New Data Found Linking Covid-19's Origins to Wuhan Market. WHO Demands China Release It (theatlantic.com) 213
"The World Health Organization on Friday called on China to release new data linking the Covid pandemic's origins to animal samples at Wuhan Market after the country recently took down the research," reports CNBC.
The existence of the new data was revealed by the Atlantic earlier this week, in an article reporting that the newly-discovered samples showed the virus was present in creatures for sale there near the very beginning of the pandemic: A new analysis of genetic sequences collected from the market shows that raccoon dogs being illegally sold at the venue could have been carrying and possibly shedding the virus at the end of 2019. It's some of the strongest support yet, experts told me, that the pandemic began when SARS-CoV-2 hopped from animals into humans, rather than in an accident among scientists experimenting with viruses....
The genetic sequences were pulled out of swabs taken in and near market stalls around the pandemic's start. They represent the first bits of raw data that researchers outside of China's academic institutions and their direct collaborators have had access to. A few weeks ago, the data appeared on an open-access genomic database called GISAID, after being quietly posted by researchers affiliated with the country's Center for Disease Control and Prevention. By almost pure happenstance, scientists in Europe, North America, and Australia spotted the sequences, downloaded them, and began an analysis.
The samples were already known to be positive for the coronavirus, and had been scrutinized before by the same group of Chinese researchers who uploaded the data to GISAID. But that prior analysis, released as a preprint publication in February 2022, asserted that "no animal host of SARS-CoV-2 can be deduced...." The new analysis, led by Kristian Andersen, Edward Holmes, and Michael Worobey — three prominent researchers who have been looking into the virus's roots — shows that that may not be the case. Within about half a day of downloading the data from GISAID, the trio and their collaborators discovered that several market samples that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were also coming back chock-full of animal genetic material — much of which was a match for the common raccoon dog. Because of how the samples were gathered, and because viruses can't persist by themselves in the environment, the scientists think that their findings could indicate the presence of a coronavirus-infected raccoon dog in the spots where the swabs were taken....
The new analysis builds on extensive previous research that points to the market as the source of the earliest major outbreak of SARS-CoV-2: Many of the earliest known COVID-19 cases of the pandemic were clustered roughly in the market's vicinity. And the virus's genetic material was found in many samples swabbed from carts and animal-processing equipment at the venue, as well as parts of nearby infrastructure, such as storehouses, sewage wells, and water drains. Raccoon dogs, creatures commonly bred for sale in China, are also already known to be one of many mammal species that can easily catch and spread the coronavirus. All of this left one main hole in the puzzle to fill: clear-cut evidence that raccoon dogs and the virus were in the exact same spot at the market, close enough that the creatures might have been infected and, possibly, infectious.
That's what the new analysis provides. Think of it as finding the DNA of an investigation's main suspect at the scene of the crime.
The article also notes that the genetic sequences "also vanished from the database shortly after the international team of researchers notified the Chinese researchers of their preliminary findings, without explanation." And it adds that all along China has "vehemently" fought the theory that Covid-19 originated from live animals being sold at Wuhan market. Although "in June 2021, a team of researchers published a study documenting tens of thousands of mammals for sale in wet markets in Wuhan between 2017 and late 2019, including at Huanan."
"The animals were kept in largely illegal, cramped, and unhygienic settings — conditions conducive to viral transmission — and among them were more than 1,000 raccoon dogs." And there's even photos of raccoon dogs for sale at the market in December of 2019.
More coverage of the newly-discovered data is now appearing in numerous news outlets, including the New York Times, NBC News, ABC News, the Guardian, PBS, and Science.
The existence of the new data was revealed by the Atlantic earlier this week, in an article reporting that the newly-discovered samples showed the virus was present in creatures for sale there near the very beginning of the pandemic: A new analysis of genetic sequences collected from the market shows that raccoon dogs being illegally sold at the venue could have been carrying and possibly shedding the virus at the end of 2019. It's some of the strongest support yet, experts told me, that the pandemic began when SARS-CoV-2 hopped from animals into humans, rather than in an accident among scientists experimenting with viruses....
The genetic sequences were pulled out of swabs taken in and near market stalls around the pandemic's start. They represent the first bits of raw data that researchers outside of China's academic institutions and their direct collaborators have had access to. A few weeks ago, the data appeared on an open-access genomic database called GISAID, after being quietly posted by researchers affiliated with the country's Center for Disease Control and Prevention. By almost pure happenstance, scientists in Europe, North America, and Australia spotted the sequences, downloaded them, and began an analysis.
The samples were already known to be positive for the coronavirus, and had been scrutinized before by the same group of Chinese researchers who uploaded the data to GISAID. But that prior analysis, released as a preprint publication in February 2022, asserted that "no animal host of SARS-CoV-2 can be deduced...." The new analysis, led by Kristian Andersen, Edward Holmes, and Michael Worobey — three prominent researchers who have been looking into the virus's roots — shows that that may not be the case. Within about half a day of downloading the data from GISAID, the trio and their collaborators discovered that several market samples that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were also coming back chock-full of animal genetic material — much of which was a match for the common raccoon dog. Because of how the samples were gathered, and because viruses can't persist by themselves in the environment, the scientists think that their findings could indicate the presence of a coronavirus-infected raccoon dog in the spots where the swabs were taken....
The new analysis builds on extensive previous research that points to the market as the source of the earliest major outbreak of SARS-CoV-2: Many of the earliest known COVID-19 cases of the pandemic were clustered roughly in the market's vicinity. And the virus's genetic material was found in many samples swabbed from carts and animal-processing equipment at the venue, as well as parts of nearby infrastructure, such as storehouses, sewage wells, and water drains. Raccoon dogs, creatures commonly bred for sale in China, are also already known to be one of many mammal species that can easily catch and spread the coronavirus. All of this left one main hole in the puzzle to fill: clear-cut evidence that raccoon dogs and the virus were in the exact same spot at the market, close enough that the creatures might have been infected and, possibly, infectious.
That's what the new analysis provides. Think of it as finding the DNA of an investigation's main suspect at the scene of the crime.
The article also notes that the genetic sequences "also vanished from the database shortly after the international team of researchers notified the Chinese researchers of their preliminary findings, without explanation." And it adds that all along China has "vehemently" fought the theory that Covid-19 originated from live animals being sold at Wuhan market. Although "in June 2021, a team of researchers published a study documenting tens of thousands of mammals for sale in wet markets in Wuhan between 2017 and late 2019, including at Huanan."
"The animals were kept in largely illegal, cramped, and unhygienic settings — conditions conducive to viral transmission — and among them were more than 1,000 raccoon dogs." And there's even photos of raccoon dogs for sale at the market in December of 2019.
More coverage of the newly-discovered data is now appearing in numerous news outlets, including the New York Times, NBC News, ABC News, the Guardian, PBS, and Science.
Concerned, but pretending it doesn't exist. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Concerned, but pretending it doesn't exist. (Score:5, Insightful)
How to prevent future pandemics? Get a population that's less stupid and harder to bullshit.
But who'd want that?
Re: (Score:2)
The population intelligence isn't relevant here. They only spread a virus, they are usually not a contributor to any pandemic outbreak. There's a reason China doesn't want this data coming out, they've resisted a lot of pressure from the west already to stop the practice of wet markets due to both disease and trade of illegal produce.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a reason China doesn't want this data coming out, they've resisted a lot of pressure from the west already to stop the practice of wet markets due to both disease and trade of illegal produce.
Well it is pretty much down to the lab leak or the wet market regardless. Unless China has some compelling evidence otherwise, it is on them either way.
Re:Concerned, but pretending it doesn't exist. (Score:5, Insightful)
I dont think the wet market politics have much to do with the data being resisted. (And I'm 99% certain the wuhan lab 3 hours away had nothing to do with it, theres just no evidence, that was always a nutty conspiracy theory whos primary evidence seemed to be "it has wuhan in the name")
What is dangerous to china is the political fallout from how poorly party officials behaved when the virus was first discovered. Whe the hospital near the wuhan wet market started getting cases of a mysterious seemingly infectious serious illness that appeared to be SARS doctors started raising alarms and pretty frantically saying "Um, something extremely bad is happening we should probably do some contact tracing and quarantine this", party officials responded by sanctioning those doctors and demanding they stop "Alarming" people. The CCP local branch just refused to acknowledge the seriousness of the situation and allowed the thing to get out of hand.
It wasnt until it had truly out of hand that the national party stepped in and took control of the system, brought in proper virologists with the freedom to do what needed to be done (and crucially share gene sequenes that had been collected so the rest of the world knew how to respond, as it had already started spreading into italy and a couple of other places) and instituted some fairly drastic lockdowns that the situation started to recover there.
And THAT early response is whats being covered up.
Wuhan is a very large city in a very large province (think 'state'). Wuhan has between 8 to 11mil people depending on how you cound [8mil in central city, another 3 in surrounding burbs] and its capital to a province with 58mil people. So the officials in charge of that are very senior and powerful in the party.
They know the Chinese legal system is relatively independent (At least in chinese terms) and more than willing to take down senior party officials, and corruption and malicious behavior that impacts very large populations have tended to be dealt with by the legal system via bullet in the brain.
Now , *everyone* knows what happened at the start there with those officials, but nobody can prove it, because the evidence is classified. IF that evidence DID get into the hands of prosecutors, some very senior people in the communist party are going to find themselves on their knees on an oval with a white cloth around their eyes and a gun pressed onto their temple.
And the party will do *anything* to avoid that.
They don't give a shit about wet markets. The chinese govt have been trying to phase them out for a while now (Covids not the first time a zoonotic virus has hit the population via open air fish markets). What they DO care about is making sure party officials dont get ganked.
Re: Concerned, but pretending it doesn't exist. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Thats a task that may be beyond an epidemiologists paygrade alas. The stupid isn't inherent (Theres nothing *naturally* that makes Americans dumber than than , say, the australians, or other countries that handled it a lot more rationally as a society) but theres something cultural and educationally that leads to a lot of americans (and american politicians, alas) to making some very unscientific decisions. Fixing that is herculean and has people actively pushing against it.
Better to actually figure out how
Re:Concerned, but pretending it doesn't exist. (Score:4, Insightful)
I am just guessing, and have no education at all in virology/epidemiology or anything related, but it i possible the experts want this information to help them understand how this epidemic started, and thereby help prevent future epidemics.
Oh the irony. The reason why they are looking for the source is that the other hypothesis is that COVID is the result of "gain-of-function" research. If it escaped from a lab (and since WIV destroyed the original samples we will never know), then perhaps this type of research should be banned or at least regulated more tightly. It is basically biological weapons research, although to be clear it is defense against biological weapons research too. So that is the reason we want to be as sure as possible. But since politics is now involved you can bet that we won't be able to get to the bottom of it. Just look at your post, so full of hate and derision about a topic of research when that knowledge would help us make better policy decisions.
Re: (Score:3)
This type of research *is* banned and regulated in the US
But not in China
Which is why the US work was moved to the Chinese lab
It doesn't take a genius to put 2 and 2 together
Re: (Score:3)
Sure but "putting 2 and 2 together" also is not evidence [merriam-webster.com]
Re: Concerned, but pretending it doesn't exist. (Score:2)
It's only banned and regulated in the US when done by health experts. Private individuals, military researchers, are all free to continue their research.
The EU is taking precisely the other way round: only health researchers should be doing this, in class-3 or class-4 biolabs.
Notably, gain of function research has been very important in establishing the dangers of SARS in animals, leading to new laws dealing with that.
Blindfolding your doctors is a panic response by idiots.
Re: (Score:2)
Why are people so concerned about the origin of disease they are pretending no longer exists?
Presumably to prevent it from happening again.
Re: (Score:2)
Why are people so concerned about the origin of disease they are pretending no longer exists?
Presumably to prevent it from happening again.
<sarcasm>To prevent what from happening again?</sarcasm>
Oh, sorry, I thought this was about the people pretending that it never existed. :-D
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Those pesky raccoon dogs. (Score:4, Informative)
It's almost as if nature itself is constantly doing gain-of-function research and testing cross-species infections on a literal second-by-second basis, using wild animals as test subjects.
Re: (Score:2)
It's almost as if nature itself is constantly doing gain-of-function research and testing cross-species infections on a literal second-by-second basis, using wild animals as test subjects.
That is accurate, but GOF accelerates the natural process by several orders of magnitude and allows you to guide that evolution towards being more pathological (deadly) or guide it in other directions instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Natural selection works best when genetic variability and reproduction is high.
Re: (Score:2)
It is mutating an organism so that it can do something which it was not previously able to do. For example, changing a disease that only infects one species so that it can infect another, differernt species. This is what happened with Covid. A disease that previously infected some non-human species, which was previously thought to be bats, can now infect humans.
One theory is that this gain of function was done artificially, in a lab in Wuhan which we know was doing that type of research. However, all availa
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
What evidence is there anyone would marry him?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be more inclined to go for the post above you, which points out that this type of virus is prevalent in that area anyway so is a logical place to put a lab studying this type of virus and a likely place for a mutated virus to appear naturally.
This type of virus is prevalent in the region — not so much in the middle of a large city — but yes.
If I were betting, my money would be on the disease getting accidentally brought back from some distant bat cave by virologists during their sample taking, and it somehow spreading around the community at a low level for a period of time, possibly even hopping between species more than once before eventually adapting itself enough to human physiology so that it could spread easily. But there's re
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be more inclined to go for the post above you, which points out that this type of virus is prevalent in that area anyway
Those bats are prevalent several hundred miles to the south of Wuhan. There are no bats in Wuhan itself. If the virus was natural we would expect to see some infections either near where the bats actually live (not Wuhan) or in a trail from where the bats are to Wuhan. We see neither. Also, COVID has 2 specific mutations that appeared at the same time, one to allow animal to human transmission and one to allow human to human transmission. We haven't found a sample with only one of those mutations but n
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As Jon Stewart said (paraphrasing), if you have a outbreak of delicious chocolate happen right next to a Hersey's plant, would you suspect the local animal shelter?
Except SARS1 actually did start at the animal shelter, so the animal shelter has a history of delicious chocolate, which makes it equally suspect.
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, if the plant was built there *because* there was already a history of chocolate outbreaks, it would be foolish to blame the plant for the next one.
Hence the analogy is disingenuous at best.
Re: (Score:2)
A theory proposed by idiots, for idiots.
Are you claiming to have proposed the theory then?
Re: Those pesky raccoon dogs. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Too Late (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Too Late (Score:2)
One thing I wonder is why those that were adamant this was a weapon unleashed on us weren't incredibly over-zealous about wearing masks. "I ain't lettin' any of that bad-guy shit touch me."
a big mistake (Score:3)
China is seriously bungling the PR on this. What are they trying to accomplish? Everyone knows Covid originated in China, there's no painting over that.
Maybe it is that China wants to control the narrative, but that's impossible at this point. The veil of secrecy generates distrust, makes it look very much like they are deliberately hiding something, and further damages China's credibility on pretty much everything.
Re:a big mistake (Score:5, Insightful)
What are they trying to accomplish?
The veil of secrecy generates distrust, makes it look very much like they are deliberately hiding something, and further damages China's credibility on pretty much everything.
Odds are pretty good that they're getting exactly the results they intend. It's not like they're stupid.
So assume that generating distrust and making it look like they're deliberately hiding something is exactly what they want to do. Then ask what the benefit could possibly be?
Me, I'd assume that it's fueling the fires that burn in the US. The us & them battle between blue and red, republican and democat. The fact-seeking folks will take a look at this and conclude "shrug, okay, so... we don't have the actual data, but sure, raccoon dogs... that scans." The insular, drama-seeking folks will take a look and conclude "right, we can't have this made-up data, which means it was totally deliberate gain-of-function global warfare and soon Q will show us all how China infiltrated the mRNA researchers and implanted secrets that mean the vaccines will modify white people to be sterile to depopulate 'Merica to weaken us before they invade via illegal immigration."
That division in the supposedly United States of America elevates their global standing, not hurts it.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh yeah sure except that the anti-China thing is pretty bi-partisan at this point so nice theory but the holes in it are larger than the pot.
Re: (Score:2)
What are they trying to accomplish?
The veil of secrecy generates distrust, makes it look very much like they are deliberately hiding something, and further damages China's credibility on pretty much everything.
Odds are pretty good that they're getting exactly the results they intend. It's not like they're stupid.
So assume that generating distrust and making it look like they're deliberately hiding something is exactly what they want to do. Then ask what the benefit could possibly be?
Why are the two leading American GOP Presidential candidates proposing that an enemy of the US (Russia) be allowed to conquer an friendly nation like Ukraine?
There's a tendency to assume that foreign countries with other cultures are acting with some kind of single objective and every action is precisely oriented to that objective.
I think it's more likely that the Chinese system rewards secrecy and is deeply suspicious of Westerners, so even when it would be to their benefit to release data there are very
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same theory as "never talk to a police officer, even if you are innocent, especially if you are innocent". No matter what China says, folks with their own agenda will "interpret" it to prove their agenda. Remaining silent won't stop this, of course, but it means that the crazies will have to use ever more unlikely leaps of faith to make their points.
If China is silent, then all we have is the evidence. And the evidence doesn't support much except for the Wuhan Market and the same random mutation
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Err, the fifth amendment means that you don't need to testify against yourself, which means "give verbal evidence against yourself". So yes, hiding (a specific type of) evidence is an important part of the fifth amendment, and an important part of not talking. I really don't see how you can see them as different things.
Re: (Score:2)
From the article;
genetic sequences "also vanished from the database shortly after the international team of researchers notified the Chinese researchers of their preliminary findings, without explanation."
Re: (Score:2)
dunno, maybe china chose to just do its thing and don't give a crap about conspiracy nuts, demagogues and even high level political agendas in the west, who will keep blaming china every day anyway, for anything imaginable from corrupting christian youth to rogue weather balloons.
what secrecy, anyway? while china did indeed try to dismiss the issue during the first days of infection (as did most countries in the world btw if not all, very notoriously the us with trump insisting it was flu even while mass bu
Re: (Score:2)
I understand your cynicism on this, but "china chose to just do its thing and don't give a crap" is a pretty self-destructive way to behave on the international stage. It gets you shunned in a lot of places, counterproductive. Any secrecy at this point only sows more doubt. It's dumb.
Re: (Score:2)
What are they trying to accomplish?
Prevent even more pressure to crack down on and close wet markets. This has been a point of contention long before COVID. This is just more fuel to the fire, but in the form of a full can of gasoline rather than a wooden log.
It's one thing to point and say: "You're trading illegal animals in conditions that could cause a disease."
And quite another to say: "You mutherfuckers caused a global pandemic because you didn't do as we said."
Re: (Score:2)
China is seriously bungling the PR on this. What are they trying to accomplish?
Have you seriously never read any Chinese state-run media?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I have, what is your point.
Re: (Score:2)
They're doing a pretty good job winding up the Americans.
Re: (Score:2)
China would benefit enormously from showing enough freely-released evidence to convince most nations that Covid didn't escape from a negligent Chinese lab. Of course there's always the possibility that it did, and that might justify the secrecy. This is plausible and results in considerable suspicion.
Otherwise it seems like one would want to establish a zoonotic origin for the virus, show that steps are being taken, etc. There's certainly no shame in identifying the specific species that did the deed.
China bamboozled Trump (Score:2)
What a buffoon.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely, brother! Now let's post a bunch of URLs so we can prove that to the trumpist sheep!
Weasel words (Score:4, Insightful)
"Now, an international team of virologists, genomicists, and evolutionary biologists may have finally found crucial data to help fill that knowledge gap. A new analysis of genetic sequences collected from the market shows that raccoon dogs being illegally sold at the venue could have been carrying and possibly shedding the virus at the end of 2019".
A few phrases leap out at the experienced bullshit-detector.
"...MAY have finally found crucial data..."
"...raccoon dogs being illegally sold at the venue COULD have been carrying and possibly shedding the virus..."
Incidentally, if there is enough publicly available evidence to reach such conclusions, why nag the Chinese government to "release" it? Conversely, if it hasn't been "released", how can the Atlantic be so sure it exists?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm sure that "nag" is a better description of what they're doing than "demand". And the reason is that there isn't sufficient evidence to reach a conclusion. And it's my suspicion that China doesn't have the evidence being asked for. Remember, the first stage of this event that we know of was the Wuhan municipal government denying that anything was wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
A few phrases leap out at the experienced bullshit-detector.
They're weaseling because "several" of the samples collected at the market (from walls, floors, cages, shopping carts) that included early-variant COVID RNA also contained animal chemical markers, and that markers from Racoon Dogs (which can be infected by COVID-19) were common.
The tests did NOT include any samples directly from an animal, and were conducted after the outbreak had been going on for long enough that the market had been shut down.
So,
Occam Says (Score:3, Insightful)
If your town has been poisoned, the toxin probably came from the local poison factory.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
SARS-Cov 1 came from a wet market so, following occam logic, SARS-cov2 very likely came from a wet market.
Indeed all the previous pandemics in history have come from wild animal zoonosis, not labs. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Ignoring the important question (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Mostly like dog with just a hint of raccooniness.
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent funny, though I was looking for jokes about the unknown animal. Pretty certain it's the same animal they call "tanuki" in Japanese. Has a rather nasty reputation in the folk tales.
WHY WHO (Score:2)
Now why would China want to hide this data, that might prove that the Wuhan lab did nothing wrong? Right. That's not what they are hiding. Rather, more likely the opposite.
Meanwhile, maybe it is because Xi is depicted as a raccoon dog in cartoons?
Show me the reservoir (Score:3, Insightful)
If raccoon dogs are the source, where is the wild reservoir? It shouldn't be that hard to find.
Oh, they haven't found it yet? Hmm.
ctcctcggcgggcacgtag (Score:2, Interesting)
I think it's likely to be a lab leak.
WIV is right there across the river, three employees from WIV were sick and hospitalized in Nov.
Despite years of intense searching no progenitors found.
Zoonotic origin virus spreading to humans is instantly highly transmissible between humans out of the gate with zero delay for adoption.
Very specific research topics known to be of interest and study within WIV. This topic of SARS like viruses using (human) ACE2 has been a subject of study for quite some time with docum
Wondering... (Score:2)
Shouldn't this have come from the WHO-let-the-dogs-out dept?
China closing the barn door (Score:2)
...after the horses ran away.
The data is already released else TFS would not read the way it does. Everything now on is just a formality.
Re: (Score:2)
I care; They're halfway to proving me right about this.
Re: (Score:2)
And then you win... a debate on the internet? Or something just as important as that?
Re: (Score:2)
You sure are salty about something.
Re: (Score:2)
More apathetic and more interested in more relevant issues.
Let's imagine we find out without a shred of a doubt that it was the Chinese wet market. Or Colonel Mustard in the study. What now? We tell the Chinese to shut down the market, they tell us to go suck an egg and that's the end of it.
Re: I don't get it (Score:3)
It is highly relevant if you want to prevent the next outbreak. It makes a lot of difference where you focus your efforts if you think it was man-made, versus a transmission through animals.
For instance, in one case you might act like the USA and ban gain of function research (but only in health institutions, private and militaryresearch is free to do whatever it wants), in the other case you may enact laws that allow you to impound and destroy animals at large scale.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh so NOW covid is serious.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Gets to print out a certificate of achievement and pin it to the wall.
Re: I don't get it (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Satanists are libeling you? What did you do, slaughter the sacred goat?
Re: (Score:2)
You sure it wasn't just your local catholic priest when you were an altar boy?
Re: (Score:2)
So, who's the other one?
shallow vindication (Score:2)
The reason you would be need to be proven "right" about anything is because YOU couldn't ever prove it.
Re:shallow vindication (Score:5, Informative)
Despite the fact that your username make it clear that you're my natural enemy, I haven't really given you much thought. I never had you pegged as the type to ... well ... say things like this.
From what I can tell, you're making the following claims:
- You know exactly how the pandemic started because that information was given to you directly by the person who caused the pandemic
- There is a sizable criminal conspiracy that involves a cult
- The cult mods down your posts on Slashdot any time you try to expose the truth
- The cult is Satanic
- You've suffered horrific physical abuse at the hands of the cultists
- The cult wanted or needed your help
- You were close to being proven right, which I take to mean that the conspiracy, cult, and the origin story were about to be made public in a way that would be difficult to deny. (Please correct me if I'm wrong about this or any other claim.)
I browse at -1, so I should have seen something about this at some point, even if you were modded down instantly. I'm certain that I would have labeled you a kook, but I don't remember doing that, despite your username. (It's entirely possible you would have been modded down by regular users for making claims like these.)
Not that any of that matters now. At the moment, I'm just really curious about your story. How did the pandemic start? How do you know the person who started it? Why did they confess to you? How is the Satanic cult involved? Are the criminal conspirators all cultists or are these separate groups?
I won't argue with you or even ask for any evidence, though I might ask some follow-up questions to make sure I have an accurate understanding of your story. I am genuinely curious.
Re: shallow vindication (Score:2)
Or your lack of proof is failing to open doors.
Re: shallow vindication (Score:2)
That believing something like that without proof is not a virtue, nor does it suddenly turn into one if proof later appears.
To put it another way: There is no way the origins of COVID-19 can reveal that you know anything ahead of anybody else. You just picked a side and HOPED.
Re: shallow vindication (Score:2)
Somebody telling you something you want to hear is not proof, either.
It's not my fault you cannot make your case, blaming me for it will not provoke a defensive reaction from me.
Re: shallow vindication (Score:2)
And this, folks, shows us once again why witnesses are unreliable in court cases.
Re: I don't get it (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:I don't get it (Score:4, Insightful)
The more they refuse to release data on the virus, the more I will assume it was the result of a laboratory accident. This is data that could prove it originated in the wet market, but if they don't want to share that data, then we must assume the data would show it did NOT originate there. That leaves a lab accident as the remaining option.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I believe he's talking about when Trump cut off Chinese nationals from enter from China and was called racist while Pelosi literally told us to go out on the street and hug a Chinese person to show she reflexively opposed anything Trump did.
Or it could be something else.
Re: (Score:2)
You're lying again. [factcheck.org]
Re: (Score:2)
You're an illiterate. I was quite clear in plain English what the travel restrictions were. You reflexively posted a link that refutes something I did not say.
You're also an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
People can read. They can see that you're completely full of shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes they can. It's right there in English. Are you ESL? That would be your only legitimate excuse for being such a clown. If you are then I apologize and suggest you get an EFL person to help you read and understand my first post. If you are EFL then yeah you're a fucking idiot and hopeless.
Re: Not racist now? (Score:3)
Actually that wasn't quite what he did. He kept some people out but not in a way that would reduce spread of the virus. Frankly the Dominion case should be making you pause a bit before saying stuff like that.
Re: (Score:2)
I did not say it was effective. I said he was accused of being racist for creating limited travel restrictions.
I have no idea what dominion has to do with any of this. That was very off topic.
Re: Not racist now? (Score:2)
Yeah, he limited certain people from entering but didn't actually enact a ban. So... a group of people cannot enter but no real benefit, specifically virus containment, came from it. You fully bought an empty gesture.
As for Dominion: given what you've said so far it's not at all a surprise you're unaware of it. There's one major news outlet not covering it. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
I bought into nothing. I know now and I knew then exactly what he did. You are straw manning me. Go read what *I* said and not what other people said or what you want me to have said. Done on this topic. I will not defend the straw man words you shoved in my mouth. Those are your words, not mine.
I am 100% aware of dominion. It has absolutely nothing to do with Trump's travel restrictions or Pelosi's "hug a Chinese" virtual signaling.
Your snark is non-productive, off-target, mis-directed and boring.
Ha
Re: Not racist now? (Score:2)
I have read your posts to others, including one where you hastily dismissed a link that proved you wrong. You're buying spin.
Dominion should have talked you out of buying that spin, but I think you know that since you're trying to misrepresent what I said.
Re: (Score:2)
I still have no idea why you think dominion has anything to do with Trump's travel restrictions years before most people had heard of dominion.
And you read my post to others? Ok him so what? What did you dog and cat think about it? Why would you tell me you read my post to your pets? Who cares?
Whatever point you think you're making... you aren't.