451–460 of 792 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is peculiar that not many of these conspiracy theories eventually turn out to be true. See Twitter's own lawyers: https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/06/tech/twitter-files-lawyer...
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's weird how many smart people still haven't realized they are being lied to by the legacy media and establishment figures. Even after repeatedly discrediting themselves. Taibbi and Shellenberger aren't perfect either, but they are more reliable and honest. Taibbi is still the investigative journalist he's always been.
They say it is always easier to con intelligent people, because they don't think they are capable of being fooled.
All levels of aptitude/intelligence are equally likely to be conned because a con works by getting your emotions to turn your intelligence to the task of tricking you.
For example, by exciting your greed so much you come up with a justification for why an unusual circumstance is genuine.
I don't trust this article at all . > Sources within the US government say that three of the earliest people to become infected with SARS-CoV-2 were Ben Hu, Yu Ping, and Yan Zhu. All were members of the Wuhan lab suspected to have leaked the pandemic virus. > It is unclear who in the U.S. government had access to the intelligence about the sick WIV workers, how long they had it, and why it was not shared with the pub…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The geoscientist in question is actually arguing that some of the flaws in the paper are due to the authors' lack of expertise in geospatial analysis.[1] [1] https://twitter.com/search?q=(from%3Adanwalker9999)%20expert...
that may be- I am not qualified to say after reading the twitter thread, but my money is still on the peer reviewed paper written by the virologist, based on a large collection of priors. Note taht the "geoscientist" is really a hydrologist who works on oil and gas, so their ability to comment on the centering model is still suspect. From what I can tell, "dawalker" is just a retired hydrologist with no special skill…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outbreaks can only happen in places of high density/congregation, by the nature of the required proximity. It could have been dancing around the perimeter for some time. Maybe my perspective is incorrect, but this seems trivially possible to me. This problem with proximity is why kids didn't go to school.
The wet market was one of the less densely trafficked areas of the city: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9348750/figure/... Check out the other figures in that paper. The epicenter was the wet market itself.
"Epicenter: the part of the earth's surface directly above the focus of an earthquake"
It's all probability of intercept. Density and frequency are important. Relative-to-a-mall probably isn't super useful, in a city with 11 million.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment is laden with rhetoric, but, to address your point regardless: 'military arms' are widely available. The equipment and knowledge to perform advanced virology work is not. It's much simpler to restrict.
> This comment is laden with rhetoric Can you elaborate on why this was worth pointing out for the parent comment, but not GP?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that we would have done anything differently if we knew that China was responsible. It wouldn't have changed our treatments or vaccination strategies or anything. Could it have made some people who are crazy against China feel differently? Maybe. I don't think it would have made the doofuses who took ivermectin act differently though.
> I don't think it would have made the doofuses who took ivermectin act differently though from NIH https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7539925/ "Ivermectin: an award-winning drug with expected antiviral activity against COVID-19... with demonstrated antiviral activity against a number of DNA and RNA viruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)" Whether or not ivermectin ul…
I do think knowing the actual source of COVID is good information to have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How and why would they have that kind of data available if the virus only existed in the lab? At most they could have had computer simulations, but no real data. I'm not a virologist, but this doesn't make sense to me. If we work under the assumption that this was a lab-made virus that leaked, then they plainly must have actually created it. What's the point of having a real virus if you aren't using it to generate…
> If we work under the assumption that this was a lab-made virus that leaked, then they plainly must have actually created it. What's the point of having a real virus if you aren't using it to generate real data? Assuming experiments had been completed by then they'd have, what, some figures for how infectious it was in humanized mice. Maybe months down the line they'd've written a paper showing that this splice made…
To the last point though:
> They weren't working on that.
Says who? If they lied about accidentally releasing it, why wouldn’t they lie about what they were doing with it in the first place?
I don't trust this article at all . > Sources within the US government say that three of the earliest people to become infected with SARS-CoV-2 were Ben Hu, Yu Ping, and Yan Zhu. All were members of the Wuhan lab suspected to have leaked the pandemic virus. > It is unclear who in the U.S. government had access to the intelligence about the sick WIV workers, how long they had it, and why it was not shared with the pub…
We have samples that pre-date the wuhan outbreak, so they are not among the earliest. Wuhan was only the first identified super spreader location. Here's one such study from Italy that found infections from as early as Sept 2019. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20220830/Italian-study-fin... original journal https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393512...