Orlando Buffalo Posted 18 hours ago Posted 18 hours ago One of the first time I recognized how incompetent the FBI and CIA has become is the COVID origin stories. To call people conspiracy theorists for being able to see a logical thread because our enemy is telling us different is the mark of total incompetence or evil, nothing else. 2
JDHillFan Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago 42 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: April 2020. Nailed it. Via the application of common sense, I initially suspected a lab leak. Then Redhawk and his band of Virginia virologists declared otherwise. If I first remove the unhinged, hysterical nature of Redhawk, I have no reason to doubt these people. End of discussion.
IrishLass Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago Really the bigger question at this point is: accidental lab leak, or intentional release. 1 1 1
Taro T Posted 17 hours ago Posted 17 hours ago 11 minutes ago, IrishLass said: Really the bigger question at this point is: accidental lab leak, or intentional release. Far more likely an accidental lab leak. Which was then run with because in the words of Rahm Emanuel "never let a crisis go to waste." Makes extremely little sense for the CCP to intentionally release the virus into their own populace rather than in a foreign nation if they were releasing it intentionally. (And it could EASILY be released into a foreign nation via a scientist from the lab being "accidentally" infected and then immediately traveling to an international conference held somewhere else or from a worker in the lab "accidentally" getting infected then immediately traveling internationally for vacation or whatever. And they did quite a number on Italy via essentially that route; but well after they were already dealing with the crisis domestically.) Yeah, China has a demographic problem as they have a very large elderly population relative to the overall population, but can't believe their leadership saw releasing a manufactured virus into their own population (and literally in the same city the lab that sure seems to have created the virus is located) as being the solution to that problem. Occam's razor says accidental lab release is most likely. 1 1
BillsFanNC Posted 16 hours ago Author Posted 16 hours ago 37 minutes ago, IrishLass said: Really the bigger question at this point is: accidental lab leak, or intentional release. Almost certainly accidental. If China wanted to purposely release a pandemic virus then they would do it anywhere else but than in the city with the virology institute where they were conducting gain of function coronavirus research. I mean who would believe that the virus emerged naturally in that scenario? It's well documented that that the Wuhan institute of virology had insufficient biosafety controls in place. They were conducting high risk gain of function research in biosafety level 2 (BSL-2) laboratories. That type of work requires BSL-3. If any researcher in the USA got caught doing BSL-3 work in BSL-2 labs not only would their career be over, but the entire institution would have all work suspended at best, completely shutdown at worst. And yes I've worked in both BSL-2 and BSL-3 labs. 1 1
Doc Posted 16 hours ago Posted 16 hours ago 27 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Almost certainly accidental. If China wanted to purposely release a pandemic virus then they would do it anywhere else but than in the city with the virology institute where they were conducting gain of function coronavirus research. I mean who would believe that the virus emerged naturally in that scenario? It's well documented that that the Wuhan institute of virology had insufficient biosafety controls in place. They were conducting high risk gain of function research in biosafety level 2 (BSL-2) laboratories. That type of work requires BSL-3. If any researcher in the USA got caught doing BSL-3 work in BSL-2 labs not only would their career be over, but the entire institution would have all work suspended at best, completely shutdown at worst. And yes I've worked in both BSL-2 and BSL-3 labs. They accidentally released it too early... 1 1 1
IrishLass Posted 15 hours ago Posted 15 hours ago (edited) 1 hour ago, Taro T said: Far more likely an accidental lab leak. Which was then run with because in the words of Rahm Emanuel "never let a crisis go to waste." I have to disagree. Based on the vaccines being worked on prior to covid happening, Event 201 AND Fauci predicting a pandemic shortly before it happened. They wanted it for global control/digital ID etc. It was being worked on in China for a variety of reasons, but the origin was the U.S. Edited 15 hours ago by IrishLass 1 1
daz28 Posted 11 hours ago Posted 11 hours ago 9 hours ago, Doc said: Why are you hanging your hat on the "low confidence" thing? What would that make the wet market theory? Even lower confidence? No confidence? And why the resistance to believe it came from the lab there? That is, besides Trump saying it from almost the beginning? Yes, wet market would be lower. I have resistance to just about anything that's backed by low confidence.
Doc Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago 38 minutes ago, daz28 said: Yes, wet market would be lower. I have resistance to just about anything that's backed by low confidence. There aren't a ton of explanations here. It was either a lab leak or from the wet market. Saying "low confidence" just means they don't have definitive proof. There is nothing at all supporting the wet market theory and China would have produced the evidence by now. OTOH they have every reason to hide the truth about it being a lab leak.
daz28 Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago 1 minute ago, Doc said: There aren't a ton of explanations here. It was either a lab leak or from the wet market. Saying "low confidence" just means they don't have definitive proof. There is nothing at all supporting the wet market theory and China would have produced the evidence by now. OTOH they have every reason to hide the truth about it being a lab leak. All I'm saying is that NC(and others) are promoting this as definitive proof, and SUDDENLY they agree with the CIA, who still isn't sure.
Doc Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago 6 minutes ago, daz28 said: All I'm saying is that NC(and others) are promoting this as definitive proof, and SUDDENLY they agree with the CIA, who still isn't sure. It's as definitive proof as you're going to get.
daz28 Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago Just now, Doc said: It's as definitive proof as you're going to get. The fact they said it's low confidence is the best proof you're going to get?? You're misusing the word definitive. All this was is a change of opinion, and not a convincing one.
Doc Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago (edited) 1 hour ago, daz28 said: The fact they said it's low confidence is the best proof you're going to get?? You're misusing the word definitive. All this was is a change of opinion, and not a convincing one. Yes. What definitive proof do you think you're going to find after 5 years and with China having cleaned up their mess in the beginning? Edited 7 hours ago by Doc
Recommended Posts