Self-fulfilling prophecy needs no effort - how very convenient... By your own words: you can not "see the light" if all you do is see black everywhere you look and don't ever make even a minimal, let alone EQUAL effort to see the other side of Humanity. Poor. Piss poor! @Yen - you operate by 2 standards: 1) lenient when it comes to your prejudices 2) very stringent when it comes to ideas you do not "think" are possible. But there are people who do know what they are talking about, probably much more than you. I posted the articles and interviews with such experts, who actually did do their research, so go figure... To all "conspiracy theorists": easy, all too easy. Proving it - not so easy. It takes a lot of research to gather the evidence etc. If we had it - we would know it by now. Why? Well... There are so many people now who have forgotten exactly what we had to deal with when the virus was deadly and they like playing "wild-arse heroes" now... I find it ridiculous to the extreme!!!
It is 'not so' easy, because proof has to be determined. Evidences, though, are facts. The one that claims for proof has to determine the criteria for the proof. And then it's quite easy. Either the evidences meet the determined criteria for proof or not. That's the entire issue with proof. And that's also the reason why a 'bunch' of people come to the result something is proven and another 'bunch' to 'it is not'. They simply have different ideas of criteria of proof. Firstly get consensus about the criteria THEN have a look if the evidences meet them. You find that at science and at courts. When I argued for the lab leak hypothesis I avoided to use the term proof. I spoke about a bunch of evidences which result to certainty of a existence of a lab leak. Let's just reduce that to one statement, you surely could agree with: The other topic:"Huge quality differences of Pfizer vaccine batches" has a great scope!!! It for instance clarifies the inconsistencies found all over the world of 'how' the vaccines did perform! Statements such as the vaccines had a greater chance of doing harm than COVID itself.....or the vaccines did more harm than good can now coexist as truth with "they saved lives and the side effects were negligible!!!" The same applied to Thalidomide. But there it's not a quality issue, it is the drug itself, the contra indication. Either way. There has to be an investigation against Pfizer as well!!!
A Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths after COVID-19 Vaccination https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4496137 Fortunately, the dailysceptic.org website saved a copy of the paper here. Now, judge for yourselves whether the study has wrong conclusions or wrong methodology or anything at all.
I find it even more extreme how media, pharma and politics have controlled and still control the masses 'how to' perceive danger!!! Don't you see the powers behind that? The indoctrinated ours-only direction? The censorship of what's not conform? If the masses still would have the SAME imprinting for danger and 'empathy' with victims, the 'value' of guilt...how would they see the victims of post vaccine syndromes, the cause of excess deaths all around the world, all the studies that show less effectiveness, more harm, the evidences of a lab leak, the Pfizer contracts, the criminally low quality batches, the plants who started vaccine making without QM and QA approval???? Where is the same enthusiasm, the same motivation to clarify the things? The same will to get things fairly right? The same will to apply 'measures'???? It is not there....ha! It is not there because it is NOT wanted that the masses get into the same 'turmoil'. The unvaxxed were easily spoken to be guilty, even responsible potential killers!!! Where is the same anger against Pfizer? The lab not communicating what has happened? Where is it??? People now can die / have died due to vaccine effects..slowly..unrecognized....or being handicapped a long time..more and more..we have a fact now..low quality batches......excess deaths...do you see a 'counter' at the news every day? No, but people watched shady PCR positives which said nothing about the sickness at all!!! We could have more deaths related to the vaccination than COVID in the future or even today already...slowly raising and one day exceeding those of COVID...and nobody would ever know about. Nobody wants to know! THIS is the scope of how to control masses and making sensitive to one direction ONLY. And the study of the batches scope gives reason for massive concerns now. The numbers of the bad correlation line speak volumes!!! More than 4% of the Pfizer vaccines were like poison, extrapolate that to the amount of all world vaccinations! I know about 2 scientists who were invited to talk about post vac injuries on TV. They had exactly that Danish study with them..guess what? The interview has been recorded, they could present that study, too, they (reporters) said thank you. But it was never broadcasted until today! To call those with the same enthusiasm to clarify those things now as well as wild-arse heroes....while making the pointless assumption to have forgotten other things?!!?? When your mind has returned to a reasonable state rather ask yourself... "Would you / we recognize the entire scope of the vaccine injuries and deaths with the current level of investigations?" AKA the recent "motivation" to get to KNOW it at all??
"We own the science" Dictatorial technocracy. People (some here) that love to be kept and fed with cockroaches by the goverment will agree with that woman.
Yen, I repeat: you operate differently for different arguments, not according to the same principle/criteria/level of proof required!!! You have just proven it amply!!! Very emotional...
I take this as your criticism of the way I posted those evidences. Anyway evidences are facts. Maybe an interview of the author of that Danish study is less emotional for you.
There is no "evidence" according to your criteria when you are against a stance... But when you are for a stance - then there certianly is "sufficient evidence"...
This question is actually pointless. Neither you nor I can answer it. You cannot because you don't know the level of expertise of us two. (Those of your article and mine). I cannot, because I don't know the level of expertise of the author(s) of your article. It is also pointless because of leaks like that: https://blog.whitecoatwaste.org/202...tigation-proves-u-s-govt-funded-patient-zero/ Finally it's you that has to list the evidences for a lab leak and a zoonosis side by side and come to your own conclusion. Doing that you should ignore any presentations of them. Presentations, especially those made earlier already, are biased pro zoonosis hypothesis and the lab leak hypothesis has still suffered from censorship. To me there is no real evidence that underlines the zoonosis hypotheses. I had posted why already with regards to your article. The evidence presented at 35:48 alone is strong enough (together with Ben Hu and co. time stamp 1:20) to wipe anything away that seemingly speaks for the zoonosis hypothesis. They could not present animal zero. But 'the others' could present human zero and co. And as being said. Their arguments do not rule out a lab leak since viral material found at cages at Wuhan market can be originated from human as well. (Infected animal seller). Besides of that...they were too late with their investigation time frame. The pandemic started already earlier in November 2019. Anyway the strongest evidence for me already before they found Ben Hu and co. was Rossana Segreto's paper. I have enough background to understand her work. For the record again the time stamps to review.
Well, there certainly is a point: you have the best grip on some aspects of Science in this thread, so that makes you an expert. Maybe limited but a bigger expert than anyone else here But without a counterposition of at least equally qualified people, this is not a "good" debate... Unscientific. And I am sorry to say, it looks ever worse in that respect... So, let's be honest: there are seriously competent guys who have actually worked on this first hand, in the field - and they do not share your position at all. Maybe something to think about a bit more, then?!?
Yes, sure. This is no scientific debate. Never had the claim it is. Anyway I have to disagree...there is nothing 'unscientific'. The sources are available, the papers which are evidences for the lab leak hypothesis are publicly available and those are not only scientific works. There are also investigative evidences next to science. Don't know how many still do favor other hypothesis such as zoonosis. I would be glad I could have a debate with those. I would ask them 3 simple questions: 1.) How would you explain that the spike protein of wuhan-hu1 (the original strain) is adapted to human ACE2 most? More than to other potential animal? Every virologist knows that a jump is always FIRST adaption to a new kind of host is always (can be only) second! 2.) How would you explain that there is a lab just 3 km away, which has deleted genetic sequences of coronaviruses (database) at the same time frame, a lab accident which required to exchange the venting system, GSM jamming, a lab that is capable of creating chimeric viruses (RaTG13 with the RBD of MP789 and humanized spikes of another)? And wuhan-hu1 exactly has that, besides of a furin cleavage site which never has been found at natural corona viruses before. 3.) How would you explain that 3 (not only one) of those lab workers in WIV involved in that type of 'research' got sick on November 2019 already having exactly the same symptoms as we know as 'corona'? Most of the articles dealing with zoonosis are about collecting arguments for their hypothesis. The best they have is collected samples on cages....no host, no infected animal... Or they deal with speculative assumptions like :"It's highly unlikely that the first COVID-19 outbreak would occur at the market if there weren't a source of the virus there". Already the existence of a lab 3 km away with its known gain of function research and the other proven issues (deletion of WIV database, lab accidents) is a stronger argument than that. All the zoonosis adherents avoided to deal with the results of genetic analyses / attributes of the virus up to now. It is obvious that to examine the virus and its attributes lead to more evidences than to trace for samples of virus which could have originated from anyone (human or animal).
That's a lot of suppositions - "Oh, look, it's only 3 km away from"... No, that is deffo NOT science, that's close to religion, those are "convictions" (without proper proof)...
Yes I know! That's why I have posted that bit of your paper! Actually to mention that it has that sort of 'convictions' (I called that speculative assumptions)! The proximity alone is no evidence, but this applies to the Wuhan market as well. Here again the entire bit of your article. I replied with The fact that there is a lab 3km away is not an evidence for a lab leak at all. I posted that as additional fact, because as fact it is certainly important. It allows an interchange of people from the lab and the market. Would it be 300km away, this option wouldn't be plausible! Just remember: I firstly thought it was a zoonosis, the 3km alone did not convince me! The evidences for a lab leak concerning the WIV itself are reasoned in their works (published scientific papers), the genetic matches to their chimeric viruses and their manipulation purposes / techniques, those 3 sick lab workers and all the other occurrences within that time frame. Something funny. The name of the original strain has a sort of self-irony....it's called Wuhan-hu1. I wonder if hu comes from Ben Hu lol. Would be bold if the creator of the virus Wuhan-hu1 Ben Hu got infected by his own work...so to say the virus's reply is like f**k you! Edit: A lab leak is NOT a 'Chinese issue' alone. The US is very much involved in gain of function there. And they cooperated with the WIV! Singapore and Australia, too. Have a look at the authors of this paper, published at Nature on October 2013 already! As you can see at its abstract it is about gain of function research / virus manipulations. Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor | Nature Zheng-Li Shi, the 'bat woman' and the leader of the lab in Wuhan. Ben Hu, the one infected and probable the very first 'corona' patient. Peter Daszak!!! The one who had been sent by the WHO to clarify from where the virus came. A liar! And a conflict of interests the WHO deliberately has ignored!!! He stated it has a natural origin but without to reason it. He is a gain of function expert as you can know from his works and cooperation with the WIV!!!! All them involved in a scientific co-work (paper) which is about gain of function research!
I tell you what's NOT science in this regard... If you look at the journal Nature and works that can shed some light into what could have happened for instance: A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence | Nature Medicine You still find this: WTF? Nature is a top notch scientific journal!!! "scientists believe.." This wording is untenable! Science knows plurality of opinions of scientists. If..then "some scientists believe"... Furthermore "scientists believe.." Science is not about belief, it's about verifiable facts. This is not the only works with that 'disclaimer' which is unscientific and pathetic per se.....it clearly indicates that 'science' still has issues when it comes to basic means and the lab leak hypothesis. Such a 'disclaimer' has absolutely no place in a scientific journal! So when blaming for being 'unscientific' then you find that HERE!!!! And not at those who present the evidences!!!
You know, when people who actually went there and did work on it properly, as experts, speak of "facts" - I tend to have a little bit more respect for it...
It Is Difficult to Get a Man to Understand Something When His Salary Depends Upon His Not Understanding It.
@Yen, it's really funny you should be the one who now insists on qualifying sentences like that... I was the only one here who kept insisting on it for a long time... Suddenly... Oh, well...
Yes, that is perfectly fine if you would be allowed to hear all them experts. Unfortunately you (still) cannot....only those who are conform to a particular 'story'. So it actually doesn't matter. You are only allowed to hear selected experts. People who are not familiar with what's going on behind the scene don't even know about manipulation and censorship. 22:40min up here refreshes your mind. Or 35:50min of the sky lab leak video. The medical journals are still biased towards pro vaccines and pro zoonosis hypothesis. To present such disclaimers in front of top notch scientific work is a farce. It started with an ode on the vaccines before you could present a study which showed negative vaccine data and ended with a 'scientists believe' (in a narrative).