4 ms·

>more likely to me that many scientists in the field, especially those that work specifically with gain of function, are going to be reluctant to blame a lab le

>more likely to me that many scientists in the field, especially those that work specifically with gain of function, are going to be reluctant to blame a lab leak because they know that if it is found that covid was from a lab, then their funding is at risk. This would be easy to find out given that their names are public and so are the projects/papers/publications. What does the data indicate?

redis_mlc 5y ago
Actually, it's not that "easy to find out" because the CCP is involved with: 1) their Thousand Talents program, which pays scientists to copy foreign research back to China. There are various contractual terms including not criticizing the CCP, and patenting foreign-supported research in China. 2) Since GoF can be used in bioweapons, there is also money for weapons development. Note the WIV was built by the French, which the CCP kicked out the day the lab opened. 3) Both the US and Australia have been involved in a coverup for over a year. In the US, this was revealed with Fauci's emails, and in Australia, journalists have uncovered previously-denied (on the record) bat virus research and training of Wuhan's virology scientists in Australia. 4) And, as mentioned, you need a BSL lab to do virology research, and virologists can't afford to build their own without govt. funding, and aren't allowed to do GoF in the US. A similar situation was how the Nazis moved to Argentina after the fall of Berlin to continue a variety of weapons programs. That's what the "thank you for not saying it was a lab leak" email to Fauci was about. Yes, I'm intentionally comparing Fauci and Daszak to Nazis.
inter_netuser 5y ago
im quite certain lots of information is not at all public. Seems it takes a high-ranking defector to suddenly get everyone sweating and carefully walking back written statements.
- passivate 5y ago
  >im quite certain lots of information is not at all public. What information are you referring to that's not public? Most scientists' research areas, publications are public knowledge. Science relies on this to make progress. OP claimed people signing the letter had a conflict of interest and/or were somehow complicit. Rather than getting into an argument, why not put forth the data. I'd suggest OP to look up their names, papers, labs, funding sources, etc and put forth a real argument.

redis_mlc 5y ago

Actually, it's not that "easy to find out" because the CCP is involved with: 1) their Thousand Talents program, which pays scientists to copy foreign research back to China. There are various contractual terms including not criticizing the CCP, and patenting foreign-supported research in China. 2) Since GoF can be used in bioweapons, there is also money for weapons development. Note the WIV was built by the French, which the CCP kicked out the day the lab opened. 3) Both the US and Australia have been involved in a coverup for over a year. In the US, this was revealed with Fauci's emails, and in Australia, journalists have uncovered previously-denied (on the record) bat virus research and training of Wuhan's virology scientists in Australia. 4) And, as mentioned, you need a BSL lab to do virology research, and virologists can't afford to build their own without govt. funding, and aren't allowed to do GoF in the US. A similar situation was how the Nazis moved to Argentina after the fall of Berlin to continue a variety of weapons programs. That's what the "thank you for not saying it was a lab leak" email to Fauci was about. Yes, I'm intentionally comparing Fauci and Daszak to Nazis.

inter_netuser 5y ago

im quite certain lots of information is not at all public. Seems it takes a high-ranking defector to suddenly get everyone sweating and carefully walking back written statements.

passivate 5y ago
>im quite certain lots of information is not at all public. What information are you referring to that's not public? Most scientists' research areas, publications are public knowledge. Science relies on this to make progress. OP claimed people signing the letter had a conflict of interest and/or were somehow complicit. Rather than getting into an argument, why not put forth the data. I'd suggest OP to look up their names, papers, labs, funding sources, etc and put forth a real argument.