Remember when Trump, in his attempt to shift blame to China as his sole motivation, declared the virus came from a lab? He had no proof and to date there still is no smoking gun. If you science believers remember, the CCP conveniently ordered the lab to be scrubbed. Immediately after Trump made his baseless claim, a letter was issued declaring the 'scientz' showed the virus came from nature. People ate it up and called themselves scientifically based. So proud are the Left of their sheepish worship of science and of administrators like Peter Daszak who actually penned that letter and was the primary individual responsible for securing the funding of the Wuhan Lab's gain of function research. How did the scientific community, who claimed at the time that there was little known about the virus and a lot of speculation, so easily and immediately assert that the virus came from nature? Well the scientific community didn't....the NIH and WHO did...you know...the science officials
There may not be proof that the virus came from a lab. Unlike some who claim to know science, I know what proof means. But the opposite claim that it most definitely did NOT come from a lab is based on no evidence, way too quickly declared and losing traction post Trump rapidly.
As New Evidence Emerges For COVID "Lab-Leak" Theory, Journalists Who Screamed
jimmy: I still have an open mind about the whole thing. The actions of the Chinese were (and still are) suspicious, but there's a big difference between acting guilty and proving guilt.
I think some day the truth will be known. In the meantime, I remember a Chinese woman who got out of China about nine months ago and began speaking about the issue.
She seems to have vanished from the face of the Earth, and I can't remember her name so I can search to try to determine what happened to her.
Bob
Fauci being questioned yesterday on whether the U.S. helped fund the Wuhan lab. Emails surfacing regarding connection. As Rand Paul stated this virus started in a city larger than N.Y., not in the mountains near bat caves. Wouldn't it be something if the U.S. helped fund this lab which, supposedly, for years has been known to have lax safety protocols.
These lies about a "lab leak" are as dangerous and damaging to America as the lies about the election being stolen.
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 08:07:09 AM
These lies about a "lab leak" are as dangerous and damaging to America as the lies about the election being stolen.
Rich: I disagree. The danger and damage, if any, is to the media narrative and conventional wisdom. I see no danger to America. How is America being damaged, specifically? Bob
Quote from: Bob In PA on May 12, 2021, 08:22:57 AM
Rich: I disagree. The danger and damage, if any, is to the media narrative and conventional wisdom. I see no danger to America. How is America being damaged, specifically? Bob
You would think that being a lie would be enough to make it something we would want to avoid.
Still, I didn't use the term dangerous lightly
There were 3,800 anti-Asian racist incidents, mostly against women, in the past yearThere was a time before the truth and morals were sacrificed on the altar of political expediency when accusations required proof to be considered or taken seriously. Now you and Jimmy and others seem to have twisted those values where any or all accusations no matter how baseless, damaging, or dangerous are considered true (as long as it matches your political views) until proven false.
This is not how things should be done.
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 08:30:04 AM
You would think that being a lie would be enough to make it something we would want to avoid.
Still, I didn't use the term dangerous lightly
There were 3,800 anti-Asian racist incidents, mostly against women, in the past year
There was a time before the truth and morals were sacrificed on the altar of political expediency when accusations required proof to be considered or taken seriously. Now you and Jimmy and others seem to have twisted those values where any or all accusations no matter how baseless, damaging, or dangerous are considered true (as long as it matches your political views) until proven false.
This is not how things should be done.
Rich: You are assuming it's a lie, without proof. The Chinese won't let us into the lab to determine whether or not it's a lie. The Chinese won't release the records so we can answer the question for ourselves. Bob
Quote from: Bob In PA on May 12, 2021, 08:42:23 AM
Rich: You are assuming it's a lie, without proof. The Chinese won't let us into the lab to determine whether or not it's a lie. The Chinese won't release the records so we can answer the question for ourselves. Bob
Bob,
The burden of proof is on the accuser. That is where you are twisting things, it's not on me to prove the accusation a lie. Remember when you got angry when I posted the poll that showed the majority of Americans are happy with President Biden? I said the anger was expected because your political side seems to lean very heavily on the argumentum ad populum fallacy which is why any suggestion that you are not in the majority unsettles you. I bring that up because this very thread is built on the argumentum ad populum fallacy. It's not like Jimmy had a careful fact-based case to support his accusation. Instead, he opted for MULTIPLE SOURCES pushing the same baseless and unsupported accusations. That's because, in your world, volume trumps facts and critical thinking.
Here's the thing, regardless of China's transparency or lack thereof, you can't claim any wild made-up theory is valid and MUST BE DISPROVEN. That's not how the world should be working. I mean in your world, I could claim Daniel Jones is a lizard person who hates Donald Trump and personally ate 1 million ballots and I would sit here demanding you prove to me that Daniel Jones isn't a lizard person and he didn't eat all those ballots.
Rich: I've got to hand it to you, you're the master of the "loaded question" (or, to be more accurate, the "loaded post").
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 08:52:25 AM
Remember when you got angry when I posted the poll that showed the majority of Americans are happy with President Biden?
No, I don't remember that. It didn't happen. Attempting to support a false premise with persistent repetition (and by referring to disputed items as fact) shows only that you may have a career in politics (or at CNN).
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 08:52:25 AM
I said the anger was expected because your political side seems to lean very heavily on the argumentum ad populum fallacy which is why any suggestion that you are not in the majority unsettles you. I bring that up because this very thread is built on the argumentum ad populum fallacy. It's not like Jimmy had a careful fact-based case to support his accusation. Instead, he opted for MULTIPLE SOURCES pushing the same baseless and unsupported accusations. That's because, in your world, volume trumps facts and critical thinking.
This portion of your post is superfluous inasmuch as it is based entirely on a disputed fact (a premise without a foundation).
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 08:52:25 AM
Here's the thing, regardless of China's transparency or lack thereof, you can't claim any wild made-uptheory is valid and MUST BE DISPROVEN. That's not how the world should be working. I mean in your world, I could claim Daniel Jones is a lizard person who hates Donald Trump and personally ate 1 million ballots and I would sit here demanding you prove to me that Daniel Jones isn't a lizard person and he didn't eat all those ballots.
Again, the bold portion is a conclusion. All theories are "made up" and the question of whether it is "wild" is a matter of personal opinion. I think it's logical to wonder if the virus came from a lab.
They are known to be working with dangerous viruses in that lab. We can't prove it unless they let us into the lab or at least release documentation for our examination.
The remainder of your post is correct. The burden of proof is on the accuser. However, I don't think it's a good idea to berate accusers. Do you berate women who "make up" "wild" accusations about rape?
Bob
Quote from: Bob In PA on May 12, 2021, 09:31:43 AM
The remainder of your post is correct. The burden of proof is on the accuser. However, I don't think it's a good idea to berate accusers. Do you berate women who "make up" "wild" accusations about rape?
Bob
So people promoting their political agendas by pushing unfounded and baseless theories (which are creating hate crimes against Asians) should be treated like a woman who was sexually assaulted? That's quite the stretch. I have to say your comparison is disrespectful toward women over the years who were victims of sexual assault or harassment who were mistreated when they brought up their accusations. I really think there are some lines one shouldn't cross and that comparison of yours does cross it.
To be clearly I strongly disagree with your comparison suggesting there is a similarity between people promoting baseless and damaging conspiracy theories for political gain and women who suffered double victimhood when being subjected to sexual assault or harassment.
Edit to add: I find it sort of amazing that the same people that supported Donald Trump hiding his tax returns from the American people, are using China's resistance toward full transparency as "proof" of whatever wild conspiracy theory one can concoct.
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 09:44:01 AM
So people promoting their political agendas by pushing unfounded and baseless theories (which are creating hate crimes against Asians) should be treated like a woman who was sexually assaulted? That's quite the stretch. I have to say your comparison is disrespectful toward women over the years who were victims of sexual assault or harassment who were mistreated when they brought up their accusations. I really think there are some lines one shouldn't cross and that comparison of yours does cross it.
To be clearly I strongly disagree with your comparison suggesting there is a similarity between people promoting baseless and damaging conspiracy theories for political gain and women who suffered double victimhood when being subjected to sexual assault or harassment.
Rich: Yeah, that's an old tactic - try to "change the momentum" by changing the subject. Nice try. Bob
There is absolutely no good evidence that this was transmitted from a friggin' bat. That NIH letter was an ass covering move. The fact we're not even allowed to explore this as a possibility means we are completely blind to the origins of this virus and we cannot combat it effectively.
Science trusters my @$$.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 10:36:56 AM
There is absolutely no good evidence that this was transmitted from a friggin' bat. That NIH letter was an ass covering move. The fact we're not even allowed to explore this as a possibility means we are completely blind to the origins of this virus and we cannot combat it effectively.
Science trusters my @$$.
jimmy: I see two possibilities: the Chinese explanation and what we suspect. So far as I can tell, no one in our government knows. It could be the government knows more than they're willing to make public, I guess. Bob
The fact that people are claiming its dangerous to even talk about wreaks of evangelism. The fact there is this desire to silence people is downright dystopian.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 10:36:56 AM
There is absolutely no good evidence that this was transmitted from a friggin' bat. That NIH letter was an ass covering move. The fact we're not even allowed to explore this as a possibility means we are completely blind to the origins of this virus and we cannot combat it effectively.
Science trusters my @$$.
Well if we are going with your no-evidence is needed for theories, I have a theory that Elvis (who is still alive, thanks to the Illuminati) enlisted the help of Big Foot and the Loch Ness monster to develop and disseminate Covid. If you are unwilling to spend time and money to disprove my theory that's proof of your efforts to cover things up.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 10:45:06 AM
The fact that people are claiming its dangerous to even talk about wreaks of evangelism. The fact there is this desire to silence people is downright dystopian.
You said the exact thing when people were calling out the dangerous lies about the election being stolen. How did that turn out again????
I didn't know you then, but I suspect you had a similar view about the false theories/hypothesis that Iraq had WMDs.
Wild conspiracy theories have very real-world consequences
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 11:01:40 AM
Well if we are going with your no-evidence is needed for theories, I have a theory that Elvis (who is still alive, thanks to the Illuminati) enlisted the help of Big Foot and the Loch Ness monster to develop and disseminate Covid. If you are unwilling to spend time and money to disprove my theory that's proof of your efforts to cover things up.
You said the exact thing when people were calling out the dangerous lies about the election being stolen. How did that turn out again????
I didn't know you then, but I suspect you had a similar view about the false theories/hypothesis that Iraq had WMDs.
Wild conspiracy theories have very real-world consequences
These are not conspiracy theories. And you need to point out where i said something about the election being stolen. And back then I didnt have theories about WMDs at all. You are making some big assumptions there for a guy who claims to be a fact based scientifically oriented person.
You make claims about everyone, including yourself, that are figments of your own imagination.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 11:14:51 AM
These are not conspiracy theories.
Definition of conspiracy theory
: a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators
Seems your China lab "hypothesis" more than meets the definition of a conspiracy theory
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 11:30:56 AM
Definition of conspiracy theory
: a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators
Seems your China lab "hypothesis" more than meets the definition of a conspiracy theory
So explain how what I said was a conspiracy theory. The fact the same guy who was the primary facilitator of funding the Wuhan lab gain of function research also penned the letter to immediately discount lab leak theory based on nothing but "it's just not" is highly suspicious and has nothing to do with conspiracy. Its a cover your ass move. I'm not saying China did it on purpose. I'm suggesting they may have goofed up and let it leak and dont want it to get out when they're trying to roll out their "Made In China 2025" agenda...oh and thats not a conspiracy either thats an open CCP campaign slogan. The fact that the Trump hating media gladly ate up this CYA letter without looking further is just $h1tty journalistic integrity. I'm not saying they conspired with Daszak on the letter.
Never said any of this is a plot. You know what a lab leak is? Its not a plot. You know what denial from fear of being castigated and losing funding is? Its not a plot. Its a cowardly act. You know what running with the story to bash Trump is? It's low integrity journalism which there is a prepronderance of. Its not a plot.
And the idea that we're not allowed to talk about it because its dangerous? That's just your parochial nature speaking.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 11:46:34 AM
So explain how what I said was a conspiracy theory. The fact the same guy who was the primary facilitator of funding the Wuhan lab gain of function research also penned the letter to immediately discount lab leak theory based on nothing but "it's just not" is highly suspicious and has nothing to do with conspiracy. Its a cover your ass move. I'm not saying China did it on purpose. I'm suggesting they may have goofed up and let it leak and dont want it to get out when they're trying to roll out their "Made In China 2025" agenda...oh and thats not a conspiracy either thats an open CCP campaign slogan. The fact that the Trump hating media gladly ate up this CYA letter without looking further is just $h1tty journalistic integrity. I'm not saying they conspired with Daszak on the letter.
Never said any of this is a plot. You know what a lab leak is? Its not a plot. You know what denial from fear of being castigated and losing funding is? Its not a plot. Its a cowardly act. You know what running with the story to bash Trump is? It's low integrity journalism which there is a prepronderance of. Its not a plot.
And the idea that we're not allowed to talk about it because its dangerous? That's just your parochial nature speaking.
Jimmy,
I didn't see any actual facts to support your claims. As I have already said, you need facts to support your "hypothesis'. Without facts, it's just a dangerous conspiracy theory that only serves to encourage more Asian hate crimes. When you have factual evidence that this Covid virus was created in a lab, get back to me. Until then, you are only pushing dangerous unfounded conspiracy theories that encourage hate crimes against Asians.
What you seem to forget is that my public health background means I know and understand the origins of pandemics. So I understand more than anyone on this board just how wild your accusations are.
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 11:55:48 AM
Jimmy,
I didn't see any actual facts to support your claims. As I have already said, you need facts to support your "hypothesis'. Without facts, it's just a dangerous conspiracy theory that only serves to encourage more Asian hate crimes. When you have factual evidence that this Covid virus was created in a lab, get back to me. Until then, you are only pushing dangerous unfounded conspiracy theories that encourage hate crimes against Asians.
What you seem to forget is that my public health background means I know and understand the origins of pandemics. So I understand more than anyone on this board just how wild your accusations are.
No..a hypothesis is just a hypothesis. Its not dangerous. You dont seem to understand the scientific method much. The danger is in ignoring as even a possibility and not looking at it for fear it might give Trump some bonus points. And the idea that we should operate under the declaration of the administrator who facilitated funding of that very lab is seems to be a less than neutral approach. Yeah dont look at this baseless declaration...look at this other baseless declaration. And this idea that I have to get back to you on anything is kind of arrogant on your part. I mean really....who are you? An authority?
Hate crimes against Asians are on the rise and its Blacks doing the crime.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 12:04:02 PM
No..a hypothesis is just a hypothesis. Its not dangerous. You dont seem to understand the scientific method much. The danger is in ignoring as even a possibility and not looking at it for fear it might give Trump some bonus points. And the idea that we should operate under the declaration of the administrator who facilitated funding of that very lab is seems to be a less than neutral approach. And this idea that I have to get back to you on anything is kind of arrogant on your part. I mean really....who are you? An authority?
Hate crimes against Asians are on the rise and its Blacks doing the crime.
When you have factual evidence to support your assertion, it would be listened to. Otherwise, you are just another person promoting dangerous and wild conspiracy theories. In science, we TEST theories and hypotheses to determine if they are correct or not and before we accept them. You figured posted multiple sources promoted the same unfounded fact-free conspiracy theories was handly short cut behind the show test and confirm part of science
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 12:09:27 PM
When you have factual evidence to support your assertion, it would be listened to. Otherwise, you are just another person promoting dangerous and wild conspiracy theories. In science, we TEST theories and hypotheses to determine if they are correct or not and before we accept them. You figured posted multiple sources promoted the same unfounded fact-free conspiracy theories was handly short cut behind the show test and confirm part of science
Yeah....so then the hypothesis should be explored instead of ignored. Right? Derrp.
And its not my hypothesis. What part of the scientific community do you belong to in order to be able to say "In science,
we TEST theories..." I thought you were a nurse.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 12:13:41 PM
Yeah....so then the hypothesis should be explored instead of ignored. Right? Derrp.
And its not my hypothesis. What part of the scientific community do you belong to in order to be able to say "In science, we TEST theories..." I thought you were a nurse.
What I see in this thread is you took a fact-free totally unsupported conspiracy theory and used it as the underpinning for your polarizing (and in my opinion un-American) attack on science, the media, Americans you consider leftists, and Trump's critics.
When challenged that your "hypothesis" is NOTHING but a wild completely unsupported conspiracy theory you tried to turn that around and went on the attack with "Oh I am the victim!! My theories are being ignored!!"
That is not how science works (maybe you should get to learn science before attacking it). You have your hypothesis. Before you ACT on it, you test and prove it to be true or not. You skipped that part and used it as a weapon to wield against your fellow Ameircans
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 12:21:29 PM
What I see in this thread is you took a fact-free totally unsupported conspiracy theory and used it as the underpinning for your polarizing (and in my opinion un-American) attack on science, the media, Americans you consider leftists, and Trump's critics.
When challenged that your "hypothesis" is NOTHING but a wild completely unsupported conspiracy theory you tried to turn that around and went on the attack with "Oh I am the victim!! My theories are being ignored!!"
That is not how science works (maybe you should get to learn science before attacking it). You have your hypothesis. Before you ACT on it, you test and prove it to be true or not. You skipped that part and used it as a weapon to wield against your fellow Ameircans
Show me where I claim to be a victim? Rich you are off the rails.
I never said ACT on the hypothesis. I'm just saying it is gaining traction whether you or anyone else in the nursing or ambulance profession wants it to or not and its probably worth putting thru its paces. I didnt say we need to enACT policy based on it.
You do not read words. You try to read intentions and you suck at it because of your poor interpersonal skills.
Oh and you are not a scientist. I think we've all but established that. You are some kind of medical proxy to science. Like a security guard who thinks of himself as a cop.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 12:29:25 PM
Show me where I claim to be a victim? Rich you are off the rails.
I never said ACT on the hypothesis. I'm just saying it is gaining traction whether you or anyone else in the nursing or ambulance profession wants it to or not and its probably worth putting thru its paces. I didnt say we need to ACT on it.
You do not read words. You try to read intentions and you suck at it because of your poor interpersonal skills.
Oh and you are not a scientist. I think we've all but established that. You are some kind of medical proxy to science. Like a security guard who thinks of himself as a cop.
"gaining traction"
What does that mean exactly?
"putting it through its paces"
That's just another way of saying I posted the wild conspiracy theory it's your just to disprove it.
You didn't "say" act on it, you literally acted on it as using it for justification of partisan attacks on your fellow Americans
As for your ugly personal attacks on me, that par for your side. If I agreed with you, you would be promoting me as some sort of genius and authority on the subject. Since I dared to disagree, you pull out insults and slander, the right's go to move. Is it any wonder our nation is so polarized and messed up?
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 12:42:10 PM
"gaining traction"
What does that mean exactly?
"putting it through its paces"
That's just another way of saying I posted the wild conspiracy theory it's your just to disprove it.
You didn't "say" act on it, you literally acted on it as using it for justification of partisan attacks on your fellow Americans
As for your ugly personal attacks on me, that par for your side. If I agreed with you, you would be promoting me as some sort of genius and authority on the subject. Since I dared to disagree, you pull out insults and slander, the right's go to move. Is it any wonder our nation is so polarized and messed up?
Soooo.....not a scientist then?
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 12:47:12 PM
Soooo.....not a scientist then?
I have a degree in engineering from one of the top schools in our country. I am certified in emergency medical care. I also spent 20 years in public health emergency management (with the emergency focus on pandemics, just like the one we have, and WMD attacks) What are your science or medical or public health qualifications?????
Edit to add: Fl Gman pointed out how Republican Senators have weaponized this wild conspiracy theory to attack Doctor Fauci in the Senate yesterday. I guess that was just Republicans putting the "hypothesis through its paces" /sarcasm/
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 12:57:27 PM
I have a degree in engineering from one of the top schools in our country. I am certified in emergency medical care. I also spent 20 years in public health emergency management (with the emergency focus on pandemics, just like the one we have, and WMD attacks) What are your science or medical or public health qualifications?????
Edit to add: Fl Gman pointed out how Republican Senators have weaponized this wild conspiracy theory to attack Doctor Fauci in the Senate yesterday. I guess that was just Republicans putting the "hypothesis through its paces" /sarcasm/
I also have a degree in aerospace engineering from one of the top schools in the country.
But guess what...I dont have a degree in biology. And I'm not a virologist. I don't consider myself a scientist by any stretch. Nor am I stomping around a Giants fan forum claiming to be the pre-eminent authority on science.
You lack humility and that's why my trolling has such an unraveling affect on you.
As for Fauci....what's your point? Anytime someone gets put on the stage and questioned it is political in nature and your side is just as guilty of it if not more so. And still, that doesn't mean his connection with the lab can't be questioned. The NIH is completely willing to let the narrative that the virus came from man's intrusion and exploitation of nature. That's a good narrative for them. The idea that it came from their own lab is not good for them or their funding. The fact that the virus came from Wuhan where there exists a lab that researches and manipulates such viruses and has a track record of negligence and very little monitoring from the organization that helped fund it would make anyone a bit curious. Why not investigate the idea? Because its dangerous? If this were a crime, any investigator would first look in this direction instead of ignoring it and closing the case.
Where is the evidence that says this did not come from a lab when an eminent virologist (not a public health administrator) says its obviously not of natural origins? Where? Where is the shut-me-up facts? Oh there isn't any. Why can't this be investigated? We have been told to live under the notion that this did not come from a lab but is natural and our policy making with regard to how we handle this virus should all be based on that instead? Our research of the virus should be based on the notion that it is naturally occurring as foundational? Because that is what we are being told. Again, nobody is saying just assume it came from a lab but why can't the possibility be explored without being shut down? Why can't it be discussed?
And btw....not a scientist right?
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 01:51:50 PM
.... a degree in aerospace engineering from one of the top schools in the country.
jimmy: So you're a rocket scientist, eh? =D> =D> =D> We have one in our family (a first cousin) and the guy is unquestionably brilliant (MIT). Let me know when you figure out the Giants. LOL =)) =)) =)) Bob
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 01:51:50 PM
I also have a degree in aerospace engineering from one of the top schools in the country.
But guess what...I dont have a degree in biology. And I'm not a virologist. I don't consider myself a scientist by any stretch. Nor am I stomping around a Giants fan forum claiming to be the pre-eminent authority on science.
You lack humility and that's why my trolling has such an unraveling affect on you.
As for Fauci....what's your point? Anytime someone gets put on the stage and questioned it is political in nature and your side is just as guilty of it if not more so. And still, that doesn't mean his connection with the lab can't be questioned. The NIH is completely willing to let the narrative that the virus came from man's intrusion and exploitation of nature. That's a good narrative for them. The idea that it came from their own lab is not good for them or their funding. The fact that the virus came from Wuhan where there exists a lab that researches and manipulates such viruses and has a track record of negligence and very little monitoring from the organization that helped fund it would make anyone a bit curious. Why not investigate the idea? Because its dangerous? If this were a crime, any investigator would first look in this direction instead of ignoring it and closing the case.
Where is the evidence that says this did not come from a lab when an eminent virologist (not a public health administrator) says its obviously not of natural origins? Where? Where is the shut-me-up facts? Oh there isn't any. Why can't this be investigated? We have been told to live under the notion that this did not come from a lab but is natural and our policy making with regard to how we handle this virus should all be based on that instead? Our research of the virus should be based on the notion that it is naturally occurring as foundational? Because that is what we are being told. Again, nobody is saying just assume it came from a lab but why can't the possibility be explored without being shut down? Why can't it be discussed?
And btw....not a scientist right?
Did that top school in the country teach you that science is about proposing wild conspiracy theories and then challenging people to disprove them (see the parts of your quote I bolded)? If so, they need to have their teaching credentials yanked.
Also thanks for demonstrating another favorite trick of the right
Quotewhen an eminent virologist
This is one of the clever but less than honest tricks I see the right constantly employee. Every single one of their so-called experts are "eminent", "world-renowned", ""leading FILL IN THE FIELD OF EXPERTISE" and other variations on that theme. It's never here is a virologist and here is that virologist's credentials. It's always these meaningless and unprovable adjectives that falsely inflate the credentials whoever's claims we are going to have to take as a matter of blind faith
Quote from: Bob In PA on May 12, 2021, 01:56:55 PM
jimmy: So you're a rocket scientist, eh? =D> =D> =D> We have one in our family (a first cousin) and the guy is unquestionably brilliant (MIT). Let me know when you figure out the Giants. LOL =)) =)) =)) Bob
I am no rocket scientist. I just have a piece of paper. If we couldnt have gotten enough Toilet Paper during the lock down then I would have had to wipe my @$$ with it. I certainly don't plan to take it with me to my grave.
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 02:03:02 PM
Did that top school in the country teach you that science is about proposing wild conspiracy theories and then challenging people to disprove them (see the parts of your quote I bolded)? If so, they need to have their teaching credentials yanked.
Also thanks for demonstrating another favorite trick of the right
This is one of the clever but less than honest tricks I see the right constantly employee. Every single one of their so-called experts are "eminent", "world-renowned", ""leading FILL IN THE FIELD OF EXPERTISE" and other variations on that theme. It's never here is a virologist and here is that virologist's credentials. It's always these meaningless and unprovable adjectives that falsely inflate the credentials whoever's claims we are going to have to take as a matter of blind faith
Not a conspiracy theory. Just an ugly cover your ass move by a bunch science affiliated bureaucrats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Baltimore
If you got a problem with him being better than you then maybe you should go get some more certifications and boost those rookie numbers of yours.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 02:09:52 PM
Not a conspiracy theory. Just an ugly cover your ass move by a bunch science affiliated bureaucrats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Baltimore
If you got a problem with him being better than you then maybe you should go get some more certifications and boost those rookie numbers of yours.
People who I am asked to take their word on blind faith usually don't have lengthy sections in their Wikipedia page dedicated to controversies involving fraud and the like.
CCP is now angry and lashing out.
https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandemic/beijing-urges-who-leader-not-pursue-lab-leak-theory
Now this whole thing is getting funny.
QuoteThe front-page report quoted a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson urging "the WHO to play a leading role in respecting science."
This "respect science" mantra being thrown about everywhere is getting ridiculous. Why is it the investigation can't happen? Because the orthodoxy says so. The scientific orthodoxy gets its panties bunched when other scientists challenge them.
"You will
REPENT respect the science!!!"
Same people...different professions
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 02:20:27 PM
CCP is now angry and lashing out.
https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandemic/beijing-urges-who-leader-not-pursue-lab-leak-theory
Is this supposed to prove our claims?
Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 02:27:28 PM
So what's your point?
Its just another article about the issue in this thread.
Problem????
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 02:29:45 PM
Its just another article about the issue in this thread.
Problem????
Originally it was a non-sequitor. With the edits, it's just more of you pushing your false narrative that it's the obligation of others to disprove whatever wild conspiracy theory you dream up. Then it's more of the usual right's false victimhood combined with less than honest attacks on other Americans (in this case Americans who believe in science and the scientific method)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw0n3HZXLmo
Oh Fauci. What he's saying is....dont wear a mask...it aint gonna do you no good :laugh:
Does this guy ever tell the truth? Yeah....but always later.
CDC says 10% of transmissions occurred outdoors.
Bull$h!t. More like 0%
https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-exaggerating-risk-outdoor-covid-135958591.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANzBm8VD46i45aV_BYln8yhQSdk4CISwv3p69ixd2ivMz3FU0sSfPcKDLlzIVOgMhJlurfdMPDPmK1hAB7xnUgJsTkk09vS2rISuLTygxSSZ0pNdFessRPNlukHejXxihoVf_gvKDMAaPwMooVWJsxrv-YitXf2ZsD64OYjT-USI
Amazing how a naturally occurring virus managed to be transmitted from a wild animal to a human, but only indoors. What are the odds? CDC says 10%.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 04:44:01 PM
CDC says 10% of transmissions occurred outdoors.
Bull$h!t. More like 0%
https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-exaggerating-risk-outdoor-covid-135958591.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANzBm8VD46i45aV_BYln8yhQSdk4CISwv3p69ixd2ivMz3FU0sSfPcKDLlzIVOgMhJlurfdMPDPmK1hAB7xnUgJsTkk09vS2rISuLTygxSSZ0pNdFessRPNlukHejXxihoVf_gvKDMAaPwMooVWJsxrv-YitXf2ZsD64OYjT-USI
Amazing how a naturally occurring virus managed to be transmitted from a wild animal to a human, but only indoors. What are the odds? CDC says 10%.
I'm not sure it was zero percent, Jimmy, but it was very very low. I agree. The media and the CDC never balanced Covid. Fear was mongered. But part of the problem was the denier in chief who made it even worse and made mask-wearing seem as if it made his followers weak. Seriously, such a sacrifice. It was all about common sense from the get go. Masks indoors. Avoid large crowds outdoors. Do that and you would be good.
Quote from: jimmyz on May 12, 2021, 04:44:01 PM
CDC says 10% of transmissions occurred outdoors.
Bull$h!t. More like 0%
https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-exaggerating-risk-outdoor-covid-135958591.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANzBm8VD46i45aV_BYln8yhQSdk4CISwv3p69ixd2ivMz3FU0sSfPcKDLlzIVOgMhJlurfdMPDPmK1hAB7xnUgJsTkk09vS2rISuLTygxSSZ0pNdFessRPNlukHejXxihoVf_gvKDMAaPwMooVWJsxrv-YitXf2ZsD64OYjT-USI
Amazing how a naturally occurring virus managed to be transmitted from a wild animal to a human, but only indoors. What are the odds? CDC says 10%.
Jimmy, facts mattered. The CDC said "less than 10%" not "10%" They didn't lie, as you ironically falsely claim, but they were criticized for using a higher number "10%". Also, it's factually incorrect to claim 0% because there are many documented cases of outdoor spread. What is it with your side always spreading misinformation? That was rhetorical as you further comments showed you made the false claim of 0% to promote your completely unsupported conspiracy theories
Quote from: katkavage on May 12, 2021, 04:59:59 PM
I'm not sure it was zero percent, Jimmy, but it was very very low. I agree. The media and the CDC never balanced Covid. Fear was mongered. But part of the problem was the denier in chief who made it even worse and made mask-wearing seem as if it made his followers weak. Seriously, such a sacrifice. It was all about common sense from the get go. Masks indoors. Avoid large crowds outdoors. Do that and you would be good.
Not 0% but more like 0%.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v-U3K1sw9U
Excellent and thought provoking article written by Nicholas Wade a respected science writer on the origins of the virus. Wade does not say if came form the lab, only that we don't know. He directly challenges two scientists who were leading the natural origin argument and dismissing the lab origin as false. The first was Peter Daszak of the Eco Health Alliance. Daszak it seems was involved with the funding of the lab and had a clear conflict of interest. The other Kristian Anderson Professor of immunology for the Scripps Research center made definitive claims about the origin he could not have known, per Wade. He lays out why but it's very technical and you would have to read the article. The total resistance to the Lab origin and denial of any investigation by the Chinese has many rethinking their initial assumptions.
Quote from: FL GMAN on May 13, 2021, 10:00:20 AM
Excellent and thought provoking article written by Nicholas Wade a respected science writer on the origins of the virus. Wade does not say if came form the lab, only that we don't know. He directly challenges two scientists who were leading the natural origin argument and dismissing the lab origin as false. The first was Peter Daszak of the Eco Health Alliance. Daszak it seems was involved with the funding of the lab and had a clear conflict of interest. The other Kristian Anderson Professor of immunology for the Scripps Research center made definitive claims about the origin he could not have known, per Wade. He lays out why but it's very technical and you would have to read the article. The total resistance to the Lab origin and denial of any investigation by the Chinese has many rethinking their initial assumptions.
Why should we believe Nicholas Wade over Doctor Peter Daszak ( a British zoologist and an expert on disease ecology, in particular on zoonosis) and Kristian G. Andersen, (PhD-Professor Department of Immunology and Microbiology California Campus with more of his credentials posted below)?
Scripps Research Joint Appointments
Professor, Department of Integrative Structural and Computational Biology
Director of Infectious Disease Genomics, Translational Research Institute
Faculty, Graduate Program
Other Joint Appointments
Vice President, Viral Hemorrhagic Fever Consortium
Research Focus
Kristian Andersen is a professor in the Department of Immunology and Microbiology at Scripps Research, with joint appointments in the Department of Integrative Structural and Computational Biology, and at the Scripps Research Translational Institute. Over the past decade, his research has focused on the complex relationship between host and pathogen. Using a combination of next-generation sequencing, field work, experimentation, and computational biology he has spearheaded large international collaborations investigating the emergence, spread and evolution of deadly pathogens, including SARS-CoV-2, Zika virus, Ebola virus, West Nile virus, and Lassa virus. His work is highly cross-disciplinary and exceptionally collaborative.
Kristian earned his doctoral degree from the University of Cambridge and performed postdoctoral work in Pardis Sabeti's group at Harvard University and the Broad Institute.
Education
Ph.D., Immunology, University of Cambridge, UK, 2009
B.Sc., Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, DK, 2004
Professional Experience
Postdoc
Harvard University & Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard
Graduate
University of Cambridge & MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology
Undergraduate
Aarhus University & University of Kent, Canterbury
Awards & Professional Activities
2016, Ray Thomas Edwards Foundation Career Development Award
2016, Pew Scholar in the Biomedical Sciences
2009, Carlsberg Foundation postdoctoral fellowship
2008, Max Perutz prize for "outstanding graduate research"
2005, Carlsberg Foundation scholarship at Churchill College
You can believe who you want. All I'm saying is that Daszak appears compromised. If the positions were reversed you would be screaming about this. The man was part of the funding of the lab. As for Christian, read the article, her reasoning as to why the virus couldn't have come from the lab appears incorrect. I'm sure there will be discussion on this going forward. You frequently claim to be open minded but get angry at any questioning you don't agree with. If the CCP won't allow inspections and verification why would anyone be anything other than suspicious.
Quote from: FL GMAN on May 13, 2021, 03:48:04 PM
You can believe who you want. All I'm saying is that Daszak appears compromised. If the positions were reversed you would be screaming about this. The man was part of the funding of the lab. As for Christian, read the article, her reasoning as to why the virus couldn't have come from the lab appears incorrect. I'm sure there will be discussion on this going forward. You frequently claim to be open minded but get angry at any questioning you don't agree with. If the CCP won't allow inspections and verification why would anyone be anything other than suspicious.
In my role in public health emergency preparedness, I have sat through many a lecture from top doctors in infectious diseases and top epidemiologist. This was all before Republicans and Conservatives tainted the science with their political agenda. I understand where all these pandemics start (hint it's not in laboratories of political enemies)
To correct you, I am not "open-minded" rather I adhere to my own brand of critical thinking with is a combination of intellectual honesty, the scientific method, the principles of critical thinking, along with viewing "expert" witnesses the way a court would. So if you come to me with a politically motivated wildly implausible conspiracy theory that is utterly devoid of proof, you are simply not going to find a taker.
If you had that little thing called evidence to support your accusations, you would find me all ears. Without proof and the fact that your claims fly in the face of established science, you are not going to find a taker. If in your mind that makes me closed minded, so be it.
When you responded you cited the credentials of the people being tested as better than Wade, you end with citing your own "credentials", why is that. As for being scientific, you had no problem telling everyone Florida's numbers for Covid were fake when a Fraud looking to make money made that statement. Was that critical thinking. Read the article it's thought provoking. People can be wrong sometimes.
Quote from: FL GMAN on May 14, 2021, 07:43:24 AM
When you responded you cited the credentials of the people being tested as better than Wade, you end with citing your own "credentials", why is that. As for being scientific, you had no problem telling everyone Florida's numbers for Covid were fake when a Fraud looking to make money made that statement. Was that critical thinking. Read the article it's thought provoking. People can be wrong sometimes.
FL GMan, I know the far right propaganda machine put out hit pieces throughout their propaganda network attacking the Florida Whistle Blower. However, I have not seen any factual evidence to support their smear attack. Yet, you as a consumer of far right propaganda do. Why is that? Why do you accept anything produce by the right-wing propaganda network completely and without question?
Mighty I heard about her around 1 year ago and I even mentioned to you that she might not be who you think she is. If you read the story it lays out what she did including trying to frame police for actions they never committed. She will get her day in court but if you read the story it takes her apart with facts not assumptions. I did not think about her again until I read the story and it's damming.
Quote from: FL GMAN on May 14, 2021, 11:42:56 AM
Mighty I heard about her around 1 year ago and I even mentioned to you that she might not be who you think she is. If you read the story it lays out what she did including trying to frame police for actions they never committed. She will get her day in court but if you read the story it takes her apart with facts not assumptions. I did not think about her again until I read the story and it's damming.
I am aware you believe the right-wing propaganda machine and I also am aware you refused to believe the whistleblower.
Mighty it doesn't matter whether one believed her or not, her story has been proven false. I also saw that 18 scientists have come forward and penned a letter to the WHO that the origin of the virus in the lab cannot be ruled out. The 18 include the leading epidemiologist at Harvard. Do you think he's a right winger as well. There is doubt on the origin of the virus whether you like it or not. I don't understand why this would be a right wing issue, don't we all want to know what happened.
Quote from: FL GMAN on May 14, 2021, 01:05:50 PM
Mighty it doesn't matter whether one believed her or not, her story has been proven false. I also saw that 18 scientists have come forward and penned a letter to the WHO that the origin of the virus in the lab cannot be ruled out. The 18 include the leading epidemiologist at Harvard. Do you think he's a right winger as well. There is doubt on the origin of the virus whether you like it or not. I don't understand why this would be a right wing issue, don't we all want to know what happened.
I have not seen any factual evidence that has "proven her story false"
I looked at the letter. They want more investigation into the origin and dispute the World Health Organisation's findings that determined the origin to be natural. Of course, none of the scientists made the claims you and the rest of the FOX News BBH contingent have made. I mean they are not agreeing with Rand Paul's dishonest and immoral false accusations and attacks against Dr Faucci, they are not doing like JimmyZ who claimed there was "new evidence" which factually is false, or Bob suggesting that China is vanishing people to hide the truth.
There is a world of difference between the world of science where some scientists want more proof and more study, verses you guys creating a totally unsubstantiated conspiracy theory to wield as a political weapon.
FL Gman
That right-wing propaganda machine hit piece on the Florida whistleblower. Tell me did the author of the article attempt to be fair and impartial (meaning he also reached out to the Whistle Blower for her response/side of the story) or did he only use the information that was provided to him by Ron Desantis's people?
Ron Desantis hit machine? Did Ron Desantis put the cam on the officer that proved false her claim that they terrified her children and acted inappropriately. She will have her day in court but somehow I don't think that will matter to you. If she was really being attacked and had even a leg to stand on, the NYT, Washington Post , CNN and MSNBC would have her on every day and you know it. Let's just agree to disagree.
Quote from: FL GMAN on May 14, 2021, 02:49:06 PM
Ron Desantis hit machine? Did Ron Desantis put the cam on the officer that proved false her claim that they terrified her children and acted inappropriately. She will have her day in court but somehow I don't think that will matter to you. If she was really being attacked and had even a leg to stand on, the NYT, Washington Post , CNN and MSNBC would have her on every day and you know it. Let's just agree to disagree.
I take that to mean- "why, yes Rich it was a one-sided hit piece put out by Desantis and the right. They never talked to or tried to talk to the whistleblower, journalism wasn't the goal, propaganda was"
OK, so I actually read the whole Nicholas Wade article this morning. Took me like 45 minutes.
This thread needs to redirect to the theory, and the science, if we are truly interested in science. Wade claims, multiple times, that his article does NOT comprise proof. Rather, he proposes two (main) hypotheses on the virus origin, lab-escape theory versus natural evolution. (A third theory is also noted as possible but unlikely at the end of Wade's article, that the virus jumped directly from bats to humans.) Then the article contrasted evidence in favor of each. He uses Occam's razor (implicitly) to argue for the unintended lab accident theory of origin as opposed to natural evolution origin.
I found argument #3, the presence of the furin cleavage site, the most riveting, along with Baltimore's assertion that it was "smoking gun" evidence that SARS2 was engineered.
Wade's article is a rationally-written step-by-step analysis. This is not Donald Trump-driven say-what-you-want-and-label-it-truth-after-the-fact vitriolic election-stealing conspiracy theory.
I think one can rationally disagree with Wade's analysis, and Wade admits that the lab-escape hypothesis is just that, it's not proof. But the call to action from the article is to get more information from what happened at Wuhan Institute of Virology.