The Evidence Mounts?

[LuFins Dad]

https://www.city-journal.org/new-evidence-for-lab-leak-hypothesis-of-covid-origins

In previous animal-to-human viral transmissions such as the 2003 SARS outbreak in China, researchers ascertained intermediate animal hosts and serologic signs of infections in animal traders within months of the outbreaks. Despite intensive efforts over the past two years, no one has found a bat-source population, SARS-CoV-2 circulating in an intermediate species that functioned as a viral conduit between bats and humans, or evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was present anywhere else before it emerged in Wuhan..

Consider, too, the unique furin cleavage site between the S1 and S2 subunits of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Furin is an enzyme expressed by human cells that separates the spike protein subunits at the cleavage site, enabling the virus to bind more efficiently to human cells and release its genetic material into them. It is an important reason that SARS-CoV-2 is so easily transmissible.
The furin cleavage site is found nowhere else in the entire genus of SARS-related betacoronaviruses. SARS-CoV-2 is the only one that has it. This fact alone suggests that it did not arise naturally in SARS-CoV-2..

[Jolly]

It's lab created.

[Aqua Letifer]

@jolly said in The Evidence Mounts?:

It's lab created.

I think "came from a lab" might be more accurate. But hey, who knows.

[Jolly]

We are never going to have video tape of Chinese scientists talking about exactly how they were going to create SARS-Cov-2.

I do think we have enough circumstantial evidence to exceed the 90% mark.

[Aqua Letifer]

@jolly said in The Evidence Mounts?:

We are never going to have video tape of Chinese scientists talking about exactly how they were going to create SARS-Cov-2.

I do think we have enough circumstantial evidence to exceed the 90% mark.

Yep, agree.

[LuFins Dad]

Beyond a reasonable doubt?

[Doctor Phibes]

@jolly said in The Evidence Mounts?:

I do think we have enough circumstantial evidence to exceed the 90% mark.

I hate to be all engineery here, but where does the 90% figure come from?

'Likely', or 'more likely' as stated in the article is a reasonable assertion, but '90%' implies some kind of statistical analysis involving actual numbers, and I haven't seen that. 'Likely' could easily mean 51%.

It's like somebody saying 'There's a 72% chance that Trump didn't win the election'. It's meaningless without actual data.

[Jolly]

1. The virus has never been found in its supposed host, evan after intense efforts to do so. This has never happened before in epidemiology.
2. The Wuhan lab was actively engaged in Gain Of Function research.
3. SARS-Cov-2 has a double CGG sequencing, likely inserted by CRISPER technology, commonly used to make viruses more transmissible or more lethal. That sequencing in genetic manipulation is a well known technique. Double CGG has never been found in a coronavirus, until COVID.
4. The Chinese knew what they had, shortly after the pandemic started in Wuhan. Witness the military shooting people in the streets and apartment doors being welded shut. Also witness how they have tried mightily, through disinformation or coercion to spike any story about the virus being created in Wuhan.

Yeah, I'm 90% convinced.