They Lied...Go Figure...COVID

[gatomontes99]

It is man made

It did come from WIV

Quote

https://oversight.house.gov/release/final-report-covid-select-concludes-2-year-investigation-issues-500-page-final-report-on-lessons-learned-and-the-path-forward/

COVID-19 ORIGIN: COVID-19 most likely emerged from a laboratory in Wuhan, China. The FIVE strongest arguments in favor of the “lab leak” theory include:

    The virus possesses a biological characteristic that is not found in nature.
    Data shows that all COVID-19 cases stem from a single introduction into humans. This runs contrary to previous pandemics where there were multiple spillover events.
    Wuhan is home to China’s foremost SARS research lab, which has a history of conducting gain-of-function research at inadequate biosafety levels.
    Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) researchers were sick with a COVID-like virus in the fall of 2019, months before COVID-19 was discovered at the wet market.
    By nearly all measures of science, if there was evidence of a natural origin it would have already surfaced

And this is how the press treated the truth:

Quote

It remains unknown how the virus that causes COVID-19 originated, but many scientists think a natural spillover is most likely. Online posts have cited unnamed sources to claim that scientists in Wuhan, China, were the first to get sick with COVID-19. But U.S. intelligence says the researchers’ symptoms were non-specific or inconsistent with COVID-19, and the information has no bearing on the origin of the pandemic.

https://www.factcheck.org/2023/06/scicheck-no-bombshell-on-covid-19-origins-u-s-intelligence-rebuts-claims-about-sick-lab-workers/

 

Quote

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/17/business/media/coronavirus-tom-cotton-china.html

Senator Tom Cotton Repeats Fringe Theory of Coronavirus Origins

Scientists have dismissed suggestions that the Chinese government was behind the outbreak, but it’s the kind of tale that gains traction among those who see China as a threat.

Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas in Washington last month. On Sunday, he accused China of “duplicity and dishonesty.” Credit...Anna Moneymaker/The New York Times
Alexandra Stevenson
 

 

Who was right all along? DJT.

[robosmith]

You'll never get "the truth" out of the clown show that is the RepubliCON House.

All they'll tell you is rumors based on political advantage.

You can tell because there is NO SCIENCE nor SCIENTIFIC EXPERTS cited in the "report."

JUST a rehash of old conspiracy theories which the OP has fallen for AGAIN. 🤮

[gatomontes99]

5 hours ago, robosmith said:

You'll never get "the truth" out of the clown show that is the RepubliCON House.

All they'll tell you is rumors based on political advantage.

You can tell because there is NO SCIENCE nor SCIENTIFIC EXPERTS cited in the "report."

JUST a rehash of old conspiracy theories which the OP has fallen for AGAIN. 🤮

There are literally 40 doctors cited in the preface as witnesses to the committee. Why do you lie when you are so easily debunked?

[Nationalist]

6 hours ago, robosmith said:

You'll never get "the truth" out of the clown show that is the RepubliCON House.

All they'll tell you is rumors based on political advantage.

You can tell because there is NO SCIENCE nor SCIENTIFIC EXPERTS cited in the "report."

JUST a rehash of old conspiracy theories which the OP has fallen for AGAIN. 🤮

As @gatomontes99 points out, the article cites quite a number of "SCIENTIFIC EXPERTS". But the real question here is, 'Why would you refuse the obvious?'

The origin of The Rona is not a political subject. All of humanity is concerned and should be allowed to know how this happened. Why would you even want to defend and protect those who sold this "natural spillover" bullsh1t, when it's so obviously...bullsh1t?

I mean...assuming you honestly bought this bullsh1t originally...now you see it was all a lie. A cover-up. Considering that you argued consistently for lockdowns, vaxxing, and all the other abusive crap that went on, why aren't you p1ssed right off that the very origin story you bought into, was all bullsh1t?

I really want to know robo. What drives you to try to make this tragedy, a political issue?

[Black Dog]

4 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

There are literally 40 doctors cited in the preface as witnesses to the committee. Why do you lie when you are so easily debunked?

Funny how you apes will believe scientists and doctors when they tell you what you want to hear.

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

As @gatomontes99 points out, the article cites quite a number of "SCIENTIFIC EXPERTS". But the real question here is, 'Why would you refuse the obvious?'

Not all of whom believe the lab leak bullshit.

Edited December 3, 2024 by Black Dog

[gatomontes99]

2 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Funny how you apes will believe scientists and doctors when they tell you what you want to hear.

Not all of whom believe the lab leak bullshit.

 

Funny how the doctors and scientists we believe aren't playing politics. I notice you couldn't refute the data so you attacked me. Care to address the data or are you just interested in letting your emotions rule?

[Legato]

12 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Funny how you apes will believe scientists and doctors when they tell you what you want to hear.

Not all of whom believe the lab leak bullshit.

 

I suppose you do know the virus got out in a box of Kibble.

[Black Dog]

4 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Funny how the doctors and scientists we believe aren't playing politics.

LMAO tell me another one.

Quote

I notice you couldn't refute the data so you attacked me. Care to address the data or are you just interested in letting your emotions rule?

There's no data or direct evidence supporting the lab leak theory, it's the same conjecture we've heard over and over again. The report here literally rehashes Alina Chan's incredibly flawed five points.

[User]

37 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

There's no data or direct evidence supporting the lab leak theory, it's the same conjecture we've heard over and over again. The report here literally rehashes Alina Chan's incredibly flawed five points.

You guys are your own worst enemies. I honestly do not know if it is just ignorance this time or your usual dishonesty. 

 

[gatomontes99]

52 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

LMAO tell me another one.

There's no data or direct evidence supporting the lab leak theory, it's the same conjecture we've heard over and over again. The report here literally rehashes Alina Chan's incredibly flawed five points.

There are 502 pages of it supported with expert witnesses and data. But sure, you do you.

Edited December 3, 2024 by gatomontes99

[Black Dog]

6 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

There are 502 pages of it supported with expert witnesses and data. But sure, you do you.

Have you actually read the report? The lab leak section is right at the start and is quite short, just four pages long.

To me the most compelling evidence against the lab leak and for zoonotic spillover is the fact that all the early cases of SARS-CoV-2 were clustered around the wet market 10 miles from the WIV lab. That's based on data, not conjecture.

Edited December 3, 2024 by Black Dog

[Black Dog]

19 minutes ago, User said:

You guys are your own worst enemies. I honestly do not know if it is just ignorance this time or your usual dishonesty. 

Thanks for weighing in with nothing as usual.

[User]

2 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Thanks for weighing in with nothing as usual.

Why do you care? 

When I do, you just run away or turn it into a back-and-forth insult fest to obfuscate. 

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Not all of whom believe the lab leak bullshit.

None of whom buy that stupid natural spillover crap.

[Black Dog]

6 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

None of whom buy that stupid natural spillover crap.

This just shows you haven't read the report either. Maybe they'll put out a board book version just for you.

[Hodad]

17 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

It is man made

It did come from WIV

And this is how the press treated the truth:

 

 

Who was right all along? DJT.

Jeebus, man, even the political report you are citing does NOT draw the man-made or lab-leak conclusion. You farking quoted their conclusion of "most likely" and still managed to misrepresent it as conclusive. Why are you lying? What do you have to gain from lying in such obvious ways?

At any rate, regardless of what you or the Republican house (itself a punchline) think, the majority of scientists (by a large margin) still think that the evidence shows a natural origin, including compelling research from 2024.

[gatomontes99]

15 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Jeebus, man, even the political report you are citing does NOT draw the man-made or lab-leak conclusion. You farking quoted their conclusion of "most likely" and still managed to misrepresent it as conclusive. Why are you lying? What do you have to gain from lying in such obvious ways?

At any rate, regardless of what you or the Republican house (itself a punchline) think, the majority of scientists (by a large margin) still think that the evidence shows a natural origin, including compelling research from 2024.

It doesnt? So what does it mean when the report says it contains characteristics not found in nature? Does that mean it's natural?

Edited December 3, 2024 by gatomontes99

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Funny how you apes will believe scientists and doctors when they tell you what you want to hear.

We believe scientists and doctors when they're not trying to p1ss in our faces and telling us it's raining. I can only guess why you like that kind of thing. 

Whats really funny is how many times you believed their blatant BS, Black Dummy. 

Is there anything that they could possibly say to you that's so blatantly false and stupid that you wouldn't believe them?

FYI that was a rhetorical question, dummy. Just bang on the ceiling and ask your mom what rhetorical means. 

[User]

12 minutes ago, Hodad said:

At any rate, regardless of what you or the Republican house (itself a punchline) think, the majority of scientists (by a large margin) still think that the evidence shows a natural origin, including compelling research from 2024.

You sit here talking about misrepresentation and then play this same dumb game you always play, trying to claim a majority of scientists think X. 

What exact scientists? How did you poll them? You certainly are not talking about every single scientist. You are also playing the argument from popularity and authority logical fallacy game all in one. 

Science is not a popularity contest of opinions from experts. 

[Nationalist]

36 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

This just shows you haven't read the report either. Maybe they'll put out a board book version just for you.

So...that's your position and you're sticking to it eh? Stupid you. Whatever happened to "believe the science"?

I've been through the document's relevant section on the origins and the following sticks out like a soar thumb:

Quote

Dr. Robert Redfield (March 8, 2023)
From the earliest days of the pandemic, my view was that both theories about the origin of COVID-19 needed to be aggressively and thoroughly examined. Based on my initial analysis of the data, I came to believe—and still believe today—that it indicates COVID-19 infections more likely were the result of an accidental lab leak than the result of a natural spillover event. This conclusion is based primarily on the biology of the virus itself, including its rapid high infectivity for human-to-human transmission which would then predict rapid evolution of new variants, as well as a number of other important factors to include the unusual actions in and around Wuhan in the fall of 2019…12
One month later in April 2023, Mr. Ratcliffe testified:
The Honorable John Ratcliffe (April 18, 2023)
First, let me state the bottom-line up front. My informed assessment as a person with as much access as anyone to our government’s intelligence during the initial year of the pandemic has been and continues to be that a lab leak is the only explanation credibly supported by our intelligence, by science, and by commonsense. From a view inside the IC, if our intelligence and evidence supporting a lab leak theory was placed side-by-side with our intelligence and evidence pointing to a natural origins or
spillover theory, the lab leak side of the ledger would be long, convincing,
even overwhelming, while the spillover side would be nearly empty and
tenuous.

and this:

Quote

In January 2024, Mr. Wade voiced his increasing support for a lab incident origin.14 Mr.
Wade astutely noted that “SARS2 possesses a furin cleavage site, found in none of the other 871
known members of its viral family, so it cannot have gained such a site through the ordinary
evolutionary swaps of genetic material within a family.”15 With the natural evolution of a furin
cleavage site being nonexistent, Mr. Wade further noted that EcoHealth and the WIV’s DEFUSE
proposal, which was rejected by DARPA, sought to do what nature had not been ever known to
do—insert a furin cleavage site into a SARS2 virus.16 It is, therefore, more than just a
coincidence that COVID-19 emerged from the city with a lab preparing to conduct this research
under cost-effective yet risky BSL-2 protocols.

ya...stupid you.

[Deluge]

13 hours ago, robosmith said:

You'll never get "the truth" out of the clown show that is the RepubliCON House.

All they'll tell you is rumors based on political advantage.

You can tell because there is NO SCIENCE nor SCIENTIFIC EXPERTS cited in the "report."

JUST a rehash of old conspiracy theories which the OP has fallen for AGAIN. 🤮

robowoke thinks left-wing activism is science. lol

Edited December 3, 2024 by Deluge

[Nationalist]

41 minutes ago, Deluge said:

robowoke thinks left-wing activism is science. lol

robowoke thinks? Oh come on...

[Hodad]

50 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

It doesnt? So what does it mean when the report says it contains characteristics not found in nature? Does that mean it's natural?

No, it doesn't. Let me re-quote it for you: "COVID-19 most likely emerged from a laboratory in Wuhan, China."

Their "most likely" isn't your "conclusive." And in the scientific community it's not even viewed as the most likely. 

If you are looking to a political document for scientific rigor you are looking in the wrong place. Scientists continue to find compelling evidence of natural origin, and no evidence to really support the lab leak outside of speculation. 

 

 

[User]

1 minute ago, Hodad said:

Their "most likely" isn't your "conclusive." And in the scientific community it's not even viewed as the most likely. 

LOL, you are here arguing about "most likely" and then provide a source to a survey that "suggests"

Its comical that I already knew this was the source you were going to use. 

This is not all scientists, hell, it is not even all virologists or epidemiologists, it was a selective survey sent to chosen people in the field with a 10% response. 

This is why you hide from me. 

 

[Nationalist]

7 minutes ago, User said:

LOL, you are here arguing about "most likely" and then provide a source to a survey that "suggests"

Its comical that I already knew this was the source you were going to use. 

This is not all scientists, hell, it is not even all virologists or epidemiologists, it was a selective survey sent to chosen people in the field with a 10% response. 

This is why you hide from me. 

 

Dude...ya can't fix stupid.