The Science article I posted. The actual journal articles that your Nature "op-ed" was based on. Dozens of other articles, that only science deniers like you continue to deny. There is no controversy among experts about this. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1236580 …https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6409556/ …
-
-
Replying to @kay_empty @LaVeterinarian and
I even posted Most emerging infections are zoonotic in origin. Just in the last few decades we've had multiple Ebola spillovers, Nipah, Hendra, SARS and MERS, and many others out there in bats that could jump as well.https://sciencemag.org/news/2017/06/bats-really-do-harbor-more-dangerous-viruses-other-species …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @CyHusain @LaVeterinarian and
That most emerging infections are zoonotic doesn't mean anything. Everyone knows that it could have come from there. But it is only those who lack basic critical thinking skills who don't understand that it can also come from a lab.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kay_empty @LaVeterinarian and
The burden of proof is on those claiming it does come from a lab and they are yet to provide ANY evidence. AND NOTHING has changed from the time of this article:https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/05/scientists-exactly-zero-evidence-covid-19-came-lab …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @CyHusain @LaVeterinarian and
This has nothing to do with burden of proof. From the beginning there were those who were conducting bad science and those who were supporting the conducting of bad science, who dismissed the possibility of a lab leak. There is no real evidence to support any possibility.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kay_empty @LaVeterinarian and
Researchers led by Shan-Lu Liu at the Ohio State University say there is “no credible evidence” of genetic engineering (Emerging Microbes & Infections, http://doi.org/dpvw ). virus’s genome is sequenced, if altered, there would be signs of inserted gene sequences. NONE FOUND!
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @CyHusain @LaVeterinarian and
1) the lab leak hypothesis in no way requires inserted genes, and almost no one who talks about the possibility of a lab leak believes such was done. This is a strawman that is repeatedly done by scientists who deny the possibility of a lab leak (and also often have a COI)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kay_empty @CyHusain and
and is a good reason why people should not trust them - as they are arguing in bad faith. 2) It is actually not true. Baric developed "no-see-ums" and trained Shi.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kay_empty @LaVeterinarian and
FYI COVID-19 is lousy as a bioweapon, yes when wide spread it causes considerable damage but, of no tactical value!
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CyHusain @LaVeterinarian and
Again, this is a strawman. Almost no one who is advocating that the lab leak hypothesis is possible thinks that this is a bioweapon. That is in part because they have actually followed what Shi, Daszak and Baric said about what they were doing in the years before covid.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
What planet are you on? The news and social media are FULL of claims that #SARSCoV2 couldn't possibly have arisen naturally and therefore must have been "engineered," including lots of claims that it's "bioweapon."
-
-
I am on the real planet. Not the planet you have isolated yourself into where there are two sides - yours and a small number of goofs you can make fun on because you avoid where the discussion is taking place. Its the same with all extremists.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kay_empty @CyHusain and
If it were such a "small" number of "goofs," I wouldn't write nearly as much about
#LabLeak. It's not. It's a lot.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
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.