4 ms·

That is not evidence if it has been debunked in several scientific papers. This is one of them with the analysis of the virus genoma: https://www.tandfonline.co

That is not evidence if it has been debunked in several scientific papers. This is one of them with the analysis of the virus genoma: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/22221751.2020.1733440 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/22221751.2020.1...

bpodgursky 6y ago
You have not even slightly tried to read or understand what I posted. This is (weak) evidence that the virus was not engineered. It says absolutely nothing about the possibility -- which I outlined clearly, and which is outlined clearly in the linked doc -- that this is a natural virus accidentally released from a lab.
- tigershark 6y ago
  I read it. There are a bunch of papers that are presented as proof of how it was engineered spreading bullshit, plus some fact narrated in the typical conspiracy theorist modus operandi to convince people of something that is very, very unlikely.
  - bpodgursky 6y ago
    I'm sorry, but it's simply not possible to square your comments with the content as presented. Let me quote it directly, in case you missed it: > Studies proving the virus was not "engineered" do not prove the spillover event occured outside of a laboratory. We are not claiming the virus was engineered. They also do not prove that the spillover event did not involve an animal or organism sourced from one of these labs. > To start with, we will once again state that we are not claiming SARS-CoV-2 has been engineered. > Editors’ note, March 2020: We are aware that this story is being used as the basis for unverified theories that the novel coronavirus causing COVID-19 was engineered. There is no evidence that this is true; scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus. I'd like to engage on this, but it's pretty clear you aren't discussing this in good faith, or even reading the content you're talking about, so I'm going to have to step out.
salawat 6y ago
Did you even read it? Project evidence hasn't claimed the thing was engineered; only that a lab was involved in it in some shape or form. They also address the articles you've linked if I recall. It's not a bunch of conspiracy theories. It is a vast collection of circumstances that make it very difficult to discount a lab origin out of hand.
- tigershark 6y ago
  Where is the paper that I posted on that page? I don’t see it. What I can see is the typical modus operandi of all the conspiracy theories with unproven or factually wrong claims and several “coincidences”.

bpodgursky 6y ago

You have not even slightly tried to read or understand what I posted. This is (weak) evidence that the virus was not engineered. It says absolutely nothing about the possibility -- which I outlined clearly, and which is outlined clearly in the linked doc -- that this is a natural virus accidentally released from a lab.

tigershark 6y ago
I read it. There are a bunch of papers that are presented as proof of how it was engineered spreading bullshit, plus some fact narrated in the typical conspiracy theorist modus operandi to convince people of something that is very, very unlikely.
- bpodgursky 6y ago
  I'm sorry, but it's simply not possible to square your comments with the content as presented. Let me quote it directly, in case you missed it: > Studies proving the virus was not "engineered" do not prove the spillover event occured outside of a laboratory. We are not claiming the virus was engineered. They also do not prove that the spillover event did not involve an animal or organism sourced from one of these labs. > To start with, we will once again state that we are not claiming SARS-CoV-2 has been engineered. > Editors’ note, March 2020: We are aware that this story is being used as the basis for unverified theories that the novel coronavirus causing COVID-19 was engineered. There is no evidence that this is true; scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus. I'd like to engage on this, but it's pretty clear you aren't discussing this in good faith, or even reading the content you're talking about, so I'm going to have to step out.

salawat 6y ago

Did you even read it? Project evidence hasn't claimed the thing was engineered; only that a lab was involved in it in some shape or form. They also address the articles you've linked if I recall. It's not a bunch of conspiracy theories. It is a vast collection of circumstances that make it very difficult to discount a lab origin out of hand.

tigershark 6y ago
Where is the paper that I posted on that page? I don’t see it. What I can see is the typical modus operandi of all the conspiracy theories with unproven or factually wrong claims and several “coincidences”.