Here, Drosten says he finds lab origins "improbable," because SARS-2 does not derive from a known (SARS-1) DNA backbone – an argument ripped straight from the 17 March 2020 Andersen letter in Nature. That's how lazy our Science propaganda is here.https://www.republik.ch/2021/06/05/herr-drosten-woher-kam-dieses-virus …
-
Show this thread
-
This is the equivalent of saying "That house can't have been built by humans, it corresponds to no published blueprints" A desperate stretch concocted at the start of th epandemic by virologists to defend their profession, now reported as the sum of Drosten's considered opinionpic.twitter.com/2r3H4XBgU0
1 reply 3 retweets 17 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @eugyppius1
Here is Kristian Andersen questioning the sequencing...https://virological.org/t/novel-2019-coronavirus-genome/319/23 …
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
-
Replying to @eugyppius1
One last thing...If you can find anything on this, it would be worth it...I found this link on the links I just sent, but it is EXTREMELY interesting on the date removed and the people involved...Henry Niman leads the link for recombinomics. You can highlight over it on page.pic.twitter.com/T3uQQPoJa2
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @DreamzAbstract @eugyppius1
Henry Nimanpic.twitter.com/BjVQFRqgLj
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @DreamzAbstract @eugyppius1
Just picked this up, but he worked at Pitt, isn't that were they were doing GOF?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Chapel Hill, with Baric, is the American centre for this, as far as bat coronaviruses; haven't heard of this at Pitt
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.