Forum
»
Three WIV scientists named as patient(s) zero for Covid-19
Three WIV scientists named as patient(s) zero for Covid-19
06-23-2023, 10:56 PM
-
#121
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
Nonsense as usual. Candidate species have been proposed. If you read the papers, there is no definitive claim for a single species. And there has been no “thorough debunking”. But I’m sure you read a post about a paper you didn’t understand that said otherwiseThe evidence is so overwhelming that the natural origins crew had to push pangolins, oh wait...now it's raccoon dogs.
Oh wait...
Both have been thoroughly debunked.
Wasn't it Reliance012's evolutionary biology professor, Mike Worobey, who has been pushing the wet market theory and raccoon dogs?
Oh wait....
It was!!!
Oh wait...
Both have been thoroughly debunked.
Wasn't it Reliance012's evolutionary biology professor, Mike Worobey, who has been pushing the wet market theory and raccoon dogs?
Oh wait....
It was!!!
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
06-23-2023, 10:58 PM
-
#122
- gwg77
- Join Date: Oct 2017
- Location: United States
- Posts: 20,548
- Subscribers: 19
- Rep Power: 1102238
-
-
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
It’s the many independent lines of evidence all pointing in the same direction.
- Huanan Seafood Market epicenter
- detailed photographic evidence of live mammals being sold at the market (one of four markets with evidence of selling mammals in a city of 11 million people).
- genetic evidence implicating the virus and animals at the market at the same time, including species susceptible to coronaviruses
- positive virus samples in the market associated with mammalian vendors
- two spillover events based on phylogenetics (very damning evidence)
- both early lineages (A and B) found in early sampling, no intermediate haplotypes, suggesting animal to animal transmission
- characteristics of natural recombination in the viral genome (furin cleavage site is not genetically engineered)
- discovery of very closely related existing viruses, including some with spike proteins that bind HACE2 as good or better than sarscov2
- serological evidence that communities living in close proximity to bats are frequently infected with related coronaviruses
- no existing virus backbone in any database that could’ve been used
-about a dozen other things
- Huanan Seafood Market epicenter
- detailed photographic evidence of live mammals being sold at the market (one of four markets with evidence of selling mammals in a city of 11 million people).
- genetic evidence implicating the virus and animals at the market at the same time, including species susceptible to coronaviruses
- positive virus samples in the market associated with mammalian vendors
- two spillover events based on phylogenetics (very damning evidence)
- both early lineages (A and B) found in early sampling, no intermediate haplotypes, suggesting animal to animal transmission
- characteristics of natural recombination in the viral genome (furin cleavage site is not genetically engineered)
- discovery of very closely related existing viruses, including some with spike proteins that bind HACE2 as good or better than sarscov2
- serological evidence that communities living in close proximity to bats are frequently infected with related coronaviruses
- no existing virus backbone in any database that could’ve been used
-about a dozen other things
06-23-2023, 11:14 PM
-
#123
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
No ****. The fact that it doesn’t demonstrate infection was made explicitly clear in the first study (Bloom’s paper was a follow up). I didn’t say infected. The point is, as I said:genetic evidence implicating the virus and animals at the market at the same time, including species susceptible to coronaviruses
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
06-23-2023, 11:24 PM
-
#124
- gwg77
- Join Date: Oct 2017
- Location: United States
- Posts: 20,548
- Subscribers: 19
- Rep Power: 1102238
-
-
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
That's cool bro, but Worobey and Andersen ran to the NY Times and The Atlantic to shill their paper and raccoon dogs before it was even published.No ****. The fact that it doesn’t demonstrate infection was made explicitly clear in the first study (Bloom’s paper was a follow up). I didn’t say infected. The point is, as I said:
genetic evidence implicating the virus and animals at the market at the same time, including species susceptible to coronaviruses
genetic evidence implicating the virus and animals at the market at the same time, including species susceptible to coronaviruses
And Bloom's paper was not a follow up, he was directly questioning all the news report about raccoon dogs that stemmed from Worobey's paper.
06-23-2023, 11:39 PM
-
#125
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
Here’s the first author of the first paper that Bloom re analyzed. Again, the point made clear is that susceptible animal species, including raccoon dogs, were present at the market at the same time as the virusThat's cool bro, but Worobey and Andersen ran to the NY Times and The Atlantic to shill their paper and raccoon dogs before it was even published.
And Bloom's paper was not a follow up, he was directly questioning all the news report about raccoon dogs that stemmed from Worobey's paper.
And Bloom's paper was not a follow up, he was directly questioning all the news report about raccoon dogs that stemmed from Worobey's paper.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...849542657.html
“After, the data came out: the exact right species were in the exact spot they were predicted to be, the very center of all known epidemiological links within the city, and the hot spot within the market. And the 2 viral lineages found nearby.”
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
06-23-2023, 11:47 PM
-
#126
- gwg77
- Join Date: Oct 2017
- Location: United States
- Posts: 20,548
- Subscribers: 19
- Rep Power: 1102238
-
-
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
But no infected animal species.Here’s the first author of the first paper that Bloom re analyzed. Again, the point made clear is that susceptible animal species, including raccoon dogs, were present at the market at the same time as the virus
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...849542657.html
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...849542657.html
Again:
“It is just very hard to take data collected that far downstream of initial entry into humans and to convincingly support any precise scenario for how the virus got into humans,” he said in an interview.
“Even if you had animal-to-human transmission in the market in December, by the time you collected samples in January, it could have been easily spreading back from humans to animals,” added Sergei Pond, a computational virologist at Temple University who was not involved in Bloom’s research.
I mean you wanna talk about falling for a narrative when you have Worobey and Andersen running to the media so they can push this narrative as if there was infected raccoon dogs, when there was not.“Even if you had animal-to-human transmission in the market in December, by the time you collected samples in January, it could have been easily spreading back from humans to animals,” added Sergei Pond, a computational virologist at Temple University who was not involved in Bloom’s research.
06-23-2023, 11:55 PM
-
#127
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
Worobey and Andersen never claimed evidence of infected species. They made proclamations similar to what I’ve posted several times now:But no infected animal species.
Again:
I mean you wanna talk about falling for a narrative when you have Worobey and Andersen running to the media so they can push this narrative as if there was infected raccoon dogs, when there was not.
Again:
I mean you wanna talk about falling for a narrative when you have Worobey and Andersen running to the media so they can push this narrative as if there was infected raccoon dogs, when there was not.
Virus. Susceptible host species. Same place. Same time. Early samples.
So your first shot at that long list of evidence was a swing and a miss.
Now I’d like you to explain the two lineages. But try it in your own words. Anyone can google low quality responses they don’t understand to dismiss evidence. It’ll be good a learning exercise for you.
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
06-24-2023, 12:08 AM
-
#128
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
The media actually ran to them broseph.But no infected animal species.
Again:
I mean you wanna talk about falling for a narrative when you have Worobey and Andersen running to the media so they can push this narrative as if there was infected raccoon dogs, when there was not.
Again:
I mean you wanna talk about falling for a narrative when you have Worobey and Andersen running to the media so they can push this narrative as if there was infected raccoon dogs, when there was not.
06-24-2023, 12:09 AM
-
#129
- gwg77
- Join Date: Oct 2017
- Location: United States
- Posts: 20,548
- Subscribers: 19
- Rep Power: 1102238
-
-
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
Absolutely not.Worobey and Andersen never claimed evidence of infected species. They made proclamations similar to what I’ve posted several times now:
Virus. Susceptible host species. Same place. Same time. Early samples.
So your first shot at that long list of evidence was a swing and a miss.
Now I’d like you to explain the two lineages. But try it in your own words. Anyone can google low quality responses they don’t understand to dismiss evidence. It’ll be good a learning exercise for you.
Virus. Susceptible host species. Same place. Same time. Early samples.
So your first shot at that long list of evidence was a swing and a miss.
Now I’d like you to explain the two lineages. But try it in your own words. Anyone can google low quality responses they don’t understand to dismiss evidence. It’ll be good a learning exercise for you.
You had Angela Rasmussen, who worked on the paper too say things like this to The Atlantic:
Angela Rasmussen, a virologist involved in the research, told me, “This is a really strong indication that animals at the market were infected. There’s really no other explanation that makes any sense.”
They were really trying to sell infected raccoon dogs to the media.The new analysis, led by Kristian Andersen, Edward Holmes, and Michael Worobey—three prominent researchers who have been looking into the virus’s roots—shows that that may not be the case. Within about half a day of downloading the data from GISAID, the trio and their collaborators discovered that several market samples that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were also coming back chock-full of animal genetic material—much of which was a match for the common raccoon dog, a small animal related to foxes that has a raccoon-like face. Because of how the samples were gathered, and because viruses can’t persist by themselves in the environment,the scientists think that their findings could indicate the presence of a coronavirus-infected raccoon dog in the spots where the swabs were taken. Unlike many of the other points of discussion that have been volleyed about in the origins debate, the genetic data are “tangible,”Alex Crits-Christoph, a computational biologist and one of the scientists who worked on the new analysis, told me. “And this is the species that everyone has been talking about.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/...b-leak/673390/
06-24-2023, 12:13 AM
-
#130
06-24-2023, 12:20 AM
-
#131
- gwg77
- Join Date: Oct 2017
- Location: United States
- Posts: 20,548
- Subscribers: 19
- Rep Power: 1102238
-
-
Originally Posted By Putinist⏩
The scientists who wrote the wet market paper, had no evidence of infected raccoon dogs. Yet they ran to the media and acted as if they were almost certain that raccoon dogs were infected.How are you ruling out infected raccoon dogs gwg77? You're so sure thst entire line of investigation is wrong. Why?
That is why their paper became a laughing stock on social media, especially when Bloom came out with his paper refuting the claims they were trying to make to the media.
From The Atlantic
March 16, 2023:
On May 24, 2023, Katherine J. Wu had to walk it all back:
06-24-2023, 12:21 AM
-
#132
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
Katherine Wu just writes articles on science bro. She's not a researcher.The scientists who wrote the wet market paper, had no evidence of infected raccoon dogs. Yet they ran to the media and acted as if they were almost certain that raccoon dogs were infected.
That is why their paper became a laughing stock on social media, especially when Bloom came out with his paper refuting the claims they were trying to make to the media.
From The Atlantic
March 16, 2023:
On May 24, 2023, Katherine J. Wu had to walk it all back:
That is why their paper became a laughing stock on social media, especially when Bloom came out with his paper refuting the claims they were trying to make to the media.
From The Atlantic
March 16, 2023:
On May 24, 2023, Katherine J. Wu had to walk it all back:
Both titles are consistent with each other. (The strongest evidence was still weak.) Importantly, we have not yet ruled out raccoon dogs...
You were the one who told the fib, technically.
06-24-2023, 12:22 AM
-
#133
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
So no direct quotes from the Worobey or Andersen claiming the sequencing data demonstrates an infected animal host? Your accusation was false.Absolutely not.
You had Angela Rasmussen, who worked on the paper too say things like this to The Atlantic:
They were really trying to sell infected raccoon dogs to the media.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/...b-leak/673390/
You had Angela Rasmussen, who worked on the paper too say things like this to The Atlantic:
They were really trying to sell infected raccoon dogs to the media.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/...b-leak/673390/
And yes I’ve noticed your subtle attempt at steering away from the subject. Let me bring you back to task.
I provided a list of evidence
You tried to pick what you thought was low hanging fruit and misconstrued what I said
Your argument turned into attacking the authors for overstating evidence
You haven’t attempted to argue the evidence itself (which I agree entirely is not a smoking gun). But it is consistent with a market origin and what was predicted. It is harder to explain via lab leak.
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
06-24-2023, 12:27 AM
-
#134
We can say the evidence overwhelmingly points to a natural origin, while still being unclear as to the details.
More importantly, what evidence is there for a lab leak beyond a few strange circumstances? There is really no smoking gun there either.
Your strategy seems to be to dismiss the evidence and then promote your pet idea, which has far less evidence...
More importantly, what evidence is there for a lab leak beyond a few strange circumstances? There is really no smoking gun there either.
Your strategy seems to be to dismiss the evidence and then promote your pet idea, which has far less evidence...
06-24-2023, 12:31 AM
-
#135
- gwg77
- Join Date: Oct 2017
- Location: United States
- Posts: 20,548
- Subscribers: 19
- Rep Power: 1102238
-
-
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
Don't get mad at me because they ran to the media and tried to shill infected raccoon dogs with no evidence. That's exactly what they did.So no direct quotes from the Worobey or Andersen claiming the sequencing data demonstrates an infected animal host? Your accusation was false.
And yes I’ve noticed your subtle attempt at steering away from the subject. Let me bring you back to task.
I provided a list of evidence
You tried to pick what you thought was low hanging fruit and misconstrued what I said
Your argument turned into attacking the authors for overstating evidence
You haven’t attempted to argue the evidence itself (which I agree entirely is not a smoking gun). But it is consistent with a market origin and what was predicted. It is harder to explain via lab leak.
And yes I’ve noticed your subtle attempt at steering away from the subject. Let me bring you back to task.
I provided a list of evidence
You tried to pick what you thought was low hanging fruit and misconstrued what I said
Your argument turned into attacking the authors for overstating evidence
You haven’t attempted to argue the evidence itself (which I agree entirely is not a smoking gun). But it is consistent with a market origin and what was predicted. It is harder to explain via lab leak.
And I don't have to argue the evidence, because we both know it's not a smoking gun. They overhyped their paper to the media. End of story.
06-24-2023, 12:34 AM
-
#136
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
-
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2006
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,385
- Rep Power: 316746
-
-
06-24-2023, 12:36 AM
-
#137
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
Again, the media ran to them. Even your headline you linked was misinterpreted by you. "Strongest" does not mean "strong".Don't get mad at me because they ran to the media and tried to shill infected raccoon dogs with no evidence. That's exactly what they did.
And I don't have to argue the evidence, because we both know it's not a smoking gun. They overhyped their paper to the media. End of story.
And I don't have to argue the evidence, because we both know it's not a smoking gun. They overhyped their paper to the media. End of story.
And the Rethuglicans and shills in our govt never overhyped the evidence of the lab leak? LOL that is the most overhyped thing ever. Our own intel guys said the evidence was of low quality. Low quality trust me bros vs the giant list Reliance posted. Hmm.
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
It’s the many independent lines of evidence all pointing in the same direction.
- Huanan Seafood Market epicenter
- detailed photographic evidence of live mammals being sold at the market (one of four markets with evidence of selling mammals in a city of 11 million people).
- genetic evidence implicating the virus and animals at the market at the same time, including species susceptible to coronaviruses
- positive virus samples in the market associated with mammalian vendors
- two spillover events based on phylogenetics (very damning evidence)
- both early lineages (A and B) found in early sampling, no intermediate haplotypes, suggesting animal to animal transmission
- characteristics of natural recombination in the viral genome (furin cleavage site is not genetically engineered)
- discovery of very closely related existing viruses, including some with spike proteins that bind HACE2 as good or better than sarscov2
- serological evidence that communities living in close proximity to bats are frequently infected with related coronaviruses
- no existing virus backbone in any database that could’ve been used
-about a dozen other things
- Huanan Seafood Market epicenter
- detailed photographic evidence of live mammals being sold at the market (one of four markets with evidence of selling mammals in a city of 11 million people).
- genetic evidence implicating the virus and animals at the market at the same time, including species susceptible to coronaviruses
- positive virus samples in the market associated with mammalian vendors
- two spillover events based on phylogenetics (very damning evidence)
- both early lineages (A and B) found in early sampling, no intermediate haplotypes, suggesting animal to animal transmission
- characteristics of natural recombination in the viral genome (furin cleavage site is not genetically engineered)
- discovery of very closely related existing viruses, including some with spike proteins that bind HACE2 as good or better than sarscov2
- serological evidence that communities living in close proximity to bats are frequently infected with related coronaviruses
- no existing virus backbone in any database that could’ve been used
-about a dozen other things
06-24-2023, 12:36 AM
-
#138
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
Logic fail. Because evidence wasn’t provided for infected raccoon dogs, therefore they can ruled out.The scientists who wrote the wet market paper, had no evidence of infected raccoon dogs. Yet they ran to the media and acted as if they were almost certain that raccoon dogs were infected.
That is why their paper became a laughing stock on social media, especially when Bloom came out with his paper refuting the claims they were trying to make to the media.
From The Atlantic
March 16, 2023:
On May 24, 2023, Katherine J. Wu had to walk it all back:
That is why their paper became a laughing stock on social media, especially when Bloom came out with his paper refuting the claims they were trying to make to the media.
From The Atlantic
March 16, 2023:
On May 24, 2023, Katherine J. Wu had to walk it all back:
You should read the first paper. It’s cited in the link I gave you. The authors literally have a paragraph dedicated to explaining why the correlation that Bloom later conducted would be error prone.
Since you seem to ignore when others post links, I’ll provide the summary one more time. Full paper referenced within.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...849542657.html
This was published before Bloom even ran his analysis.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fuxnl5zXsAIkxup.jpg
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
06-24-2023, 12:40 AM
-
#139
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
I’m not mad. I’m pointing out your attempt to shift the conversation away from the evidence because you don’t understand it so you’re forced to regurgitate the responses of others. You’d much rather debate semantics about what the authors said in an interview than whether or not the evidence supports a natural origin.Don't get mad at me because they ran to the media and tried to shill infected raccoon dogs with no evidence. That's exactly what they did.
And I don't have to argue the evidence, because we both know it's not a smoking gun. They overhyped their paper to the media. End of story.
And I don't have to argue the evidence, because we both know it's not a smoking gun. They overhyped their paper to the media. End of story.
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
06-24-2023, 12:40 AM
-
#140
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
loled @ error barsLogic fail. Because evidence wasn’t provided for infected raccoon dogs, therefore they can ruled out.
You should read the first paper. It’s cited in the link I gave you. The authors literally have a paragraph dedicated to explaining why the correlation that Bloom later conducted would be error prone.
Since you seem to ignore when others post links, I’ll provide the summary one more time. Full paper referenced within.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...849542657.html
You should read the first paper. It’s cited in the link I gave you. The authors literally have a paragraph dedicated to explaining why the correlation that Bloom later conducted would be error prone.
Since you seem to ignore when others post links, I’ll provide the summary one more time. Full paper referenced within.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...849542657.html
06-24-2023, 12:48 AM
-
#141
- gwg77
- Join Date: Oct 2017
- Location: United States
- Posts: 20,548
- Subscribers: 19
- Rep Power: 1102238
-
-
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
Logic fail. Because evidence wasn’t provided for infected raccoon dogs, therefore they can ruled out.
You should read the first paper. It’s cited in the link I gave you. The authors literally have a paragraph dedicated to explaining why the correlation that Bloom later conducted would be error prone.
Since you seem to ignore when others post links, I’ll provide the summary one more time. Full paper referenced within.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...849542657.html
This was published before Bloom even ran his analysis.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fuxnl5zXsAIkxup.jpg
You should read the first paper. It’s cited in the link I gave you. The authors literally have a paragraph dedicated to explaining why the correlation that Bloom later conducted would be error prone.
Since you seem to ignore when others post links, I’ll provide the summary one more time. Full paper referenced within.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...849542657.html
This was published before Bloom even ran his analysis.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fuxnl5zXsAIkxup.jpg
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
That's great, but it is undeniable that they took their evidence and tried to sell it to the media as infected raccoon dogs.I’m not mad. I’m pointing out your attempt to shift the conversation away from the evidence because you don’t understand it so you’re forced to regurgitate the responses of others. You’d much rather debate semantics about what the authors said in an interview than whether or not the evidence supports a natural origin.
Talk about bullshіt narratives from the Trust the Science™ crew.
Now you want to sit here and talk about a paper that isn't a smoking gun.
Call me when you have a smoking gun.
06-24-2023, 01:11 AM
-
#142
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By Putinist⏩
Cracked me up toololed @ error bars
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
06-24-2023, 01:16 AM
-
#143
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By gwg77⏩
Was never meant to be a smoking gun. But it is one more line of evidence for a natural origin. And one more than lab leakers have.That's great, but it is undeniable that they took their evidence and tried to sell it to the media as infected raccoon dogs.
Talk about bullshіt narratives from the Trust the Science™ crew.
Now you want to sit here and talk about a paper that isn't a smoking gun.
Call me when you have a smoking gun.
Talk about bullshіt narratives from the Trust the Science™ crew.
Now you want to sit here and talk about a paper that isn't a smoking gun.
Call me when you have a smoking gun.
I’ll just quote this again.
“The market was identified as the epidemiological center of the virus in the city, and a stall as the viral hotspot in the market last year.
After, the data came out: the exact right species were in the exact spot they were predicted to be, the very center of all known epidemiological links within the city, and the hot spot within the market. And the 2 viral lineages found nearby.
Look for predictions that work!”
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
06-24-2023, 05:02 AM
-
#144
- jtaylor2010
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,186
- Rep Power: 441972
-
-
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
So your top three pieces of evidence that it occurred naturally are:It’s the many independent lines of evidence all pointing in the same direction.
- Huanan Seafood Market epicenter
- detailed photographic evidence of live mammals being sold at the market (one of four markets with evidence of selling mammals in a city of 11 million people).
- genetic evidence implicating the virus and animals at the market at the same time, including species susceptible to coronaviruses
- positive virus samples in the market associated with mammalian vendors
- two spillover events based on phylogenetics (very damning evidence)
- both early lineages (A and B) found in early sampling, no intermediate haplotypes, suggesting animal to animal transmission
- characteristics of natural recombination in the viral genome (furin cleavage site is not genetically engineered)
- discovery of very closely related existing viruses, including some with spike proteins that bind HACE2 as good or better than sarscov2
- serological evidence that communities living in close proximity to bats are frequently infected with related coronaviruses
- no existing virus backbone in any database that could’ve been used
-about a dozen other things
- Huanan Seafood Market epicenter
- detailed photographic evidence of live mammals being sold at the market (one of four markets with evidence of selling mammals in a city of 11 million people).
- genetic evidence implicating the virus and animals at the market at the same time, including species susceptible to coronaviruses
- positive virus samples in the market associated with mammalian vendors
- two spillover events based on phylogenetics (very damning evidence)
- both early lineages (A and B) found in early sampling, no intermediate haplotypes, suggesting animal to animal transmission
- characteristics of natural recombination in the viral genome (furin cleavage site is not genetically engineered)
- discovery of very closely related existing viruses, including some with spike proteins that bind HACE2 as good or better than sarscov2
- serological evidence that communities living in close proximity to bats are frequently infected with related coronaviruses
- no existing virus backbone in any database that could’ve been used
-about a dozen other things
1.) the epicenter appears to be a seafood market(a seafood market that you forgot to mention is right next to the lab where they study these exact types of viruses).
2.) the market sold mammals(you actually say this is one of the best pieces of evidence for it occurring naturally despite the fact that none of the animals in the market have ever been found to have the virus)
3.) the virus was present at the market at the same time animals were(again despite the fact that none of the animals there ever tested positive for the virus).
I must say, I’m not overwhelmed. Also, how can you claim to know that the cleavage site wasn’t manipulated? The longer we go without discovering the animal(s) that this virus naturally originated in the less likely it is that they even exist at all, which means it’s more and more likely that it was an engineered virus.
06-24-2023, 06:33 AM
-
#145
Originally Posted By jtaylor2010⏩
Right next being 9 miles and divided by a fuking river?So your top three pieces of evidence that it occurred naturally are:
1.) the epicenter appears to be a seafood market(a seafood market that you forgot to mention is right next to the lab where they study these exact types of viruses).
2.) the market sold mammals(you actually say this is one of the best pieces of evidence for it occurring naturally despite the fact that none of the animals in the market have ever been found to have the virus)
3.) the virus was present at the market at the same time animals were(again despite the fact that none of the animals there ever tested positive for the virus).
I must say, I’m not overwhelmed. Also, how can you claim to know that the cleavage site wasn’t manipulated? The longer we go without discovering the animal(s) that this virus naturally originated in the less likely it is that they even exist at all, which means it’s more and more likely that it was an engineered virus.
1.) the epicenter appears to be a seafood market(a seafood market that you forgot to mention is right next to the lab where they study these exact types of viruses).
2.) the market sold mammals(you actually say this is one of the best pieces of evidence for it occurring naturally despite the fact that none of the animals in the market have ever been found to have the virus)
3.) the virus was present at the market at the same time animals were(again despite the fact that none of the animals there ever tested positive for the virus).
I must say, I’m not overwhelmed. Also, how can you claim to know that the cleavage site wasn’t manipulated? The longer we go without discovering the animal(s) that this virus naturally originated in the less likely it is that they even exist at all, which means it’s more and more likely that it was an engineered virus.
06-24-2023, 06:41 AM
-
#146
- jtaylor2010
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,186
- Rep Power: 441972
-
-
Originally Posted By Putinist⏩
If only there was a way for humans to cross rivers and travel 9 miles quickly…Right next being 9 miles and divided by a fuking river?
It’s less than 10 miles away and frequented by many of the people who worked at the lab. Also, Lold at picking that out while not touching the other points or talking about Reliance’s trash tier list of “overwhelming” evidence.
06-24-2023, 06:48 AM
-
#147
Originally Posted By jtaylor2010⏩
lmao trash tier okIf only there was a way for humans to cross rivers and travel 9 miles quickly…
It’s less than 10 miles away and frequented by many of the people who worked at the lab. Also, Lold at picking that out while not touching the other points or talking about Reliance’s trash tier list of “overwhelming” evidence.
It’s less than 10 miles away and frequented by many of the people who worked at the lab. Also, Lold at picking that out while not touching the other points or talking about Reliance’s trash tier list of “overwhelming” evidence.
Which people frequented that market? lmao
06-24-2023, 07:45 AM
-
#148
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
-
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
- Join Date: Mar 2020
- Posts: 17,326
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By jtaylor2010⏩
Actually, that list is excellent, and more to the point, it'sscientificevidence supported by reams of peer-reviewed papers. I see nothing comparable from the lab leak perspective. All we've seen is "But their emails", circumstantial evidence, speculation, conspiracy, smoke n' mirrors etc.If only there was a way for humans to cross rivers and travel 9 miles quickly…
It’s less than 10 miles away and frequented by many of the people who worked at the lab. Also, Lold at picking that out while not touching the other points or talking about Reliance’s trash tier list of “overwhelming” evidence.
It’s less than 10 miles away and frequented by many of the people who worked at the lab. Also, Lold at picking that out while not touching the other points or talking about Reliance’s trash tier list of “overwhelming” evidence.
But tell me, WRT to this point about the workers going to the market. Why did the market become the apparent origin of the outbreak? Why doesn't it simply look like it began at the lab and radiated outwards from there?
Occam's razor still applies I presume, so doesn't this make a complex story about the virus going from humans to animals and back to humans/other animals? Why complicate a scientific theory, when a simpler one suffices?
Back off, Warchild.
Seriously.
06-24-2023, 08:42 AM
-
#149
- jtaylor2010
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,186
- Rep Power: 441972
-
-
Originally Posted By Bodhy⏩
- how is “they sold mammals at the market” considered scientific evidence?Actually, that list is excellent, and more to the point, it'sscientificevidence supported by reams of peer-reviewed papers. I see nothing comparable from the lab leak perspective. All we've seen is "But their emails", circumstantial evidence, speculation, conspiracy, smoke n' mirrors etc.
But tell me, WRT to this point about the workers going to the market. Why did the market become the apparent origin of the outbreak? Why doesn't it simply look like it began at the lab and radiated outwards from there?
Occam's razor still applies I presume, so doesn't this make a complex story about the virus going from humans to animals and back to humans/other animals? Why complicate a scientific theory, when a simpler one suffices?
But tell me, WRT to this point about the workers going to the market. Why did the market become the apparent origin of the outbreak? Why doesn't it simply look like it began at the lab and radiated outwards from there?
Occam's razor still applies I presume, so doesn't this make a complex story about the virus going from humans to animals and back to humans/other animals? Why complicate a scientific theory, when a simpler one suffices?
And all of the other “evidence” regarding animals is completely obliterated by the fact that no animals in the market have ever been found to be infected with the virus. Also lmfao at saying the lab leak theory is nothing but circumstantial when the list you praise is nothing but circumstantial(and that’s being generous enough to even use the word evidence when referring to it at all). Nothing on that list means that it could not have been from the lab, and again the inability to find an animal species where it originated when they know exactly where to look(and did look extensively) points to the likelihood that it never started in an animal.
As far it originating in the lab, we now know that there lab workers were sick with an illness in line with Covid 19 to the point where some are 100% confident in claiming they are patient(s) zero. As far as why it didn’t spread so rapidly through the lab, I would say the PPE worn by workers would explain some of it. But once it hit the market(where those protective measures weren’t in place) it spread rapidly. And that was less than one month after the initial sickness in the lab workers, so it’s perfectly reasonable to look at that as a possibility. And that’s before we even get into some of the unique characteristics of the virus that have made some very reputable and knowledgeable people say it is EXTREMELY unlikely for a virus to end up like that naturally, but is exactly what we would expect to occur with the types of manipulations that were taking place in the lab.
06-24-2023, 08:54 AM
-
#150
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts