It’s exactly these things, i.e., an opportunistic tactical play by states aligned against China. This recent “deepening debate” fake news tour is coming from U.S. (and aligned) intelligence, hawkish think tanks, and rags that operate as mouthpieces for those groups like the WSJ. This guy Metzl from the Atlantic Council, the neocon hawk media influencer, is a lab leak cheerleader getting a lot of airplay. Here’s what he wrote on his personal website:
Let me be clear. While I do believe that a lab incident is the most likely origin of the pandemic, this is only a hypothesis. That this pandemic might stem from a zoonotic jump in the wild is also a hypothesis, even though very little evidence supporting that hypothesis has so far emerged. When comparing the evidence for each possibility, the case for a lab incident origin seems significantly stronger to me.
Lolk but WSJ has been pumping this shit the whole time.
Like Keeed, he was a lab leaker from the very beginning, so we’re left wondering if he’s actually this kooky or just trying to influence shit, but it’s obviously the latter because that’s what the marionnette Atlantic Council does. Notice what he says here too: a lab accident followed by a criminal cover up. Brah loudly calling for FuLl iNvEsTiGaTiOnS (read: espionage, defunding, and sanctions) is balls deep into the criminal fucking conspiracy angle as the most likely explanation and openly accusing China of massive criminal activity. Also notice that the puppets doing this reboot are saying we should now ask intelligence agencies for the correct answers.
Facebook has a public partnership with the Atlantic Council and is one of their largest donors.
yeah I’m wondering the same thing. people are talking about this like “lab leak” and “came from an animal” are mutually exclusive but even if this had been in a lab at some point, it almost certainly came from animal before it got into the lab, right? There’s nothing so far to suggest this is a fabricated, engineered virus, correct?
but yeah, in a bigger sense, what difference does it make (other than maybe getting people to realize their lab procedures are deficient)? It doesn’t seem that the US response (from a health perspective, at least) would need to be different if the answer to this is one or the other (Trump loved to peddle this because he thinks it gets him off the hook somehow but … it doesn’t). Like, if anything it’s worse, china unleashed a bioweapon and trump did nothing and let them kill half a million americans is somehow good for him???
You do realize that this is exactly what happened with SARS right? The source was found after a decade+ of research, and the outbreak was in Guangdong. Pointing to the distance as if it’s inconceivable when it literally already happened is nonsense. Ignoring how those same bats are used in bush meat and ignoring basic facts how the market was the epicenter of the beginning of the outbreak is just ludicrous.
We’ll skip over how this is climate denier style impugning of credibility, because why bother honestly. Nothing in either article actually demonstrates any conflict of interest or bias. Feel free to actually quote something specifically if you feel differently. The market theory isn’t some thing supported mainly by these two guys. It’s the overwhelming consensus.
‘fairly high probability’. Yikes, the whole 1% thing is gone now. Based on some YouTube videos and an essay from an author that definitely states it comes from bats in a cave, a scenario that’s literally happened twice in the past 20 years?
This post is a perfect example of what gets my jimmies rustled. You get to just throw whatever nonsense against the wall, and it’s up to me and others to disprove your completely unsupported assertions. It’s especially bad when your main point is a link that directly contradicts your point and you try to frame it as plausibly supporting your theory. Your evidence is literally nothing more than that someone has been studying coronaviruses since they’ve been responsible for two major outbreaks. It’s utter shit level of evidence.
Also Nate can fuck right off. Experts on both sides… no, that’s not true. There’s a clear consensus. His twitter feed is hilarious. Biden is investigating so it must be a lab! Yair Rosenberg got push back after saying Trump could win in 2016! Notably, zero experts backing his assertion of >50%. I like his work more than most, but he’s such a fucking idiot sometimes.
I’m using today’s post to say that while this happened a while ago, whoever changed the original original thread title to “the oranges of covid” was a genius and whoever changed it back was a silly.
ZZ is saying that there’s a fairly high probability with next to nothing backing it. Silver is positing it at >50%. Consensus doesn’t seem to actually be there.
Part of the reason that consensus is eroding is because they keep not finding any evidence to support it in the places they expect to find it. They found SARS in palm civets just a few months after the first outbreak, and lots of other animals subsequently. They found MERS in camels in a similar time frame with only a few dozen cases worldwide. We’re now 18 months deep and 3.5M dead, and they haven’t found a damn thing despite massive efforts. The only other species that have contracted Covid seem to have gotten it from humans.
Nobody can find the zoonotic links everybody (except dipshit conservatives) wants to be true. Investigations into other very plausible vectors are being actively blocked. Its problem.
Also, bitey bats from the bat caves are still a natural origin, basically. Lab-linked and lab-engineered are separate arguments. You can have the former without the latter. Personally, I’m >50% for lab linked, <50% for lab leaked, and don’t have an opinion for human engineered.
Wat? It took over a decade and extraordinary effort to nail down precisely where the '02 SARS outbreak came from. Also they’ve found viruses very closely related to COVID-19 circulating in the wild but there’s still a crapload of research to be done.
Meanwhile, everything in WIV’s inventory and published research has been ruled out as a precursor.
By WIV. Because WHO didn’t actually look at the inventory or records themselves.
Also, the first SARS case was in November 2002, and by March 2003 they had found civets in the nearby market that carried it. They didn’t find the reservoir that infected the civets until much later, but the point here is that we haven’t found ANY animals that are infected at any of the markets identified as super spreader sites. If we had infected livestock at the market, but we just couldn’t find the bat cave where the virus originated, I don’t think anyone here would be discussing the lab theory at all.
lol, people were tossing out the lab theory from day one, of course you’d still be running with it. How would you know it went from animal to human and not human to animal (this is one of the reasons it actually took years to trace the '02 SARS outbreak)?
So far the only thing supporting the lab leak idea is this Sherlock Holmesian process of elimination idea that we’ve eliminated all the animals at this marketplace, therefore it must have been the lab. Except no one who actually studies this for a living thinks we’ve tested nearly enough to rule out the markets. Also you’re completely ignoring the community’s main theory that it originated on a farm outside Wuhan. There’s extremely strong evidence that COVID can spread, mutate, and spillover via mink farms. There are several thousand small mink farms in China that haven’t been tested at all, each one of which is a mini unregulated biolab. Somehow the bros on substack have dismissed this possibility because reasons.
According to theSunday Times, British spies believe claims that the coronavirus pandemic may have originated from a leak out of a laboratory in Wuhan are “feasible”.
