peers prior to approaching a journal. In some cases, journals will proactively approach the authors and offer to put forward the paper for peer review with a view to publishing it.

                These papers include a study led by Dr Alina Chan of the Broad Institute, MIT, USA. Dr Chan and colleagues explain that SARS-CoV-2, even at very early stages of its detection in humans, was already highly adapted for human infectivity. In this respect it is different from the earlier SARS virus, SARS-CoV (sometimes now called SARS-CoV-1), which caused a human epidemic in 2003. The earlier SARS-CoV was initially far less well adapted to infecting humans and had to acquire mutations gained though many rounds of infectious cycles to reach peak infectivity. This type of progressive adaptation (mutation and selection) is exactly what is expected to happen in animal-to-human virus disease transmission. The fact that there is no evidence as yet for SARS-COV-2 having adapted in this way casts doubt on the zoonosis theory of the virus’s origin. Dr Chan and colleagues conclude that the possibility of a lab escape "should be considered regardless of how likely or unlikely".

                Another study, led by Dr Nikolai Petrovsky at Flinders University in Australia, similarly concludes, "Overall, the data indicates that SARS-CoV-2 is uniquely adapted to infect humans, raising questions as to whether it arose in nature by a rare chance event or whether its origins lie elsewhere." The authors conclude that the possibility cannot be excluded that "SARS-CoV-2 was created by a recombination event that occurred inadvertently or consciously in a laboratory handling coronaviruses, with the new virus then accidentally released into the local human population".

                Yet another paper available only in pre-print form, authored by Rossana Segreto of the University of Innsbruck, is baldly titled, "Is considering a genetic manipulation origin for SARS-CoV-2 a conspiracy theory that must be censored?"

                Segreto argues, "Genetic manipulation of SARS-CoV-2 may have been carried out in any laboratory in the world with access to the backbone sequence and the necessary equipment. New technologies based on synthetic genetics platforms even allow the reconstruction of viruses based on their genomic sequence, without the need of a natural isolate [of the virus]."

                However, she adds, "Unfortunately, theories that consider a possible artificial origin for SARS-CoV-2 are censored by international scientific journals as they seem to support conspiracy theories."

                Of course, it's possible that these papers are currently in the process of being published by journals. But we're not holding our breath. The fact that so much scientific evidence of lab origin and genetic engineering is being withheld from the peer-reviewed literature will doubtless contribute to the frequently claimed scientific "consensus" that the virus has a natural origin. But in reality, there is no consensus – just censorship of scientists who support a lab origin theory.
                Last edited by seanD; 06-05-2021, 02:25 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by seanD View Post
                  Btw, the censorship was deeply rooted in the scientific community and not just with the Lancet (note that this article came out last year before all this recent information blew up)...

                  Journals censor lab origin theory for SARS-CoV-2


                  (also note that Kristian Andersen I believe is the guy in one of the emails suggesting to Fauci the possibility the virus was engineered)
                  good stuff !
                  Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    I guess we could therefore make the same argument with collecting matchbooks or stamps
                    I suppose, but unlike "science", I've never had someone appeal to stamp collecting in an attempt to win a political debate, or use it to decide what freedoms I should be allowed to exercise.
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                      There are different ways to "tweak" it - one is to directly manipulate it using something like CRISPR to edit the genes. But another way is to basically use selective breeding, by keep exposing it to human tissue and keeping the most promising mutations until it mutates into a form that can infect humans. That way would not show any signs of manipulation. It would be "natural" but still tweaked to infect humans.
                      I wouldn’t put it past them to tweak a virus in a lab.
                      A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
                      George Bernard Shaw

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        One way china influences the scientific community.

                        Over 500 U.S. Scientists Under Investigation for Being Compromised by China

                        More than 500 U.S. scientists are under investigation for being compromised by China and other foreign countries, according to a recent hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

                        The hearing was focused on protecting the U.S.'s biomedical research from foreign entities such as China. While delivering opening remarks, Senator Patty Murray, chair of the committee, spoke about a recent report from the National Institutes of Health and conflicts of interests among 507 NIH grant recipients.
                        "It's important that researchers with foreign affiliations and potential conflicts of interest—for example, participation in foreign talent programs or commitments to file patents in, or move laboratories to, foreign nations—fully disclose those issues when applying for federal grants," Murray said.

                        "The latest report from the National Institutes of Health on undisclosed conflicts of interest found cause for concern with only 507 grant recipients—compared to over 30,000 total grantees in 2020," she added.

                        Murray also said that the NIH "has made progress in implementing policies and procedures to raise awareness of, prevent and address undue foreign influence among the biomedical research community." But she noted that "investigations from the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of the Inspector General, the department's Office of National Security and the Government Accountability Office make clear there is more NIH can be doing here."

                        Michael Lauer, deputy director for extramural research at the NIH, told the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee that as of April 2021 the agency has contacted over 90 institutions "regarding concerns involving over 200 scientists."

                        "The individuals violating laws and policies represent a small proportion of scientists working in and with U.S. institutions. We must ensure that our responses to this issue do not create a hostile environment for colleagues who are deeply dedicated to advancing human health through scientific inquiry," Lauer said. "We cannot afford to reject brilliant minds working honestly and collaboratively to provide hope and healing to millions around the world."

                        In an email sent to Newsweek, the NIH Office of Extramural Research confirmed that the "NIH has concerns regarding over 500 scientists at research institutions supported by NIH grants, and has contacted over 90 institutions regarding over 200 of these scientists."

                        Senator Richard Burr, a ranking member of the committee, said during his opening statement that "the government of the People's Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party are the most sophisticated perpetrators, but other foreign actors are also engaged in efforts to subvert our biomedical research."

                        I find it interesting that Patty Murray indicates "only" 507 cases this year compared to 30k last year (and these are just the ones that receive NIH grants apparently), but does that mean their measures are really working, or that the recipients are just getting better at avoiding detection? And I mean, at this point, who knows how much influence china has at the very top, perhaps with those in NIH leadership positions. Fauci was head honcho of a federal scientific department and he admitted working with the chinese at the Wuhan lab.

                        Comment

                        Related Threads

                        Collapse

                        Topics Statistics Last Post
                        Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                        16 responses
                        159 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post One Bad Pig  
                        Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                        53 responses
                        400 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post Mountain Man  
                        Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                        25 responses
                        114 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post rogue06
                        by rogue06
                         
                        Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                        33 responses
                        198 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post Roy
                        by Roy
                         
                        Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                        84 responses
                        373 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post JimL
                        by JimL
                         
                        Working...
                        X