jwb, do you know what defines a "genetically modified virus" versus something that doesn't meet that classification? Those scientists were not asked to account for those kinds of questions, but only whether or not there were signs of intentional, specific modification to make it function a certain way. Their conclusions do not take into account what I listed a page or so ago in regards to the definition of a "genetically modified virus".
I'm not disagreeing with their observations on the spike proteins and such. My point of disagreement is the overall conclusion because their conclusion doesn't take spontaneous mutation or the other things I mentioned into consideration.
If the virus they had in the lab was forced to spontaneously mutate (a process where you really can't control the exact outcome) as part of their GOF minutia, then that completely sidesteps everything they talked about in the analysis I read from what you linked me to. It would also explain why the symptoms are so wide-ranging and it's beyond-expected virulence. They forced it to mutate under strict conditions and never had the opportunity to study it afterwards. I doubt anyone working there wanted something they were still in the process of studying to escape.
I'd be more inclined to think less conspiratorially about the situation under other circumstances, but the way that the Chinese government handled the lab, personnel and also warning signs from the U.S. embassy less than two years ago about that lab's lack of procedural care all point to something other than the mainstream narrative.
Last edited by Anteater; 05-01-2020 at 01:03 PM.
|