On 19/11/2021 23:09, BrightsideS9 wrote:
>
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 21:40:23 GMT, Pamela
> <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 20:28 19 Nov 2021, Alexander said:
>>>
>>> All they had to do to strip you of your freedoms was re-brand the
>>> flu and convince you that it's a threat to your existence.
>>
>> What do we do about Bill Gates' microchips that came in the vaccine?
>>
>
> Ah Ha, that's where the chips have gone that new cars need. Shrewd
> operator is Bill Gates, less cars, less global warming, more goody
> points he gets.
>
>> Is it true they communicate with Windows 10? Should I wrap myself in
>> foil when I use the computer?

LOL! I wonder if people like Alexander when they're cursing the
inadequacy of their WiFi connections ever stop to think about what that
implies about the absurdity of the micro-chip idea!

--

Fake news kills!

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

On 20/11/2021 11:08, Java Jive wrote:
> On 19/11/2021 21:59, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>
>> On 19/11/2021 21:36, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> So what's new? I've never claimed otherwise!
>>>
>> "against all rational evidence to the contrary" goes way beyond what
>> "balance of probability" can justify.
>
> That the lab-leak was from bio-weapons research is indeed "against all
> rational evidence to the contrary".
>
I have never, ever, mentioned bio-weapons research, so you are aiming at
a wrong target.

What I said was
<quote>
I haven't offered any conspiracy theories, I just put forward a
realistic observation that your approach is a "balance of probability"
position and it doesn't *prove* that there is no other possible answer.
<end quote>

I stand by that, and deny anything else you might dream I said.

Jim

In article <snajm8$jp0$1@dont-email.me>,
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 20/11/2021 09:17, Spike wrote:
> >
> > On 19/11/2021 21:31, Java Jive wrote:
> >>
> >> Amongst many other things, my degree taught me to rely on *EVIDENCE*;
> >> let's see *EVIDENCE* for your claims, put up or shut up.
> >
> > *YOU* made the case. *YOU* provide the evidence.

> *YOU* made the claims that the pandemic was caused by a lab-leak. *YOU*
> provide the evidence for that claim.

Interestinly in today's Times, there is a review of a book that makes
strong case for a lab leak. (not military, just an investigation of a
strange virus)

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

xposting trimmed

In article <sn962g$rc5$2@dont-email.me>,
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> > All they had to do to strip you of your freedoms was re-brand the flu
> > and convince you that it's a threat to your existence.

> All conspiracy theorists had to do was tell you a load of dangerously
> stupid lies and you believed them.

You're assuming he believes anything he writes. (ahem) I've not seen any
evidence of that...

So far as I can tell his postings could simply be from a bored no-mates 12
year old who wants to be the center of attention. Of course I have no
'evidence' of this beyond it being compatable with his behaviour here.
....So he might be older. :-)

And in fairness, some 12 year olds are well educated and smart, and able to
learn.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

xposting trimmed

In article <XnsADE7DC789D2F37B93@144.76.35.252>, Pamela
<pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:

> What do we do about Bill Gates' microchips that came in the vaccine?

> Is it true they communicate with Windows 10? Should I wrap myself in
> foil when I use the computer?

I stopped using 'doze many years ago. However IIUC people are now having
'doze 11 inflicted upon them, along with it trying to dictate what sorts of
machine the mere user is 'allowed'.

The good news is that other OS's exist. :-)

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On 10:06 20 Nov 2021, Jim Lesurf said:

> xposting trimmed
>
> In article <sn962g$rc5$2@dont-email.me>,
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> > All they had to do to strip you of your freedoms was re-brand the
>> > flu and convince you that it's a threat to your existence.
>
>> All conspiracy theorists had to do was tell you a load of
>> dangerously stupid lies and you believed them.
>
> You're assuming he believes anything he writes. (ahem) I've not seen
> any evidence of that...
>
> So far as I can tell his postings could simply be from a bored
> no-mates 12 year old who wants to be the center of attention. Of
> course I have no 'evidence' of this beyond it being compatable with
> his behaviour here. ...So he might be older. :-)
>
> And in fairness, some 12 year olds are well educated and smart, and
> able to learn.
>
> Jim

You're right that his posts seem so surreal that he couldn't possibly
beleive what he says.

On the other hand, there are some deeply troubled individuals out
there who live in an alternate reality to the rest of society.

On 20/11/2021 11:06, Java Jive wrote:
> On 20/11/2021 09:18, Spike wrote:
>> On 19/11/2021 21:41, Java Jive wrote:

>>> That is a lie - you tried to claim that there was evidence that it was
>>> a lab-leak, and further by posting links to cold-war Russian bio-weapons
>>> research tried to imply that it was a lab-leak from similar research in
>>> China. As I've explained now many times, even just a careless lab-leak
>>> from a benign institution is the least likely amongst the possible
>>> explanations, while the bio-weapons idea is so unlikely that it's simply
>>> typically absurd conspiracy theory nonsense.

>> *COBBLERS*

> Your posting record above says otherwise, and still no *EVIDENCE* for a
> lab-leak, where is your *EVIDENCE*, put up or shut up.

I can see why you're so touchy and defensive.

This was part of your *VERY* *FIRST* *POST* in this thread:

Java Jive: "...finding the actual path of the virus to Wuhan from
wherever it actually originated on some remote farm or rural community".

So, no prejudgement there then. No wonder you turned to ad-homs and
abuse when your prejudgement was questioned.

--
Spike

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 21:40:23 GMT, Pamela
<pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:

>What do we do about Bill Gates' microchips that came in the vaccine?
>
>Is it true they communicate with Windows 10? Should I wrap myself in
>foil when I use the computer?

try a thicker grade....it has to match your intelligence

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 12:58:30 +0000, Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid>
wrote:

>On 20/11/2021 11:06, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 20/11/2021 09:18, Spike wrote:
>>> On 19/11/2021 21:41, Java Jive wrote:
>
>>>> That is a lie - you tried to claim that there was evidence that it was
>>>> a lab-leak, and further by posting links to cold-war Russian bio-weapons
>>>> research tried to imply that it was a lab-leak from similar research in
>>>> China. As I've explained now many times, even just a careless lab-leak
>>>> from a benign institution is the least likely amongst the possible
>>>> explanations, while the bio-weapons idea is so unlikely that it's simply
>>>> typically absurd conspiracy theory nonsense.
>
>>> *COBBLERS*
>
>> Your posting record above says otherwise, and still no *EVIDENCE* for a
>> lab-leak, where is your *EVIDENCE*, put up or shut up.
>
>I can see why you're so touchy and defensive.
>
>This was part of your *VERY* *FIRST* *POST* in this thread:
>
>Java Jive: "...finding the actual path of the virus to Wuhan from
>wherever it actually originated on some remote farm or rural community".
>
>So, no prejudgement there then. No wonder you turned to ad-homs and
>abuse when your prejudgement was questioned.

do you really suppose he will admit is errors?

his ego is more important to him

On 20/11/2021 11:25, charles wrote:
>
> Interestinly in today's Times, there is a review of a book that makes
> strong case for a lab leak. (not military, just an investigation of a
> strange virus)

Link?

--

Fake news kills!

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

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 20/11/2021 11:25, charles wrote:
>>
>> Interestinly in today's Times, there is a review of a book that makes
>> strong case for a lab leak. (not military, just an investigation of a
>> strange virus)
>
> Link?
>

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/viral-by-alina-chan-and-matt-ridley-review-s7hqgkdmf?shareToken=44a6e12d056454f92b06532467550633

On 20/11/2021 12:58, Spike wrote:
>
> On 20/11/2021 11:06, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 20/11/2021 09:18, Spike wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/11/2021 21:41, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That is a lie - you tried to claim that there was evidence that it was
>>>> a lab-leak, and further by posting links to cold-war Russian bio-weapons
>>>> research tried to imply that it was a lab-leak from similar research in
>>>> China. As I've explained now many times, even just a careless lab-leak
>>>> from a benign institution is the least likely amongst the possible
>>>> explanations, while the bio-weapons idea is so unlikely that it's simply
>>>> typically absurd conspiracy theory nonsense.
>>>
>>> *COBBLERS*
>>
>> Your posting record above says otherwise, and still no *EVIDENCE* for a
>> lab-leak, where is your *EVIDENCE*, put up or shut up.
>
> I can see why you're so touchy and defensive.
>
> This was part of your *VERY* *FIRST* *POST* in this thread:
>
> Java Jive: "...finding the actual path of the virus to Wuhan from
> wherever it actually originated on some remote farm or rural community".
>
> So, no prejudgement there then. No wonder you turned to ad-homs and
> abuse when your prejudgement was questioned.

That is exactly what the science is suggesting, that it came from bats
either directly from people in a rural community going into bat caves,
or else via a farmed animal that was taken from the countryside into
Wuhan market. The most recent report linked earlier today suggest the
the latter rather than the former, but that hadn't then been published.

And *STILL* no *EVIDENCE* for a lab-leak, where is your *EVIDENCE* for
this claim, put up or shut up!

--

Fake news kills!

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

On 16:53 20 Nov 2021, Tweed said:
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 20/11/2021 11:25, charles wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Interestinly in today's Times, there is a review of a book that
>>> makes strong case for a lab leak. (not military, just an
>>> investigation of a strange virus)
>>
>> Link?
>
> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/viral-by-alina-chan-and-
> matt-ridley-review-s7hqgkdmf?shareToken=
> 44a6e12d056454f92b06532467550633

Bootleg ePub version here:

https://b-ok.cc/book/18165133/48ec6d

On 20/11/2021 15:47, abelard wrote:
>
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 12:58:30 +0000, Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid>
> wrote:
>>
>> On 20/11/2021 11:06, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> Your posting record above says otherwise, and still no *EVIDENCE* for a
>>> lab-leak, where is your *EVIDENCE*, put up or shut up.
>>
>> I can see why you're so touchy and defensive.
>>
>> This was part of your *VERY* *FIRST* *POST* in this thread:
>>
>> Java Jive: "...finding the actual path of the virus to Wuhan from
>> wherever it actually originated on some remote farm or rural community".
>>
>> So, no prejudgement there then. No wonder you turned to ad-homs and
>> abuse when your prejudgement was questioned.
>
> do you really suppose he will admit is errors?

It wasn't an error, it was a statement of the generally accepted
scientific view.

> his ego is more important to him

Whereas yours is so important to you that, despite having nothing to
contribute to rational debate and nothing worthy of the term
'communication' to say, you just can't bear to be ignored, so instead
you waste everyone's time by making castrated remarks impotently
directed at other people. As the great American satirist Tom Lehrer
once remarked: "I feel that if a person can't communicate, the very
least he can do is to shut up!"

--

Fake news kills!

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

On 20/11/2021 11:17, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
> On 20/11/2021 11:08, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 19/11/2021 21:59, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/11/2021 21:36, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So what's new?  I've never claimed otherwise!
>>>>
>>> "against all rational evidence to the contrary" goes way beyond what
>>> "balance of probability" can justify.
>>
>> That the lab-leak was from bio-weapons research is indeed "against all
>> rational evidence to the contrary".
>>
> I have never, ever, mentioned bio-weapons research, so you are aiming at
> a wrong target.
>
> What I said was
> <quote>
> I haven't offered any conspiracy theories, I just put forward a
> realistic observation that your approach is a "balance of probability"
> position and it doesn't *prove* that there is no other possible answer.
> <end quote>
>
> I stand by that, and deny anything else you might dream I said.

It is true that you didn't metion bio-weapons specifically, but see your
posts quoted below, which show a clear signal of subscribing to
conspiracy theories about a lab-leak origin of covid, and further a
suggestion that perhaps military work was being undertaken at what is
actually a civilian institution:

06/11/2021, 12:03, all of it.

08/11/2021, 21:59

"I think that no natural mutation would merge a bat and pangolin genome
so it was probably an enhanced version that escaped."

09/11/2021, 14:42

"It is also worth noting that nearly everybody in the Wuhan facility who
cast doubts on the biological security seems to have been removed from
public view. Or they were reported as deaths from the virus."

12/11/2021, 12:34

"I think the term you have missed is "Hidden in plain sight". Research
labs have several projects on the go at any time, and they keep them
strictly isolated, both for personnel safety and rumour control[1].

The foreign nationals would not be aware of anything going on in the
Wutan lab that wasn't their research project."

12/11/2021, 16:53

"If anyone said anything like that, they would be out of the door with
their security clearance permanently removed. That is assuming that they
are not still in China where they would just be arrested and charged
with something so that they could be kept out of the way.

That is a huge penalty for simply saying there was a closed area and
they have no idea what goes on in there."

18/11/2021, 12:25

"*EVERYTHING* in China is under the control of the Chinese Government.
All businesses in China are required by law to deliver to the Chinese
Government any information asked for. That is one of the reasons why
Huawei has been banned from supplying Britain's 5G infrastructure.

There is no need to have a distinction between Civilian and Military in
such an environment."

--

Fake news kills!

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

In article <598e4efc8acharles@candehope.me.uk>,
charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
> In article <snajm8$jp0$1@dont-email.me>,
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> > On 20/11/2021 09:17, Spike wrote:
> > >
> > > On 19/11/2021 21:31, Java Jive wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Amongst many other things, my degree taught me to rely on *EVIDENCE*;
> > >> let's see *EVIDENCE* for your claims, put up or shut up.
> > >
> > > *YOU* made the case. *YOU* provide the evidence.

> > *YOU* made the claims that the pandemic was caused by a lab-leak. *YOU*
> > provide the evidence for that claim.

> Interestinly in today's Times, there is a review of a book that makes
> strong case for a lab leak. (not military, just an investigation of a
> strange virus)

Did they also review "Chariots of the Gods?" 8-> That sold many copies.

I guess it hinges on the meaning of "strong".

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 17:20:30 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>On 20/11/2021 15:47, abelard wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 12:58:30 +0000, Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20/11/2021 11:06, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Your posting record above says otherwise, and still no *EVIDENCE* for a
>>>> lab-leak, where is your *EVIDENCE*, put up or shut up.
>>>
>>> I can see why you're so touchy and defensive.
>>>
>>> This was part of your *VERY* *FIRST* *POST* in this thread:
>>>
>>> Java Jive: "...finding the actual path of the virus to Wuhan from
>>> wherever it actually originated on some remote farm or rural community".
>>>
>>> So, no prejudgement there then. No wonder you turned to ad-homs and
>>> abuse when your prejudgement was questioned.
>>
>> do you really suppose he will admit is errors?
>
>It wasn't an error, it was a statement of the generally accepted
>scientific view.
>
>> his ego is more important to him
>
>Whereas yours is so important to you that, despite having nothing to
>contribute to rational debate and nothing worthy of the term
>'communication' to say, you just can't bear to be ignored, so instead
>you waste everyone's time by making castrated remarks impotently
>directed at other people. As the great American satirist Tom Lehrer
>once remarked: "I feel that if a person can't communicate, the very
>least he can do is to shut up!"

my comment was not directed to you

On 20/11/2021 16:53, Tweed wrote:
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 20/11/2021 11:25, charles wrote:
>>>
>>> Interestinly in today's Times, there is a review of a book that makes
>>> strong case for a lab leak. (not military, just an investigation of a
>>> strange virus)
>>
>> Link?
>
> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/viral-by-alina-chan-and-matt-ridley-review-s7hqgkdmf?shareToken=44a6e12d056454f92b06532467550633

Thanks for the link, but the book looks like bollocks to me, designed to
make the authors money, not shed any useful light on the origins of
SARS-Cov-2:

Times: "The book collates a series of circumstantial but damning points
in favour of the lab-leak hypothesis."

Self-contradiction, by definition circumstantial evidence is not
damning, though it may become convincing if there's enough of it that is
all true, however the latter condition is not met here ...

Times: "It opens with a cloak-and-dagger scene of a BBC reporter trying
to reach a mine in Mojiang, a rural area in southwest China. He finds
his way repeatedly barred by impromptu roadblocks; unmarked cars follow
him; he is threatened with violence. Another reporter is detained by
police for five hours after finding his way to the mine by mountain bike."

Covid: Wuhan scientist would 'welcome' visit probing lab leak theory
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-55364445

The BBC report of this has already been linked in this thread, and is
again above, but it also quotes the woman in charge of WIV saying that
she would like to throw open the doors of the lab to the then
forthcoming WHO investigation, but of course in time that decision was
made differently by the Chinese authorities. No-one is denying that the
Chinese are covering up, but what they covering up doesn't have to be a
lab-leak, there is at least one more likely cause for a cover-up. From
here and previous reports, we know that:

- The genetic diversity of the known initial cases suggests that the
outbreak began around early October, see again below;

- The official channels set up after SARS to notify the authorities of
a new emergent health problem were not used until January:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm4454
"The system appears to have been in active use only from 3 January."

- Local officials were sacked after a national government investigation.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/11/china-fires-two-senior-hubei-officials-over-coronavirus-outbreak

All this is suggestive of local officials either being negligent and/or
trying unsuccessfully to contain the outbreak before notifying national
authorities, and, given the disastrous consequences, that would be very
embarrassing for China to admit to the outside world.

Times: "In 2012 six workers at that mine had developed severe pneumonia
from an unknown virus. Samples from the six were sent to the Wuhan
Institute for Virology (WIV), more than 1,000 miles away. Three died.
The genome of that virus, described as a Sars-related coronavirus (or
Sarsr-CoV), was sequenced; part of that genetic sequence was published.
And, later — much later — that genetic sequence was found to be 96.2 per
cent identical to the Sars-CoV-2 virus that caused Covid.

Yet that similarity was noticed only after anonymous internet sleuths
discovered an unpublished 2013 master’s thesis by a Chinese doctor
looking at the six Mojiang miners. They also discovered that the WIV had
sequenced the virus in 2016, but changed its name (from 4991 to RaTG13)
in their literature, and not mentioned its origins or importance in any
of its subsequent papers, including a 2020 paper on the origin of the
pandemic."

FALSE! The suggestion that the Chinese were trying to obscure the
identity between '4991' and 'RaTG13' is nonsense:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7744920/

"BtCoV/4991 and RaTG13 have been later asserted to be two different
coding names of the same strain, as their original authors at WIV
registered the two strains as one entry in the Database of
Bat‐associated Viruses (DBatVir).iv"

Times: "Yet despite much better sequencing technology, there has been no
similar success identifying the animal hosts in the Huanan wet market in
Wuhan that the present outbreak was supposed to come from and the human
cases in that market were all of one strain, suggesting that it was a
later superspreader event and not the start of the outbreak."

FALSE: They weren't all of one strain. As previously linked here in my
post of 07/11/2021, 23:36:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct1l3t
Science in Action, 27/06/2021, 0:56-14:16
Tales of unexpected DNA data

"A new paper by virologist Jesse Bloom reported the discovery of some
early Wuhan partial genetic sequences. These were taken at an early
date in the outbreak there but the date meta data is not available, and
they give sequences that are two or three mutations closer to the
original bat virus compared to the ones that were previously considered
to have been the start of the outbreak, suggesting that the outbreak
began a month or more earlier than the Chinese authorities have so far
admitted."

Times: "Also, Chan and Ridley say, the Sars-CoV-2 virus has not mutated
anything like as quickly as the original Sars virus did, suggesting that
it was already well adapted to humans. Which is surprising if it had
just jumped from a wild animal, but not if it had been allowed to breed
in a laboratory animal designed to mimic human biology."

FALSE! Same reasons as rebuttals above and below.

Times: "And, they say, the virus has something called a “furin cleavage
site”, which is unknown in coronaviruses of this type, but makes the
virus more effective at infecting human cells. A January 2020 paper by
WIV scientists, Chan and Ridley say, describes the entire viral genome
except for the genes coding for the furin cleavage site, which they say
is like discovering a unicorn, then writing a paper comparing it with
other horses, “describing in detail the hair and the hooves, but you
don’t mention the horn”."

FALSE!

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8373617/

"The WIV possesses an extensive catalog of samples derived from bats
(Latinne et al., 2020) and has reportedly successfully cultured three
SARSr-CoVs from bats—WIV1, WIV16, and Rs4874 (Ge et al., 2013; Hu et
al., 2017; Yang et al., 2015). Importantly, all three viruses are more
closely related to SARS-CoV than to SARS-CoV-2 (Ge et al., 2013; Hu et
al., 2017; Yang et al., 2015). In contrast, bat virus RaTG13 from the
WIV has reportedly never been isolated or cultured and only exists as a
nucleotide sequence assembled from short sequencing reads (Cohen, 2020).
The three cultured viruses were isolated from fecal samples through
serial amplification in Vero E6 cells, a process that consistently
results in the loss of the SARS-CoV-2 furin cleavage site (Davidson et
al., 2020; Klimstra et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020b; Ogando et al.,
2020; Sasaki et al., 2021; Wong et al., 2021; Zhu et al., 2021b). It is
therefore highly unlikely that these techniques would result in the
isolation of a SARS-CoV-2 progenitor with an intact furin cleavage site."

Some of the earlier part of this last NIH article also debunks the
single strain claim above.

Also:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7836551/

"Abstract

The spike protein is a focused target of COVID-19, a pandemic caused by
SARS-CoV-2. A 12-nt insertion at S1/S2 in the spike coding sequence
yields a furin cleavage site, which raised controversy views on origin
of the virus. Here we analyzed the phylogenetic relationships of
coronavirus spike proteins and mapped furin recognition motif on the
tree. Furin cleavage sites occurred independently for multiple times in
the evolution of the coronavirus family, supporting the natural
occurring hypothesis of SARS-CoV-2."

The rest of the Times article isn't quoting from the book, so I'll leave
it there, but from the above the book appears to be the usual conspiracy
carcinogens.

The book is rather more critically reviewed by the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/nov/15/viral-by-alina-chan-and-matt-ridley-review-was-covid-19-really-made-in-china

"Ridley, a Conservative hereditary peer best known for his sceptical
writings on climate change [...]"

So again we find the believers in one absurd conspiracy theory often
believe in others.

"There is just one problem: nowhere do they present proof that
Sars-CoV-2 was manufactured. Take Chan’s claim that it appeared
pre-adapted to human transmission “to an extent similar to late epidemic
Sars”. This claim rests on a single mutation in the spike protein that
appears to “slightly enhance” (Chan and Ridley’s words) its ability to
bind to human receptor cells and suggests that by the time it was first
detected in Wuhan it had “apparently stabilised genetically”.

But this is highly misleading. As the subsequent alphabet soup of
variants demonstrates, the coronavirus has undergone repeated mutations
that have steadily increased its fitness. Furthermore, studies of
viruses isolated from pangolins, one of the animals suspected of being
an intermediary host, bind to human receptor cells even more efficiently
than Sars-CoV-2, suggesting capacity for further adaptation. As two
leading virologists put it, the virus was not perfectly adapted to
humans but was “just good enough”.

On 20/11/2021 18:57, abelard wrote:
>
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 17:20:30 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>>
>> On 20/11/2021 15:47, abelard wrote:
>>>
>>> his ego is more important to him
>>
>> Whereas yours is so important to you that, despite having nothing to
>> contribute to rational debate and nothing worthy of the term
>> 'communication' to say, you just can't bear to be ignored, so instead
>> you waste everyone's time by making castrated remarks impotently
>> directed at other people. As the great American satirist Tom Lehrer
>> once remarked: "I feel that if a person can't communicate, the very
>> least he can do is to shut up!"
>
> my comment was not directed to you

However, it seemed to be directed about me, which gives me right of
response.

--

Fake news kills!

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

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:54:15 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>On 20/11/2021 18:57, abelard wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 17:20:30 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20/11/2021 15:47, abelard wrote:
>>>>
>>>> his ego is more important to him
>>>
>>> Whereas yours is so important to you that, despite having nothing to
>>> contribute to rational debate and nothing worthy of the term
>>> 'communication' to say, you just can't bear to be ignored, so instead
>>> you waste everyone's time by making castrated remarks impotently
>>> directed at other people. As the great American satirist Tom Lehrer
>>> once remarked: "I feel that if a person can't communicate, the very
>>> least he can do is to shut up!"
>>
>> my comment was not directed to you
>
>However, it seemed to be directed about me, which gives me right of
>response.

you are interesting as a subject...

On 20/11/2021 20:08, abelard wrote:
>
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:54:15 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>>
>> However, it seemed to be directed about me, which gives me right of
>> response.
>
> you are interesting as a subject...

You are uninteresting and irrelevant, full stop.

--

Fake news kills!

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

On 20/11/2021 17:34, Java Jive wrote:
> On 20/11/2021 11:17, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>
>> On 20/11/2021 11:08, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/11/2021 21:59, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 19/11/2021 21:36, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> So what's new? I've never claimed otherwise!
>>>>>
>>>> "against all rational evidence to the contrary" goes way beyond what
>>>> "balance of probability" can justify.
>>>
>>> That the lab-leak was from bio-weapons research is indeed "against all
>>> rational evidence to the contrary".
>>>
>> I have never, ever, mentioned bio-weapons research, so you are aiming at
>> a wrong target.
>>
>> What I said was
>> <quote>
>> I haven't offered any conspiracy theories, I just put forward a
>> realistic observation that your approach is a "balance of probability"
>> position and it doesn't *prove* that there is no other possible answer.
>> <end quote>
>>
>> I stand by that, and deny anything else you might dream I said.
>
> It is true that you didn't mention bio-weapons specifically, but see your
> posts quoted below, which show a clear signal of subscribing to
> conspiracy theories about a lab-leak origin of covid, and further a
> suggestion that perhaps military work was being undertaken at what is
> actually a civilian institution

Not so. I didn't say I subscribed to any particular point of view. I was
merely pointing out the alternatives, which may or not be true, that
shouldn't be automatically discarded by anybody with an open mind.

The fact that there is a currently preferred narrative based on a
"balance of probability doesn't *prove* that no other possibilities
might exist, and might even be more accurate.

You might not like it, but the scientific method is to find ways of
challenging existing beliefs to see how resilient they are. For
instance, Newton's gravitational theory survived for over a century
before Einstein identified a flaw in it not serious enough to stop it
being used as a useful rule of thumb, but it prevented it being regarded
as an ultimate truth.

Likewise, the Covid history, hidden as it is behind Chinese secrecy and
fake news (they started by accusing the Americans of bringing it from
Africa to China until world-wide ridicule made them back-track), is open
to further investigation, which may or may not require a rethink from
today's position. I am pleased to see that alternatives are being
explored, whether or not they come to any definite conclusion.

I do not apologise for having an open mind, nor for expressing it
occasionally, though I do feel sorry for you clinging to just one of
several possibilities to the extent that you think every other
alternative is definitely wrong, and you feel compelled to call out
anyone who suggests anything different.

Jim

On 20/11/2021 22:58, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
> On 20/11/2021 17:34, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 20/11/2021 11:17, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20/11/2021 11:08, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 19/11/2021 21:59, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19/11/2021 21:36, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what's new?  I've never claimed otherwise!
>>>>>>
>>>>> "against all rational evidence to the contrary" goes way beyond what
>>>>> "balance of probability" can justify.
>>>>
>>>> That the lab-leak was from bio-weapons research is indeed "against all
>>>> rational evidence to the contrary".
>>>>
>>> I have never, ever, mentioned bio-weapons research, so you are aiming at
>>> a wrong target.
>>>
>>> What I said was
>>> <quote>
>>> I haven't offered any conspiracy theories, I just put forward a
>>> realistic observation that your approach is a "balance of probability"
>>> position and it doesn't *prove* that there is no other possible answer.
>>> <end quote>
>>>
>>> I stand by that, and deny anything else you might dream I said.
>>
>> It is true that you didn't mention bio-weapons specifically, but see your
>> posts quoted below, which show a clear signal of subscribing to
>> conspiracy theories about a lab-leak origin of covid, and further a
>> suggestion that perhaps military work was being undertaken at what is
>> actually a civilian institution
>
> Not so. I didn't say I subscribed to any particular point of view.

The quotes I gave strongly suggest an adherence to a particular
conspiracy point of view, and I don't think I need to be lectured on
'The Scientific Method' by a climate denialist either.

--

Fake news kills!

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

On 21/11/2021 00:54, Java Jive wrote:
> On 20/11/2021 22:58, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>
>> On 20/11/2021 17:34, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20/11/2021 11:17, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 20/11/2021 11:08, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19/11/2021 21:59, Indy Jess John wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 19/11/2021 21:36, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So what's new? I've never claimed otherwise!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> "against all rational evidence to the contrary" goes way beyond what
>>>>>> "balance of probability" can justify.
>>>>>
>>>>> That the lab-leak was from bio-weapons research is indeed "against all
>>>>> rational evidence to the contrary".
>>>>>
>>>> I have never, ever, mentioned bio-weapons research, so you are aiming at
>>>> a wrong target.
>>>>
>>>> What I said was
>>>> <quote>
>>>> I haven't offered any conspiracy theories, I just put forward a
>>>> realistic observation that your approach is a "balance of probability"
>>>> position and it doesn't *prove* that there is no other possible answer.
>>>> <end quote>
>>>>
>>>> I stand by that, and deny anything else you might dream I said.
>>>
>>> It is true that you didn't mention bio-weapons specifically, but see your
>>> posts quoted below, which show a clear signal of subscribing to
>>> conspiracy theories about a lab-leak origin of covid, and further a
>>> suggestion that perhaps military work was being undertaken at what is
>>> actually a civilian institution
>>
>> Not so. I didn't say I subscribed to any particular point of view.
>
> The quotes I gave strongly suggest an adherence to a particular
> conspiracy point of view, and I don't think I need to be lectured on
> 'The Scientific Method' by a climate denialist either.
>
You do, because you are a closed mind and therefore an irrelevant
irritation to those who are not.

I am not a climate denialist either, just someone who thinks the drivers
of climate are a bit more complicated than what is currently modelled,
and look forward to further research which might explain why the start
of each ice age has been preceded by a couple of centuries of abnormally
high temperatures, even before mankind evolved.

If you continue with your "my way or the wrong way" attitude, you will
continue to be seen as less of a guru and more of an obsessive. That is
your loss, not mine.

Jim

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 12:53:59 GMT, Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On 10:06 20 Nov 2021, Jim Lesurf said:
>
>> xposting trimmed
>>
>> In article <sn962g$rc5$2@dont-email.me>,
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> > All they had to do to strip you of your freedoms was re-brand the
>>> > flu and convince you that it's a threat to your existence.
>>
>>> All conspiracy theorists had to do was tell you a load of
>>> dangerously stupid lies and you believed them.
>>
>> You're assuming he believes anything he writes. (ahem) I've not seen
>> any evidence of that...
>>
>> So far as I can tell his postings could simply be from a bored
>> no-mates 12 year old who wants to be the center of attention. Of
>> course I have no 'evidence' of this beyond it being compatable with
>> his behaviour here. ...So he might be older. :-)
>>
>> And in fairness, some 12 year olds are well educated and smart, and
>> able to learn.
>>
>> Jim
>
>You're right that his posts seem so surreal that he couldn't possibly
>beleive what he says.
>
>On the other hand, there are some deeply troubled individuals out
>there who live in an alternate reality to the rest of society.

Oddly in another group his posts were always sensible.
--

Martin in Zuid Holland