4 ms·
I see two arguments based on published sequences, often presented without clear distinction between the two: 1. If the WIV had a progenitor, they would have pu
by tripletao 2y ago
I see two arguments based on published sequences, often presented without clear distinction between the two:
1. If the WIV had a progenitor, they would have published it pre-pandemic. That was always ridiculous, since any active research group in the world has unpublished work in progress. These new samples confirm that to be specifically false, since they were collected "between 2004 and 2021".
2. If the WIV had a progenitor, they would have published it post-pandemic. In other words, they would publish that sequence, knowing that it establishes the WIV's research as the most likely cause of the pandemic. I don't think many people, no matter how honorable, would wish to confess to ~7M deaths. Even if they did, it's likely that the PRC would impose terrible consequences on themselves and their loved ones, since that contradicts the PRC's preferred story of zoonotic origin outside China followed by import on frozen fish.
So I don't think the absence of published sequences means much. Do you disagree?
Or is there any other piece of evidence that you believe strongly establishes that SARS-CoV-2 entered humans by natural zoonosis, and you'd be willing to discuss? I understand you think the points I mentioned from that debate aren't the most important, but you didn't say which ones you think are.
- cassepipe 2y agoYou look like you could have won 100.000 dollars