WHO expected to release report saying Covid originated in wildlife farms in China

asp3 said:
Can you site any reputable articles with the scientific evidence that the virus was a product of "gain of function"? All of the articles I've seen in sources like Scientific American and Science News have all said it's unlikely that the virus was the result of work in a lab.
Click to expand...
Data was published by the Wuhan Wuchang District Health Bureau.
Isn't that apt to be slightly more reputable than any news source? To get this kind of information, I guess you'll need to know some Chinese folk too who can translate this kind of info.
 

asp3 said:
Can you site any reputable articles with the scientific evidence that the virus was a product of "gain of function"? All of the articles I've seen in sources like Scientific American and Science News have all said it's unlikely that the virus was the result of work in a lab.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know if it's "reputable", but, I see today, the Gateway Pundit actually has an article about this very thing. Looking at some of the wording, I believe that their source may be the same one I have. Can't be sure, but, a lot of the info matches.
I was surprised (well maybe not really) to see a map that shows the highest concentration of the original outbreak happened between the 2 labs and quite a distance from the seafood market.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...o-chinas-biological-warfare-facilities-wuhan/
 
squatting dog said:
Well, I don't know if it's "reputable", but, I see today, the Gateway Pundit actually has an article about this very thing. Looking at some of the wording, I believe that their source may be the same one I have. Can't be sure, but, a lot of the info matches.
I was surprised (well maybe not really) to see a map that shows the highest concentration of the original outbreak happened between the 2 labs and quite a distance from the seafood market.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...o-chinas-biological-warfare-facilities-wuhan/
Click to expand...

According to this https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-gateway-pundit/ Gateway Pundit has low accuracy and extreme right wing bias. It isn't one that I personally would trust or call reputable.
 

Last edited:
Happy Joe said:
All YOU have to do is look at the Covid statements & news releases, and their timing, from both along with the (pre-Biden) funding for the WHO; if that is not enough evidence for you I'm afraid that I am unwilling to try to help you, as your mind is already made up.

Enjoy!
Click to expand...
My mind is made up, I don’t care where it came from! Explain to me why it matters where it came from? Explain to me why this is so important to you? I really want to know.
 
squatting dog said:
Data was published by the Wuhan Wuchang District Health Bureau.
Isn't that apt to be slightly more reputable than any news source? To get this kind of information, I guess you'll need to know some Chinese folk too who can translate this kind of info.
Click to expand...
I actually do know “some Chinese folk” and from the beginning their relatives in China said it was not from a lab.
 
Aneeda72 said:
I actually do know “some Chinese folk” and from the beginning their relatives in China said it was not from a lab.
Click to expand...

So, the map released (by the Wuhan Wuchang District Health Bureau) that clearly shows where the original hot spot was is for sure wrong? I suppose that maybe, all the victims in the dark shaded area could have gone to the sea food market first. :unsure: :rolleyes:
To answer your first question, I'd want to know if this was an accidental escape of a weaponized virus. I would think that matters... maybe not, I don't know.

Wuhan-Map-002.jpg
 
squatting dog said:
So, the map released (by the Wuhan Wuchang District Health Bureau) that clearly shows where the original hot spot was is for sure wrong? I suppose that maybe, all the victims in the dark shaded area could have gone to the sea food market first. :unsure: :rolleyes:
To answer your first question, I'd want to know if this was an accidental escape of a weaponized virus. I would think that matters... maybe not, I don't know.

View attachment 156570
Click to expand...
I said I knew some Chinese who have relatives who live in China who said it did not come from labs. I did not say where those relatives live, I did not dispute the location of where the virus started, it drives me crazy when others change or misinterpret what I wrote. Just saying.

We all chose to believe what we chose to believe, and we all chose our sources to believe. It would have only taken ONE person to go to the market, get the virus, and spread it to others that he/she worked with and start the whole thing.

This has happened several times in the USA. One stupid person with the virus shows up at a wedding or a funeral or a bar, several others get it, and the spread is on. So, yes, I believe it came from somewhere other than a lab. I don’t know if it came from the market, the wild, or the man in the moon.

I do not see how knowing where it came from makes a difference.

The UK strain came from the UK. It’s going to be really bad for us, and the world, according to the experts. Why not blame the UK for the next round of sickness and death? Maybe the UK was testing/experimenting on/with the virus, looking for a cure or a weapon?

Who really knows how the UK version of the virus came about? Maybe it was invented in a lab and it escaped their lab. Now the world is once again stuck with a virus that spreads even more rapidly. And a new conspiracy is born. 😂

Truth is, this virus mutates so fast, we will never be safe. It came from Mother Nature, and she is mad. If people need to blame someone, blame the entire human race. Look at Florida, blame the human race. You can not cure stupid.
 
Last I heard on the news yesterday was that it will be announced the virus originated in a lab.
Great just great.
The only thing for sure is the damned contagious stuff has inundated the world.
Of course, if you think it's a hoax . . . I wish ya lots of luck.
 
asp3 said:
According to this https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-gateway-pundit/ Gateway Pundit has low accuracy and extreme right wing bias. It isn't one that I personally would trust or call reputable.
Click to expand...
A note about your fact checking source:
​
The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media analyst​

It is certainly no secret that leftists and leftist media (e.g., WP, NYT, etc.) would label GP as being on the right and vice versa. Two sides of the fence, each calling the other extreme and being on the wrong side of things. I often, but not always, find the answer to be somewhere between the two extremes. That said, Alinsky's rules for radicals is in play on both sides with denigration getting a lot of use by all flavors of armchair pundits.
 
JonDouglas said:
A note about your fact checking source:
​
The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media analyst​

It is certainly no secret that leftists and leftist media (e.g., WP, NYT, etc.) would label GP as being on the right and vice versa. Two sides of the fence, each calling the other extreme and being on the wrong side of things. I often, but not always, find the answer to be somewhere between the two extremes. That said, Alinsky's rules for radicals is in play on both sides with denigration getting a lot of use by all flavors of armchair pundits.
Click to expand...

Are there any media bias and accuracy sites that you find accurate and "unbiased"?
 
Here are some thoughts (snippets) by former Pfizer Vice President and Chief Science Officer Dr. Mike Yeadon, from an interview in America's Frontline Doctors:
  • It’s a fiction, and an evil one at that, that variants are likely to “escape immunity”. Not only is it intrinsically unlikely – because this degree of similarity of variants means zero chance that an immune person (whether from natural infection or from vaccination) will be made ill by a variant – but it’s empirically supported by high-quality research.The research I refer to shows that people recovering from infection or who have been vaccinated ALL have a wide range of immune cells which recognize ALL the variants. I cannot say strongly enough: The stories around variants and need for top up vaccines are FALSE
  • The only people who might remain vulnerable and need prophylaxis or treatment are those who are elderly and/or ill and do not wish to receive a vaccine (as is their right).
  • The good news is that there are multiple choices available: hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, budesonide (inhaled steroid used in asthmatics), and of course oral Vitamin D, zinc, azithromycin etc. These reduce the severity to such an extent that this virus did not need to become a public health crisis.
  • So I no longer believe the regulators are capable of protecting us. ‘Approval’ is therefore meaningless. Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and I petitioned the EMA Dec 1, 2020 on the genetic vaccines. They ignored us. Recently, we wrote privately to them, warning of blood clots, they ignored us. When we went public with our letter, we were completely censored. Days later, more than ten countries paused use of a vaccine citing blood clots. I think the big money of pharma plus cash from BMGF creates the environment where saying no just isn’t an option for the regulator.
The above are just some interesting snippets. I recommend you read the entire article. Some key things to remember. One, there is big money and political influence involved. Two, according to Yeadon, it didn't need to become a public health crisis. You may recall when that little health Napoleon, Fauci said it wasn't a crisis (which it isn't for the majority of people). Three, IMHO and that of history precedence, this crisis is a poltician's dream event.
 
Last edited:
asp3 said:
According to this https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-gateway-pundit/ Gateway Pundit has low accuracy and extreme right wing bias. It isn't one that I personally would trust or call reputable.
Click to expand...
And how do we know mediabiasfactcheck doesn't have it's own bias? I don't know anything about Gateway Pundit but every time someone posts something from Fox or CNN someone from the other side says "They're biased!" Even though the article may just be about legitimate studies and they're just printing them.
 
garyt1957 said:
And how do we know mediabiasfactcheck doesn't have it's own bias? I don't know anything about Gateway Pundit but every time someone posts something from Fox or CNN someone from the other side says "They're biased!" Even though the article may just be about legitimate studies and they're just printing them.
Click to expand...
As you probably know, ridiculing sources is one of Saul Alinsky's 13 "Rules for Radicals", which seems to be the "go-to" book for political action these days. As for mediabiasfactcheck, the Columbia Journalism Review didn't think much of them. Personally, I wouldn't pay much attention to any of them.
 
garyt1957 said:
That's the thing, there likely aren't. And even if there were, the side they tend to disagree with most would still throw shade at them.
Click to expand...

I suppose if we each want to find one we trust we need to look at methodology and criteria they use for their analysis and determine whether or not we consider it reasonable for our purposes. I have yet to do that but might consider doing so in the future.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top