Once upon a time in Wuhan the origination of covid

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MykeNukem

Did you read the article you linked to the first time?

Yes.

It didn't say what you said it said.

Actually, it does. The first sentence:

In early 2020, a few months after the Covid-19 pandemic began, scientists were able to sequence the full genome of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes the Covid-19 infection.

It's only referencing another study in early 2020.

What you linked to isn't that study.

Your link is from:

Anne Trafton | MIT News Office
Publication Date:May 11, 2021

a reply to: MykeNukem

I said the full genome had been sequenced. The article from MIT says the full genome had been sequenced.

What exactly is your point?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MykeNukem

I said the full genome had been sequenced. The article from MIT says the full genome had been sequenced.

What exactly is your point?

My point is anyone can point to an article saying something, but, the article you linked to wasn't THAT study. It only referenced that study without a link or anything else.

So if MIT say's it, the science is settled? Or maybe link to what you were insinuating you were linking to? Which was proving that the SARS-CoV-2 genome has been fully sequenced.

You must know what I mean because you supplied a second link attempting to show that it has been sequenced. From a non-Peer Reviewed Study, which I know you wouldn't accept any other time.

a reply to: MykeNukem

This from someone who complained about "splitting hairs."

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MykeNukem

This from someone who complained about "splitting hairs."

I never complained, just hoping maybe you'd see that you do the same thing's you accuse others of.

But this isn't really splitting hairs.

1. If I say "I have proof the earth is flat", then, I provide a link, and, the only thing you can find about the earth being flat is a reference to some OTHER study, then, that doesn't hold much weight does it?

2. AND what that article is referencing hasn't been Peer-Reviewed yet.

So, wrong 2X?

a reply to: MykeNukem

If I say "I have proof the earth is flat", then, I provide a link, and, the only thing you can find about the earth being flat is a reference to some OTHER study, then, that doesn't hold much weight does it?

But I didn't say that.

Never mind. This is pointless.

Let's talk about the topic. Claims from a New Zealand GP (not a virologist) who thinks that viruses don't cause disease.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MykeNukem

If I say "I have proof the earth is flat", then, I provide a link, and, the only thing you can find about the earth being flat is a reference to some OTHER study, then, that doesn't hold much weight does it?

But I didn't say that.

Never mind. This is pointless.

Let's talk about the topic. Claims from a New Zealand GP (not a virologist) who thinks that viruses don't cause disease.

Ok, just replace "I have proof the earth is flat" with "I have proof the SARS-CoV-2 genome has been sequenced", that should clear things up.

I was just following the flow of the conversation.

Just following your example.

What do you want to address about the GP? Are you a virologist?

a reply to: MykeNukem

Are you a virologist?

No. But then, I don't make absurd claims about how viruses don't cause disease.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MykeNukem

Are you a virologist?

No. But then, I don't make absurd claims about how viruses don't cause disease.

Correct.

You make other absurd claims then try to support them with fake links and non-Peer Reviewed Studies.

a reply to: Mandroid7

Last September, the House Foreign Affairs Committee Minority Staff, under the direction of Ranking Member Michael T. McCaul, released a report on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. That report highlighted the possibility SARS-CoV-2 could have leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology(WIV). However, as we continued our investigation and uncovered more information, we now believe it’s time to completely dismiss the wet market as the source of the outbreak. We also believe the preponderance of the evidence proves the virus did leak from the WIV and that it did so sometime before September 12, 2019.

This report also lays out ample evidence that researchers at the WIV, in conjunction with U.S.scientists and funded by both the PRC government and the U.S. government, were conducting gain-of-function research on coronaviruses at the WIV, at times under BSL-2 conditions. Much of thisresearch was focused on modifying the spike protein of coronaviruses that could not infect humans sothey could bind to human immune systems. The stated purpose of this work was to identified viruses with pandemic potential and to create a broad-spectrum coronavirus vaccine. In many instances, thescientists were successful in creating “chimeric viruses” – or viruses created from the pieces of otherviruses – that could infect human immune systems. With dangerous research like this conducted atsafety levels similar to a dentist’s office, a natural or genetically modified virus could have easilyescaped the lab and infected the community.

Next Steps
After this extensive investigation, we believe it is time to call Peter Daszak to testify before Congress. There are still many outstanding questions about the type of research he funded at the WIV that only he can answer.

Source: The Origins of Covid-19 [84-page PDF report]

a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

Psst.
The OP thinks the virus doesn't actually exist. Someone should tell Congress.

originally posted by: EndtheMadnessNow
a reply to: Mandroid7

Last September, the House Foreign Affairs Committee Minority Staff, under the direction of Ranking Member Michael T. McCaul, released a report on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. That report highlighted the possibility SARS-CoV-2 could have leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology(WIV). However, as we continued our investigation and uncovered more information, we now believe it’s time to completely dismiss the wet market as the source of the outbreak. We also believe the preponderance of the evidence proves the virus did leak from the WIV and that it did so sometime before September 12, 2019.

This report also lays out ample evidence that researchers at the WIV, in conjunction with U.S.scientists and funded by both the PRC government and the U.S. government, were conducting gain-of-function research on coronaviruses at the WIV, at times under BSL-2 conditions. Much of thisresearch was focused on modifying the spike protein of coronaviruses that could not infect humans sothey could bind to human immune systems. The stated purpose of this work was to identified viruses with pandemic potential and to create a broad-spectrum coronavirus vaccine. In many instances, thescientists were successful in creating “chimeric viruses” – or viruses created from the pieces of otherviruses – that could infect human immune systems. With dangerous research like this conducted atsafety levels similar to a dentist’s office, a natural or genetically modified virus could have easilyescaped the lab and infected the community.

Next Steps
After this extensive investigation, we believe it is time to call Peter Daszak to testify before Congress. There are still many outstanding questions about the type of research he funded at the WIV that only he can answer.

Source: The Origins of Covid-19 [84-page PDF report]

And that's just the States involvement.

Many other countries either funded the lab, or provided researchers and samples.

originally posted by: YongPengSun
As a native Chinese person myself, I honestly think covid was lab created. I think the motive was to sell lots of masks, PCR test kits, vaccines for money. Profit is very important in China.

Not China..... The US.

a reply to: flice

He is not here to reply.

Unless he comes back under another handle.

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: chr0naut

You glossed over the initial process of creating the genome using a computer..

The computer did not create the genome. The genome existed in nature and from that there was lots of different measurements by different methods, which indicate the chemistry in in the genome.

Even if it was done on paper with lookup tables and hand calculated, we have to interpret the readings to make sense of them. A computer is just a tool which does that type of repetitive process and ensures it is relatively error free.

The idea that the genome comes to us complete from somewhere, without a process of discovery and putting 'the pieces of the puzzle' together, is just silly.

Her entire case is based upon putting the cart before the horse and saying why didn't we get the genome from an already complete and isolated genome. In nature, that is the virus, and we already had that, in numerous patients.

The story was that we don't have to see thousands of people all in one location dying from similar symptoms before we assume that there is a reason and begin to look for it. With the genomic testing available today, we can actually look for something unusual, in elevated numbers, even from a single patient.

Consider that the sample was taken directly from the source where the symptoms were noted. They didn't take toenail clippings when the lesions and pneumonia were obviously occurring in the lungs.

The woman in the video implied that there are billions of viruses to detect from. The truth is that there are about 219 viruses known to affect humans. It is reasonable to expect that this virus would probably be a mutation of one of those, and it was.

Human viruses: discovery and emergence

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

If you can't watch then don't comment.
Your comment is ignorant and off topic.

The doctor in this video clearly outlines why the pcr test and the virus are not real and how we got to this point.
Quit following me like a stalker and watch the video.

If you are going to post a 20 Min video and demand people watch it you really ought to provide some sort of decent summary of what it is saying.