Dr. Fauci “not convinced” coronavirus developed naturally

crimson5pheonix

It took 6 months to read my title.
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
36,496
3,698
118
Saying you can't prove it didn't come from the lab because you can't investigate the lab = the lab leak theory is a conspiracy theory and should be banned from talking about? I don't care if there's a 0.01% chance it came from the lab, the fact is it could've and shouldn't be censored.
That's nice, but you're wrong. And putting up a strawman. Again, while scientists put it as a distant unlikely, they didn't rule out the lab leak theory.

Again, why would Facebook ban discussion of something the scientific community didn't tell them they should?
g-gif-update.php.gif

Not strictly true in the sense of Facebook being a pseudo-monopoly with no real community interaction on the allowing or banning of content, but it's a separate discussion. In the limited arena of allowing people to say "I think it was the RED CHINESE" as something worth preserving and defending on par with actual research papers, fuck it.

They were merely publishing something that was boring and coincidentally it got published once the subject was no longer taboo? What piles of research that happened while it was taboo?
Genome sequencing, research on how infectious it is, antibody research, so on. You just had to look. And actually look, not just listen to funny beanie man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seanchaidh

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,237
6,506
118
Again, why would Facebook ban discussion of something the scientific community didn't tell them they should?
A least one source you have cited explained a reason for why Facebook would ban discussion of covid-19 origins that has nothing to do with the scientific community. But this just goes to show how shit you are at reading sources: you just quote mine them for a sentence here and a sentence there, even if the article as a whole rejects your proposition.

They were merely publishing something that was boring and coincidentally it got published once the subject was no longer taboo? What piles of research that happened while it was taboo?
They don't really know what happened regarding its publication and by extension neither do you, nor do you know what the character and reliability of these people are. This whole line is hearsay.

So, a former CDC director saying something means it has no merit? You skip over the important part and talk about the part in parenthesis that really isn't of much importance.
If you didn't think it important, you wouldn't have mentioned it. You thought it important because it builds into this picture of brave pro-lab leak people fighting the good fight against the tyranny of media and government (because you are a bit conspiracy theorist yourself), without considering that pretty much anyone and everyone gets death threats these days.

It was discussed in places where it mattered.

I didn't put any spin on it, that was a quote of the current CDC director.
You are literally putting a spin on it, because you are taking a quote and stripping it out of context to exaggerate your own message.

So, it's very much like a flu now...?
A flu with the apparent capability to severely impede the health service. I repeat: one my local hospitals has been forced to stop surgeries again because rising covid cases have wiped out their capacity.

Was the lab leak theory not ever considered a conspiracy theory?
The issue you are desperately trying to avoid is not that the lab leak theory was considered a conspiracy theory, but who considered it a conspiracy theory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crimson5pheonix

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
9,657
831
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
That's nice, but you're wrong. And putting up a strawman. Again, while scientists put it as a distant unlikely, they didn't rule out the lab leak theory.



View attachment 4108

Not strictly true in the sense of Facebook being a pseudo-monopoly with no real community interaction on the allowing or banning of content, but it's a separate discussion. In the limited arena of allowing people to say "I think it was the RED CHINESE" as something worth preserving and defending on par with actual research papers, fuck it.



Genome sequencing, research on how infectious it is, antibody research, so on. You just had to look. And actually look, not just listen to funny beanie man.
It was ruled out it, there's several articles that came out saying, it had a zero chance of coming from the lab.

Again, banning public discourse of something is censorship.

And none of that research is about where the virus came from...

A least one source you have cited explained a reason for why Facebook would ban discussion of covid-19 origins that has nothing to do with the scientific community. But this just goes to show how shit you are at reading sources: you just quote mine them for a sentence here and a sentence there, even if the article as a whole rejects your proposition.
So, why'd they ban discussion?


They don't really know what happened regarding its publication and by extension neither do you, nor do you know what the character and reliability of these people are. This whole line is hearsay.
Pretty funny how no journal wanted to touch it and when it became OK to talk about, they had no problem publishing it. If it was "boring" or bad research, why would it suddenly get published?


If you didn't think it important, you wouldn't have mentioned it. You thought it important because it builds into this picture of brave pro-lab leak people fighting the good fight against the tyranny of media and government (because you are a bit conspiracy theorist yourself), without considering that pretty much anyone and everyone gets death threats these days.

It was discussed in places where it mattered.
I put in parenthesis for a reason, it wasn't that big of a point obviously. There shouldn't be any fight for people to be able to discuss whatever the fuck the want to talk about, that's the point. Several researchers/scientists said they couldn't discuss it, I provided 2 articles saying as such.


You are literally putting a spin on it, because you are taking a quote and stripping it out of context to exaggerate your own message.
She said that she feared "IMPENDING DOOM" from covid, how the fuck am I taking it out of context?


A flu with the apparent capability to severely impede the health service. I repeat: one my local hospitals has been forced to stop surgeries again because rising covid cases have wiped out their capacity.
If American health wasn't severely impeded last fall/winter by that wave, a new wave isn't going to severely impede the health system when so many are either vaccinated or naturally immune.


The issue you are desperately trying to avoid is not that the lab leak theory was considered a conspiracy theory, but who considered it a conspiracy theory.
No fucking shit. Do I care that Billy Bob at the bar thinks tap water is poisoned or some shit? Do I care when the very top levels of government and science say something is a conspiracy theory when it's not? Of course. They kinda steer the narrative don't they over say Billy Bob? Is the general population then not gonna follow actual science when there's so much bullshit being said by government and "experts"? You bet. And there was literally no reason to even dig a line in the sand on the lab leak possibility.
 

crimson5pheonix

It took 6 months to read my title.
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
36,496
3,698
118
It was ruled out it, there's several articles that came out saying, it had a zero chance of coming from the lab.
Yeah well you're fucking wrong.


And none of that research is about where the virus came from...
You clearly aren't equipped to handle these discussions. It's not that it's above you, I'm certainly not an expert, it's that you have a complete and total scientific illiteracy to go with your actual illiteracy. You're in love with rando youtubers and their opinions instead of having your own. And finally it's abundantly clear that anything that can't be spoken out loud to you in a few minutes is something you're not interested in engaging with.

You're just the worst kind of person to argue with, might as well be a brick wall.
 
Last edited:

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,237
6,506
118
Pretty funny how no journal wanted to touch it and when it became OK to talk about, they had no problem publishing it. If it was "boring" or bad research, why would it suddenly get published?
I repeat: the authors have absolutely no adequate evidence at all the journals bounced their article because of censorship.

It is normal for papers to be rejected multiple times before a journal will accept them. A lot of the reason for this is scientists aim for very high impact journals, and get bounced, and then progressively move down through lower impact journals until one accepts it. I've been there: I've had a paper go through three fucking years of rejections, revisions and delays before it finally got published. And indeed, as the article states: "Four of the top science journals in the world turned it down". Well, maybe it wasn't good enough for them and the authors had a vastly inflated sense of their work's importance and quality.

Thus the whole article is written to turn a massive nothingburger into a story with a load of conjecture, hearsay, and unsafe claims, right down to the supporting comments from a load of nobodies. It's exactly the sort of article designed to sucker the gullible and con the ignorant.

I put in parenthesis for a reason, it wasn't that big of a point obviously. There shouldn't be any fight for people to be able to discuss whatever the fuck the want to talk about, that's the point. Several researchers/scientists said they couldn't discuss it, I provided 2 articles saying as such.
Except they "proved" nothing at all, as per above. It's rumourmongering presented as fact.

She said that she feared "IMPENDING DOOM" from covid, how the fuck am I taking it out of context?
The context is that she was warning if the USA too quickly ended taking infection control measures and before vaccination was at a high level, it could pay a substantial cost in lives. A lot of the reason it may not have done is precisely that people continued to maintain common sense measures (e.g. mask wearing) and social distancing, even irrespective of government relaxations. And besides, you guys are back at nearly 100,000 new infections a day. How's that for your claims of herd immunity by April? Three months on, and you still don't have it.

If American health wasn't severely impeded last fall/winter by that wave, a new wave isn't going to severely impede the health system when so many are either vaccinated or naturally immune.
But all those people who might sicken and die unnecessarily: fuck them, right?

No fucking shit. Do I care that Billy Bob at the bar thinks tap water is poisoned or some shit?
Probably not, because you pretty much are Billy Bob here.

Funnily enough, the US government possibly did partly suppress the lab leak, but not for the reasons you think. It's been claimed US government officials were warned not to pursue it by other elements of the US government involved with national security. This because it would bring a lot of attention to gain of function research: where do you think a lot of the funding for it comes from? It actually comes from the Defence and Security arms of the government. They didn't want their research scrutinised or interfered with, nor fires lit under the seats of security and defence officials who approved it. At bare minimum, they wanted time to work out what their exposure might be and plan a defence.

The public, as you amply demonstrate for us on a weekly basis, have no clue what science says. Facebook has no clue what the science says. Large chunks of government have no clue what the science says. They all have their own concerns and agendas: science just isn't that powerful. If it were, the climate change debate would have been over 20 years ago and the terrain would be covered in wind turbines and solar panels rather than oil wells.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,801
3,543
118
Country
United States of America
And besides, you guys are back at nearly 100,000 new infections a day. How's that for your claims of herd immunity by April? Three months on, and you still don't have it.
That can't be right, Phoenixmgs is always correct in his predictions