that's factually incorrect. the only people who said that were Kristian Andersen, Robert Garry, Peter Daszak, et al. literally the people getting paid to the the research at the Wuhan lab. It was stated in Nature magazine, and used as a talking point to deflect blame in the early stages of the pandemic

i slay my beliefs on the altar of Truth daily. because that's what science demands. Big Hugs.

The Proximal Origin of SARS-COV-2, published in Nature magazine, by Kristian Andersen, Robert Garry, et al of Scripps University. “These two features of the virus, the mutations in the RBD portion of the spike protein and its distinct backbone, rules out laboratory manipulation as a potential origin for SARS-CoV-2” said Andersen. They had a meeting with Fauci when the genome was sequenced, and a week later (after review by Dr Fauci) it was published. The email transcripts have been published, but were redacted because the EchoHealthAlliance (Bill Gates, Peter Daszak, et al) were involved. You will also see Dr Daszak cited over and over as one of the staunchest "Natural Origin Only" mouthpieces.

Kristian Andersen, Robert Garry, et al, Scripps University The Proximal Origin of SARS-COV-2, published in Nature. “These two features of the virus, the mutations in the RBD portion of the spike protein and its distinct backbone, rules out laboratory manipulation as a potential origin for SARS-CoV-2” said Andersen. President Trump used it as the basis for his "it's just a little flu that will magically go away in April". To be fair, he would have used any "reason" that let him go back to his self-flagellating victory lap after the failed impeachment.

I double-majored to get a Physics degree because someone who I respect highly told me "there's nothing more valuable than an engineer with a Physics degree, because Physics is applied problem-solving." go with God, amigo. :)

If they don't, AIPAC has one they can use for free.

science is often times in direct opposition to the business of science

that's not the situation at all. You had a handful of scientists who had been circumventing the laws banning Gain of Funtion research, who came out within a week of the genome being sequenced and said "Natual Origin Only. Lab Origin Impossible". That's been demonstrated to be false. There's a lot of insults you can throw at me, but if you want to go after me for 'smart' or 'pretty', you're throwing pellets at an aircraft carrier.

in the general/abstract, 100% agree. but we're talking about less than a week after the genome was sequenced, the people with the most to lose if it was lab-origin came out and said "scientific consensus" was that it was IMPOSSIBLE to be lab-origin. They dictated policy and suppressed dissent by yelling 'scientific consensus'. It was gross, and not at all science. when i say consensus is the opposite of science, science is repeating someone else's experiment and validating their result. When it's been repeated by a lot of people, it's a reasonable assumption to make. But if I learned one thing from "Under Siege 2: Dark Territory", it's that assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups. :)

shit, I made the same comment. wonder if i've been banned too... because that's OBVIOUSLY a bunch of Feds.

that's a cute Appeal to Authority. but it's not Science.

Fuck blogs. :) My area of research isn't biology, it's "wireless". Businesses (Amazon is one) pay me to analyze their problem and propose a solution. So I \*can\* write really great papers, but I can also read research and say "that's bullshit" or "that's working back from a conclusion". Look at the vaccine efficacy study that had EXACTLY 50% dispersion. That's bullshit, it just never happens... But I only brought it up to point out that when you do real "science", you don't give any weight to "consensus" of others. During COVID, we saw a lot of unethical "scientists" who were willing to cash in their credibility to get published and get in line for some grant $$. The 'scientific consensus' couldn't exist a week after the genome was sequenced, but that's what was stated and anyone who said "seems suspect" was called a science-denier, CTard, etc.

it does if what you want is a "perpetual war" virus to keep that sweet FedGov money streaming in...

I have a MSEE and a BS Physics, I was an engineer on the first 5G device ever made. I was also an engineer on Waymo's autonomous driving research, did validation engineering on Oculous2, and fixed the design of the Axon police body cam. But LoL at your "i'm a PhD". People with meaningful PhDs, in an actual science, will generally state their PhD focus when claiming their PhD. That's because a PhD in Electromagnetics means fuck-all to someone with a PhD in Organic Chemistry. You can claim whatever PhD you want now, we all know it's a PhD in "Communications" or "Social Studies". Scientific Consensus is a thing, it just wasn't a thing when Dr Fauci and his acolytes were claiming it as their high fortress.

I AM THE SCIENCE (tm)

They do. Genealogy probably isn't the right word, but they're traceable by their mutations through a "family tree" I guess I don't have to explain to you how unnatural the phylogenetic tree of COVID is... [https://www.eurekalert.org/multimedia/662100](https://www.eurekalert.org/multimedia/662100) naturally occurring virus don't usually have those HUGE leaps between generations, and oh my, it happened to mutate in exactly the same place they were researching. Amazing.

Theoretical Physics isn't science. It's a temple unto Edward Whitten. There's a reason that no significant advances in the last 30 years. I have a BS in Physics, but that's it.

No, there's actually huge genealogical jumps in the Functions of the virus. Lots of really intelligent and well-respected people pointed that out early on, but the MSM carried water for their advertisers.

it's not hard to figure out the history of Dr. Fauci. Lots has been written about his career, even prior to the pandemic are you refusing to become educated because of how it makes you feel to know you were ignorant?

it wasn't an intentional release, but they did defy government regulations and lie about what they were doing. They also perpetrated the lie despite knowing it would cause massive damage to public health and the finances of the 99%.

we can have both. it's called "justice"

It does, and there are things which it would be revolutionary to undo...but it was being used at a time when the only consensus was the consensus of the people involved in Gain of Function research, and their consensus was that nothing they did could have caused this...literally within days of the genome being sequenced. They met and published a BS paper in Nature that was never even close to being scientific, and used it as reference for all discussions. It was bad because they were telling people it was a normal, natural virus when in reality it was something far far worse. It had real policy implications.

there's a whole bunch of evidence that this didn't come from natural origin. Mostly the cover-up that Fauci, Garry, Andersen, et al perpetrated.

as a literal "independent research scientist", I can tell you that scientific consensus is the opposite of science.

of all the lies, "scientific consensus" is the greatest.

no, because it violates the Non-Aggression Principle. glad to clear that up for you.

doing what you want with your own property is peak libertarian. sorry you got banned by people doing what they want with their own property