Lab Leak?
-
wrote on 28 May 2021, 22:15 last edited by
-
wrote on 28 May 2021, 22:21 last edited by
Jesus.
-
wrote on 28 May 2021, 22:29 last edited by Loki
It’s too bad there is such a bulls eye on Fauci. To lay this at his feet is such motivated rhetoric at this point in my opinion as I’ve seen him as a right wing target.
He certainly did not invent “gain of function” and if you really cared there is an incredible amount of info on that topic. I’ve been down that rabbit hole.
Here’s a primer on the topic. You won’t even find Fauci’s name listed.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gain_of_function_research
The real prize is if China accidentally let it leak and has covered it up. I wish people would stay focused..
-
wrote on 28 May 2021, 22:34 last edited by
He certainly did not invent “gain of function” and if you really cared there is an incredible amount of info on that topic.
That's not my point. The point is that he said the risks of going through a pandemic would be worth it to gain the knowledge.
"“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks."
-
He certainly did not invent “gain of function” and if you really cared there is an incredible amount of info on that topic.
That's not my point. The point is that he said the risks of going through a pandemic would be worth it to gain the knowledge.
"“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks."
wrote on 28 May 2021, 22:40 last edited byHe certainly did not invent “gain of function” and if you really cared there is an incredible amount of info on that topic.
That's not my point. The point is that he said the risks of going through a pandemic would be worth it to gain the knowledge.
"“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks."
Got it.. so probably half the scientists looking at gain of function support it using Fauci’s reasoning and half don’t.
And now suddenly this is a “bombshell”. I feel like people assume readers are idiots, and they are probably more right than wrong.
-
He certainly did not invent “gain of function” and if you really cared there is an incredible amount of info on that topic.
That's not my point. The point is that he said the risks of going through a pandemic would be worth it to gain the knowledge.
"“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks."
Got it.. so probably half the scientists looking at gain of function support it using Fauci’s reasoning and half don’t.
And now suddenly this is a “bombshell”. I feel like people assume readers are idiots, and they are probably more right than wrong.
wrote on 28 May 2021, 22:48 last edited by@loki the question is simple: "Now, with more than half a million dead Americans, and, what, 3 million dead around the planet, do you still think it was 'worth it'?"
Of course, this question is moot, because of the wet markets, right?
-
@loki the question is simple: "Now, with more than half a million dead Americans, and, what, 3 million dead around the planet, do you still think it was 'worth it'?"
Of course, this question is moot, because of the wet markets, right?
wrote on 28 May 2021, 23:00 last edited by@loki the question is simple: "Now, with more than half a million dead Americans, and, what, 3 million dead around the planet, do you still think it was 'worth it'?"
Of course, this question is moot, because of the wet markets, right?
Believe it or not this is not a simple question. The world failed the pandemic test and it was gentle in terms of only killing a vulnerable population. We got our warning. But of course when you can’t a significant group to wear masks or get vaccines, the warning likely didn’t help as much as it should of.
Many of those deaths could have been prevented by vaccinating at risk groups a month or two even early….some would say preventing a second Trump term was worth it.
There is malevolence everywhere and picking on Fauci is a red herring and honestly irrelevant to any real question we should be asking.
-
wrote on 28 May 2021, 23:22 last edited by
Fauci's toast.
The highest paid government worker in the country is a dead job walking. He just doesn't realize it, yet. The media that fawned on his every word and promoted the Trump=dolt story, is fixing to turn on him like a ravening wolf.
CNN and PMSNBC will try to pin this one on Trump, but it ain't sticking. Too many smoking guns pointed Fauci's way...Didn't help that he flat lied to Dr. Paul, either.
-
wrote on 29 May 2021, 12:00 last edited by
-
wrote on 29 May 2021, 12:39 last edited by
It would be interesting to ask him how he views his earlier statement, but it's still only an academic question unless accompanied by policy changes.
I agree with Loki that the real deal here is China.
-
It would be interesting to ask him how he views his earlier statement, but it's still only an academic question unless accompanied by policy changes.
I agree with Loki that the real deal here is China.
wrote on 30 May 2021, 00:25 last edited by -
wrote on 30 May 2021, 01:22 last edited by
The coverup is indisputable and was known last year. That’s more than enough cause for international sanctions.
-
wrote on 30 May 2021, 11:46 last edited by
Not sure if this one has been posted - Medium
Thank you. While the article leans in one direction, I learned quite a bit. Of course it would be great to see China refute the points….if ever there warranted a “commission” to look at things this is it. Schumer, Pelloni, Schiff, Buehler?????
-
wrote on 30 May 2021, 11:49 last edited by
Russia! Russia! Russia!
-
Not sure if this one has been posted - Medium
Thank you. While the article leans in one direction, I learned quite a bit. Of course it would be great to see China refute the points….if ever there warranted a “commission” to look at things this is it. Schumer, Pelloni, Schiff, Buehler?????
wrote on 30 May 2021, 19:01 last edited byNot sure if this one has been posted - Medium
Thank you. While the article leans in one direction, I learned quite a bit. Of course it would be great to see China refute the points….if ever there warranted a “commission” to look at things this is it. Schumer, Pelloni, Schiff, Buehler?????
Early on I was thinking it was 2/3 that the lab had something to do with it. Now, I'm pretty close to a 95% certain that the lab was responsible.
-
wrote on 30 May 2021, 19:11 last edited by
Would knowing earlier have any effect on the Presidential election?