On 16/12/2021 11:46, Incubus wrote:
>
> Indeed; it doesn't automatically mean that it was part of bioweapon
> research. We should still consider the possibility, however.

We should consider first how lucrative denialism can be for those who
are prepared to be dishonest.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 16/12/2021 17:00, Spike wrote:
>
> I'm sure that someone somewhere will state that 97% of scientists refuse
> to believe that after two years we still haven't found a single infected
> animal that could be the progenitor.

TROLL! Proven lie repeated!

https://www.pasteur.fr/en/press-area/press-documents/sars-cov-2-related-viruses-capable-infecting-human-cells-discovered-bats-northern-laos

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 16/12/2021 16:31, Pamela wrote:
> How does it make any difference if a lab was involved in the creation
> of Covid rather than natural events? Is there perhaps a wider
> political battle in the debate, whose presence has gone over my
> head?
Well yeah because it's more evidence that China is out to dominate the
world. And they really are.

Bill

On 16/12/2021 20:26, Java Jive wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 17:00, Spike wrote:

>> I'm sure that someone somewhere will state that 97% of scientists refuse
>> to believe that after two years we still haven't found a single infected
>> animal that could be the progenitor.

> TROLL! Proven lie repeated!

> https://www.pasteur.fr/en/press-area/press-documents/sars-cov-2-related-viruses-capable-infecting-human-cells-discovered-bats-northern-laos

Non-definitive.

Did they list all the other viruses that have been found to be
covid-related and capable (but as in this case, not 'did') of infecting
human cells?

Do you have any clue as to how many weasel-words are used in this one
sentence?

=====

They identified three viruses in particular (BANAL-103, BANAL-236 and
BANAL-52) with genomic similarities to SARS-CoV-2, especially in a key
domain of the spike protein that enables the virus to bind to host
cells. Using direct affinity measurements, crystallography and
computational simulations of molecular dynamics, the scientists
demonstrated that the affinity of these three bat coronaviruses for the
human ACE2 receptor is similar to that of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and that
they are also able to enter human cells via the same receptor.

=====

Ask yourself these questions:

Do all viruses have spikes?

Are all spikes the same?

Then note that article you quoted doesn't mention whether the BANAL
virus spike is the same kind as that of SARS-COV-2.

Lessons for you today: read more critically; do not leap to judgements.

--
Spike

In article <XnsAE02A814AB9FF37B93@144.76.35.252>,
Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:

> How does it make any difference either way? Is the purpsoe of
> pinning it on Chinese scientists to ask for reparations?

> Asia (and to a lesser extent Africa) are breeding grounds for
> zoonotic diseases. There are dozens such diseases which go around
> the world including seasonal flu.

> How does it make any difference if a lab was involved in the
> creation of Covid rather than natural events? Is there perhaps a
> wider political battle in the debate, whose presence has gone over
> my head?

So if it did come the laboratory even by accident, that accident
killed thousands of people and ruined the lives of most of the world
for a number of years. In addition, it would mean the Chinese
government hid the truth (lied) to the world about what they had
done.

You don't think other countries attitude to China and to paying that
lab for research should change if that were the case? Or are you a
communist?

Bob.

On 17/12/2021 05:24, williamwright wrote:
>
> On 16/12/2021 16:31, Pamela wrote:
>>
>> How does it make any difference if a lab was involved in the creation
>> of Covid rather than natural events?  Is there perhaps a wider
>> political battle in the debate, whose presence has gone over my
>> head?
>
> Well yeah because it's more evidence that China is out to dominate the
> world. And they really are.

But even if they are, would any rational person choose as a weapon to
accomplish this, a gun that fires 99 blanks and 1 bullet out of every
shot it fires, and the single real shot is as likely to kill the person
behind the gun as the person it's aimed at?

The idea that SARS-CoV-2 is an escaped bio-weapon is just absurd.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 17/12/2021 09:19, Bob Latham wrote:
>
> In article <XnsAE02A814AB9FF37B93@144.76.35.252>,
> Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How does it make any difference either way? Is the purpsoe of
>> pinning it on Chinese scientists to ask for reparations?
>>
>> Asia (and to a lesser extent Africa) are breeding grounds for
>> zoonotic diseases. There are dozens such diseases which go around
>> the world including seasonal flu.
>>
>> How does it make any difference if a lab was involved in the
>> creation of Covid rather than natural events? Is there perhaps a
>> wider political battle in the debate, whose presence has gone over
>> my head?
>
> So if it did come the laboratory even by accident, that accident
> killed thousands of people and ruined the lives of most of the world
> for a number of years. In addition, it would mean the Chinese
> government hid the truth (lied) to the world about what they had
> done.

I have no doubt the Chinese are covering up, the evidence is there for
all to see, but, as I've already supplied evidence in support, it's far
more likely to be their own failings and those of their communist system
that they're covering up than a lab-leak.

> You don't think other countries attitude to China and to paying that
> lab for research should change if that were the case?

Of course they would, and doubtless that's why they're covering up.

> Or are you a communist?

NO! The vast majority of people in the word who happen to disagree with
your extremist opinions are not communists, they're just more rational
than you are capable of being.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 17/12/2021 09:16, Spike wrote:
>
> On 16/12/2021 20:26, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 16/12/2021 17:00, Spike wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm sure that someone somewhere will state that 97% of scientists refuse
>>> to believe that after two years we still haven't found a single infected
>>> animal that could be the progenitor.
>
>> TROLL! Proven lie repeated!
>
>> https://www.pasteur.fr/en/press-area/press-documents/sars-cov-2-related-viruses-capable-infecting-human-cells-discovered-bats-northern-laos
>
> Non-definitive.

The fact that wild viruses have been shown to exist and samples from the
wet market were taken, both of which are genetically closer to
SARS-CoV-2 than anything in the WIV, is sufficient to show your argument
above is false.

> =====
>
> They identified three viruses in particular (BANAL-103, BANAL-236 and
> BANAL-52) with genomic similarities to SARS-CoV-2, especially in a key
> domain of the spike protein that enables the virus to bind to host
> cells. Using direct affinity measurements, crystallography and
> computational simulations of molecular dynamics, the scientists
> demonstrated that the affinity of these three bat coronaviruses for the
> human ACE2 receptor is similar to that of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and that
> they are also able to enter human cells via the same receptor.
>
> =====

QED

> Ask yourself these questions:
>
> Do all viruses have spikes?

No, they don't.

> Are all spikes the same?

No, they aren't.

> Then note that article you quoted doesn't mention whether the BANAL
> virus spike is the same kind as that of SARS-COV-2.

The very quote that you give above talks about 'genomic similarities',
and there are other reports by or about the same group which have
already been quoted in this thread that are more explicit:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000zv3t
BBC Inside Science, 23/09/2021, 16:42-23:28
Origins of SARS-Cov-2

17:03 "A team from the Pasteur Institute, in Paris, investigating
bats in caves in northern Laos, have discovered that the bats in the
caves are infected with a coronavirus that's genetically almost
identical to the one that's causing covid in humans"

Further detail on same story:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct1l47
Science In Action, 23/09/2021, 00:40-07:36
New Evidence For SARSCoV2's Origin In Bats

> Lessons for you today: read more critically; do not leap to judgements.

Lessons for you from the entirety of this thread: Don't bullshit.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 17/12/2021 09:32, Java Jive wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 05:24, williamwright wrote:
>> On 16/12/2021 16:31, Pamela wrote:

>>> How does it make any difference if a lab was involved in the creation
>>> of Covid rather than natural events?  Is there perhaps a wider
>>> political battle in the debate, whose presence has gone over my
>>> head?

>> Well yeah because it's more evidence that China is out to dominate the
>> world. And they really are.

> But even if they are, would any rational person choose as a weapon to
> accomplish this, a gun that fires 99 blanks and 1 bullet out of every
> shot it fires, and the single real shot is as likely to kill the person
> behind the gun as the person it's aimed at?

> The idea that SARS-CoV-2 is an escaped bio-weapon is just absurd.

The Soviet plan was to fly their Tu-95 bombers at 500' above the British
cities, dropping cluster bombs containing modified versions of plague,
anthrax, and haemorrhagic fever.

With today's technology, it would be easy to create a virus more
transmissible than Omikron which itself contained a far deadlier virus.
Under such an attack, the souped-up Omicron would spread the disease,
and the other virus would kill people. When the facts became known,
panic would kill more people than the virus. The gratis research
provided by SARS-COV-2 won't be wasted by those countries with a
bioweapons interest. Anyone who has read about bioweapons will be aware
of these possibilities.

--
Spike

On 17/12/2021 09:56, Spike wrote:
>
> The Soviet plan was to fly their Tu-95 bombers at 500' above the British
> cities, dropping cluster bombs containing modified versions of plague,
> anthrax, and haemorrhagic fever.
>
> With today's technology, it would be easy to create a virus more
> transmissible than Omikron which itself contained a far deadlier virus.
> Under such an attack, the souped-up Omicron would spread the disease,
> and the other virus would kill people. When the facts became known,
> panic would kill more people than the virus. The gratis research
> provided by SARS-COV-2 won't be wasted by those countries with a
> bioweapons interest. Anyone who has read about bioweapons will be aware
> of these possibilities.

So if China's aim was to produce a military bio-weapon in a civilian
lab, why are we all still alive?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 17/12/2021 09:32, Java Jive wrote:
>
> But even if they are, would any rational person choose as a weapon to
> accomplish this, a gun that fires 99 blanks and 1 bullet out of every
> shot it fires, and the single real shot is as likely to kill the person
> behind the gun as the person it's aimed at?

Of course they would, because having created the means it requires no
effort to spread it. It is the same principle that the scammers use,
sending out millions of e-mails with the expectation that enough mugs
will believe it to give them an income. The "99 blanks" don't matter, it
is the one effective one that brings the benefit.

Likewise during the war the Germans bombed residential areas during the
war, reckoning that the people who survived would be more concerned
about finding another roof over their heads than going to the factories
to make weapons.

It isn't a weapon that needs aiming, it just needs to bother people
enough to create economic havoc.

Jim

On 17/12/2021 10:04, Java Jive wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 09:56, Spike wrote:

>> The Soviet plan was to fly their Tu-95 bombers at 500' above the British
>> cities, dropping cluster bombs containing modified versions of plague,
>> anthrax, and haemorrhagic fever.

>> With today's technology, it would be easy to create a virus more
>> transmissible than Omikron which itself contained a far deadlier virus.
>> Under such an attack, the souped-up Omicron would spread the disease,
>> and the other virus would kill people. When the facts became known,
>> panic would kill more people than the virus. The gratis research
>> provided by SARS-COV-2 won't be wasted by those countries with a
>> bioweapons interest. Anyone who has read about bioweapons will be aware
>> of these possibilities.

> So if China's aim was to produce a military bio-weapon in a civilian
> lab, why are we all still alive?

We aren't. We're dying by the million from the virus. Do keep up.

--
Spike

On 17/12/2021 09:48, Java Jive wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 09:16, Spike wrote:
>> On 16/12/2021 20:26, Java Jive wrote:
>>> On 16/12/2021 17:00, Spike wrote:

>>>> I'm sure that someone somewhere will state that 97% of scientists refuse
>>>> to believe that after two years we still haven't found a single infected
>>>> animal that could be the progenitor.

>>> TROLL! Proven lie repeated!

>>> https://www.pasteur.fr/en/press-area/press-documents/sars-cov-2-related-viruses-capable-infecting-human-cells-discovered-bats-northern-laos

>> Non-definitive.

> The fact that wild viruses have been shown to exist and samples from the
> wet market were taken, both of which are genetically closer to
> SARS-CoV-2 than anything in the WIV, is sufficient to show your argument
> above is false.

>> =====

>> They identified three viruses in particular (BANAL-103, BANAL-236 and
>> BANAL-52) with genomic similarities to SARS-CoV-2, especially in a key
>> domain of the spike protein that enables the virus to bind to host
>> cells. Using direct affinity measurements, crystallography and
>> computational simulations of molecular dynamics, the scientists
>> demonstrated that the affinity of these three bat coronaviruses for the
>> human ACE2 receptor is similar to that of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and that
>> they are also able to enter human cells via the same receptor.

>> =====

> QED

>> Ask yourself these questions:

>> Do all viruses have spikes?

> No, they don't.

>> Are all spikes the same?

> No, they aren't.

>> Then note that article you quoted doesn't mention whether the BANAL
>> virus spike is the same kind as that of SARS-COV-2.

> The very quote that you give above talks about 'genomic similarities',
> and there are other reports by or about the same group which have
> already been quoted in this thread that are more explicit:

> https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000zv3t
> BBC Inside Science, 23/09/2021, 16:42-23:28
> Origins of SARS-Cov-2

> 17:03 "A team from the Pasteur Institute, in Paris, investigating
> bats in caves in northern Laos, have discovered that the bats in the
> caves are infected with a coronavirus that's genetically almost
> identical to the one that's causing covid in humans"

> Further detail on same story:

> https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct1l47
> Science In Action, 23/09/2021, 00:40-07:36
> New Evidence For SARSCoV2's Origin In Bats

>> Lessons for you today: read more critically; do not leap to judgements.

> Lessons for you from the entirety of this thread: Don't bullshit.

You really aren't familiar with the technique of weasel-wording, or the
ability of an institute to over-egg the cake in order to improve
funding, recognition, prestige, honours, etc etc.

It's not something you learn in S101.

--
Spike

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 09:56:55 +0000, Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid>
wrote:

>With today's technology, it would be easy to create a virus more
>transmissible than Omikron which itself contained a far deadlier virus.
>Under such an attack, the souped-up Omicron would spread the disease,
>and the other virus would kill people. When the facts became known,
>panic would kill more people than the virus.

It's arguable that panic is already killing more than the virus. Wait
till we see the true figures for all the postponed or cancelled
operations and undiagnosed illnesses that aren't covid.

In any case, the question remains, what is the point of a weapon that
kills everyone including the nation that uses it? If this really is
what the Chinese had in mind, let's hope they've learned from the
experience that anything infectious that spreads everywhere is
probably not much use for this purpose.

Rod.

On 05:24 17 Dec 2021, williamwright said:
> On 16/12/2021 16:31, Pamela wrote:
>>
>> How does it make any difference if a lab was involved in the creation
>> of Covid rather than natural events? Is there perhaps a wider
>> political battle in the debate, whose presence has gone over my
>> head?
>
> Well yeah because it's more evidence that China is out to dominate the
> world. And they really are.
>
> Bill

We know that about China already. It's not that we can take whatever
proof we have of China's activities to the headmaster and get him to tell
China off.

In article <li0prglnss4us95uqqe1dl6n87eim2nmo0@4ax.com>,
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 09:56:55 +0000, Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid>
> wrote:

> >With today's technology, it would be easy to create a virus more
> >transmissible than Omikron which itself contained a far deadlier virus.
> >Under such an attack, the souped-up Omicron would spread the disease,
> >and the other virus would kill people. When the facts became known,
> >panic would kill more people than the virus.

> It's arguable that panic is already killing more than the virus. Wait
> till we see the true figures for all the postponed or cancelled
> operations and undiagnosed illnesses that aren't covid.

> In any case, the question remains, what is the point of a weapon that
> kills everyone including the nation that uses it? If this really is
> what the Chinese had in mind, let's hope they've learned from the
> experience that anything infectious that spreads everywhere is
> probably not much use for this purpose.

It is always possible that Chinese were meant to be immune to it, but
something went wrong

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 17/12/2021 10:41, Spike wrote:
>
> On 17/12/2021 10:04, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> So if China's aim was to produce a military bio-weapon in a civilian
>> lab, why are we all still alive?
>
> We aren't. We're dying by the million from the virus. Do keep up.

But some of the people who have died have been Chinese, and many people
haven't died, so why are we still alive?

Do keep up!

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 17/12/2021 10:18, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
> On 17/12/2021 09:32, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> But even if they are, would any rational person choose as a weapon to
>> accomplish this, a gun that fires 99 blanks and 1 bullet out of every
>> shot it fires, and the single real shot is as likely to kill the person
>> behind the gun as the person it's aimed at?
>
> Of course they would, because having created the means it requires no
> effort to spread it.  It is the same principle that the scammers use,
> sending out millions of e-mails with the expectation that enough mugs
> will believe it to give them an income. The "99 blanks" don't matter, it
> is the one effective one that brings the benefit.

You've overlooked a vital part of the argument, that the one bullet is
as likely to kill the person behind the gun as the one it's aimed at.

> It isn't a weapon that needs aiming, it just needs to bother people
> enough to create economic havoc.

Including in China itself. No, however fond of conspiracy theories you
choose to be, the idea never did and still doesn't make any rational sense.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 17/12/2021 10:42, Spike wrote:
>
> You really aren't familiar with the technique of weasel-wording, or the
> ability of an institute to over-egg the cake in order to improve
> funding, recognition, prestige, honours, etc etc.

I'm completely familiar with it because you do it all the time in a
pathetic attempt to cover up your total lack of logical argument and
scientific knowledge.

> It's not something you learn in S101.

But apparently something you learn in the realm of contemporary dance.
How's 'Denialism By Dance' coming on, found a theatre to take it yet?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 09:19 17 Dec 2021, Bob Latham said:

> In article <XnsAE02A814AB9FF37B93@144.76.35.252>,
> Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How does it make any difference either way? Is the purpsoe of
>> pinning it on Chinese scientists to ask for reparations?
>
>> Asia (and to a lesser extent Africa) are breeding grounds for
>> zoonotic diseases. There are dozens such diseases which go around
>> the world including seasonal flu.
>
>> How does it make any difference if a lab was involved in the
>> creation of Covid rather than natural events? Is there perhaps a
>> wider political battle in the debate, whose presence has gone over
>> my head?
>
> So if it did come the laboratory even by accident, that accident
> killed thousands of people and ruined the lives of most of the world
> for a number of years. In addition, it would mean the Chinese
> government hid the truth (lied) to the world about what they had
> done.
>
> You don't think other countries attitude to China and to paying that
> lab for research should change if that were the case? Or are you a
> communist?
>
> Bob.

I wish the attitude of countries to China had a real effect but all too
often it's like water off a duck's back.

Proving China has lied about something doesn't seem to embarass them into
making changes.

On 17/12/2021 19:18, Java Jive wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 10:18, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>
>> On 17/12/2021 09:32, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> But even if they are, would any rational person choose as a weapon to
>>> accomplish this, a gun that fires 99 blanks and 1 bullet out of every
>>> shot it fires, and the single real shot is as likely to kill the person
>>> behind the gun as the person it's aimed at?
>>
>> Of course they would, because having created the means it requires no
>> effort to spread it. It is the same principle that the scammers use,
>> sending out millions of e-mails with the expectation that enough mugs
>> will believe it to give them an income. The "99 blanks" don't matter, it
>> is the one effective one that brings the benefit.
>
> You've overlooked a vital part of the argument, that the one bullet is
> as likely to kill the person behind the gun as the one it's aimed at.
>

The person behind the gun is the scientist who created the virus in the
dangerous to humans state. I know that someone has found a bat virus
with similar characteristics in northern Laos, but there is no
associated claim that it is as infectious to humans as Covid-19, and if
enough time and effort is devoted to the search, some coincidences are
likely to appear.

>> It isn't a weapon that needs aiming, it just needs to bother people
>> enough to create economic havoc.
>
> Including in China itself. No, however fond of conspiracy theories you
> choose to be, the idea never did and still doesn't make any rational sense.
>
I don't believe that the weapon was intended to get out when it did[1],
so the fact that the first victims were the local Chinese is what the
military call "collateral damage". It is also worth noting that the
Chinese have never been reported to have bought any of the currently
used vaccines available outside China, which could suggest that as well
as enhancing an existing virus they were also developing its antidote.

That doesn't alter the fact that it would have worked as a biological
weapon useful outside China if its delivery had been properly timed and
controlled. The lack of symptoms for some days while an infected person
is able to pass the virus on to others makes the actual delivery almost
impossible to detect, and the person chosen for the role doesn't even
need to know they are the carrier.

I appreciate that this is speculation, but the lack of clear evidence
doesn't render it impossible. The fact that the Chinese Government has
gone to great lengths to prevent a proper examination if the Wuhan
facility does suggest that there is a deliberate attempt to erase it
from the list of possibilities rather than allowing an independent
observer to record that there was noting to find there.

I recognise that you are convinced by the evidence you have seen, but it
does look to me that it has been carefully stage managed. Yes, it might
be true nevertheless. It doesn't necessarily exclude other possible
scenarios though. I am not a conspiracy advocate, I am a sceptic
prepared to keep an open mind.

[1] When the outbreak among the residents of Wuhan first hit the news,
someone leaked a photo of what was claimed to be safe storage for
viruses showing some visible damage to the door which was originally
intended to keep everyone safe. I saw it online early in 2010. That
photo was nowhere to be found a couple of months later when I tried to
find it again. It does suggest that the original leak (if that was what
it was) was accidental.

On 17/12/2021 20:13, Pamela wrote:
> On 09:19 17 Dec 2021, Bob Latham said:
>
>> In article<XnsAE02A814AB9FF37B93@144.76.35.252>,
>> Pamela<pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> How does it make any difference either way? Is the purpsoe of
>>> pinning it on Chinese scientists to ask for reparations?
>>
>>> Asia (and to a lesser extent Africa) are breeding grounds for
>>> zoonotic diseases. There are dozens such diseases which go around
>>> the world including seasonal flu.
>>
>>> How does it make any difference if a lab was involved in the
>>> creation of Covid rather than natural events? Is there perhaps a
>>> wider political battle in the debate, whose presence has gone over
>>> my head?
>>
>> So if it did come the laboratory even by accident, that accident
>> killed thousands of people and ruined the lives of most of the world
>> for a number of years. In addition, it would mean the Chinese
>> government hid the truth (lied) to the world about what they had
>> done.
>>
>> You don't think other countries attitude to China and to paying that
>> lab for research should change if that were the case? Or are you a
>> communist?
>>
>> Bob.
>
> I wish the attitude of countries to China had a real effect but all too
> often it's like water off a duck's back.
>
> Proving China has lied about something doesn't seem to embarass them into
> making changes.
>
The only effective weapon would be a financial one - stopping all new
contracts with China would starve them of funds and make most of their
factories redundant. Unfortunately, too many countries around the world
want cheap goods.

Jim

On 17/12/2021 21:00, Indy Jess John wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 19:18, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 17/12/2021 10:18, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>
>>> On 17/12/2021 09:32, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But even if they are, would any rational person choose as a weapon to
>>>> accomplish this, a gun that fires 99 blanks and 1 bullet out of every
>>>> shot it fires, and the single real shot is as likely to kill the person
>>>> behind the gun as the person it's aimed at?
>>>
>>> Of course they would, because having created the means it requires no
>>> effort to spread it. It is the same principle that the scammers use,
>>> sending out millions of e-mails with the expectation that enough mugs
>>> will believe it to give them an income. The "99 blanks" don't matter, it
>>> is the one effective one that brings the benefit.
>>
>> You've overlooked a vital part of the argument, that the one bullet is
>> as likely to kill the person behind the gun as the one it's aimed at.
>>
>
> The person behind the gun is the scientist who created the virus in the
> dangerous to humans state. I know that someone has found a bat virus
> with similar characteristics in northern Laos, but there is no
> associated claim that it is as infectious to humans as Covid-19, and if
> enough time and effort is devoted to the search, some coincidences are
> likely to appear.
>
>>> It isn't a weapon that needs aiming, it just needs to bother people
>>> enough to create economic havoc.
>>
>> Including in China itself. No, however fond of conspiracy theories you
>> choose to be, the idea never did and still doesn't make any rational sense.
>>
> I don't believe that the weapon was intended to get out when it did[1],
> so the fact that the first victims were the local Chinese is what the
> military call "collateral damage". It is also worth noting that the
> Chinese have never been reported to have bought any of the currently
> used vaccines available outside China, which could suggest that as well
> as enhancing an existing virus they were also developing its antidote.
>
> That doesn't alter the fact that it would have worked as a biological
> weapon useful outside China if its delivery had been properly timed and
> controlled. The lack of symptoms for some days while an infected person
> is able to pass the virus on to others makes the actual delivery almost
> impossible to detect, and the person chosen for the role doesn't even
> need to know they are the carrier.
>
> I appreciate that this is speculation, but the lack of clear evidence
> doesn't render it impossible. The fact that the Chinese Government has
> gone to great lengths to prevent a proper examination if the Wuhan
> facility does suggest that there is a deliberate attempt to erase it
> from the list of possibilities rather than allowing an independent
> observer to record that there was noting to find there.
>
> I recognise that you are convinced by the evidence you have seen, but it
> does look to me that it has been carefully stage managed. Yes, it might
> be true nevertheless. It doesn't necessarily exclude other possible
> scenarios though. I am not a conspiracy advocate, I am a sceptic
> prepared to keep an open mind.
>
> [1] When the outbreak among the residents of Wuhan first hit the news,
> someone leaked a photo of what was claimed to be safe storage for
> viruses showing some visible damage to the door which was originally
> intended to keep everyone safe. I saw it online early in 2010. That
> photo was nowhere to be found a couple of months later when I tried to
> find it again. It does suggest that the original leak (if that was what
> it was) was accidental.
>
>
Typos:
"noting" should be "nothing"
"2010" should be "2020"

On 17/12/2021 20:13, Pamela wrote:
> Proving China has lied about something doesn't seem to embarass them into
> making changes.

This a is general problem with foreigners.

Bill

On 18/12/2021 07:23, williamwright wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 20:13, Pamela wrote:
>> Proving China has lied about something doesn't seem to embarass them into
>> making changes.
>
> This a is general problem with foreigners.
>
> Bill

Is Boris a foreigner?

--

Jeff