Corona GM conspiracy thread

Forums: Conspiracy Theorizing, Coronavirus
Email this Topic • Print this Page

ABC news has posted an article dismissing the conspiracy theory that COVID19 is engineered, but this is their reasoning:

Quote:

Researchers concluded that the novel coronavirus is not a human creation because it does not share any "previously used virus backbone." It likely arose, the study said, from a recombination of a virus found in bats and another virus, possibly originating from pangolins, otherwise known as scaly anteaters.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/conspiracy-theorists-study-concludes-covid-19-laboratory-construct/story?id=69827832

If you were going to engineer a global pandemic virus, would you start from a known 'backbone,' or would you identify some new backbone, e.g. from a bat or pangolin virus, and then manipulate it to infect humans?

I'm not arguing that it is a conspiracy, just that this logic of why it isn't doesn't make that much sense.

It's like saying a counterfeit bill wasn't printed in a certain area because the paper the bill is printed on isn't sold in that area (as if counterfeiters wouldn't go through the trouble to make their own paper and/or use paper from some other region to divert any investigation into their bills).

Conspiracies are impossible to disprove, so unless you enjoy speculating about how they could or couldn't be achieved without too much concern over proving them one way or the other, it is probably better for you to just leave them alone.

If you like mysteries and detective stories and crime-solving, however, conspiracy theorizing can provide an interesting way to keep your mind active.

Maybe conspiracy theorizing should get a little more positive attention for this reason; after all how many people are aging and/or stuck in lockdown who need to keep their mind active and avoid boredom?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,537 • Replies: 43

[+3] - farmerman - 03/29/2020[quote] I have no interest in submitting to your evaluation of me by discussing my personal background with you. [/quote] I think thats a clear...

@livinglava,

This thread is ridiculous. And let me explain why?

I am going to bet (and please correct me if I am wrong) that you have never worked in a genetics lab. You probably have never set foot in a genetics lab. You have never extracted DNA. You have never used a spectraphotometer or any other equipment.

You have certainly never engineered a genetic organism. If I put you in a fully stocked lab and gave you a white coat and all the base material you needed, you wouldn't have a clue what to do.

And yet you are here giving your analysis. The experts; that is people who have education and actual experience doing genetic engineering are saying that this is highly unlikely.

And you, based on your own crazy conspiracy theories are saying the actual genetic engineers are wrong about genetic engineering because counterfeit money is on paper.

You are being ridiculous, pretending to have anything intelligent to say on a topic you know nothing about.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Jesus Christ. I agree with that post 100%. The world must have gone ******* mad

2 Replies

@Wilso,

I was reading an article about forensic epidemiology thats been going on in trying to understand the origin of the virus strains. DNA , almost right on to th present corona virus strain was found in wild animal stock. The original site where the virus became a human infection agent was in Hubai (China) where theres a big "wet market". These are markets that sell pets , specimens amd , most-importantly "Meat and ingested amulets" of many jungle animals.

The animal that seems (at this point) to be the target species for the virus origin is the Pangolin, which, is also one of the featured specimens of Hubais wet market. The scales, like an armadillo's but bigger are the most sought after pangolin feature. The virus was isolated from a specific source of specimens and , although not fully able to transfer to humans, was studied with fox bats, a popular food animal in the Hubai market.
Th present forensics (which, by the way, involves hundreds of scientists from all over the world, is concentrating on whether the bats were a "Host" species, and where the final mutation that made the virus transmissible to humans, first occurred.

Once this is all over, I hope it delivers a worldwide wake up on the growing lethality of these zoonotic viruses being introduced within dense populations of people.

Interestingly, the Pangolin was eaten as a ceremonial meal to promote "good health" in several Asiatic cultures.

Wait till were a species 12 Billion strong.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

I’ve been reading much the same articles. I don’t understand them as well as you do. I sort of skirt around the edges.
The aspect of the whole situation has annoyed me, is fringe right wing individuals “blaming” the Chinese for the outbreak. As if they knew this would occur, and didn’t care. There’s been plenty of times over the years where I’ve encountered disgust from people re various Chinese food items. My response has always been that when food has to be found for over a billion people, just about anything edible is on the table.

1 Reply

@Wilso,

Wilso wrote:

Jesus Christ. I agree with that post 100%. The world must have gone ******* mad

You agree with my posts whenever you are right. I am sure it happens more than you think.

0 Replies

@Wilso,

I love the various styles of cooking in China. I just gotta know what in it. My first time I was introduced to sea cucumbers gotta admit they looked like a bowl of dicks in a broth.

Weve been trying to stem the collecting and killing of pangolins for more than 10 years when we discovered they were going extinct. Looks like their parting gift to us is "to get even".

In Nigeria "bush meat" hadda be watched carefully. I wont eat bats. I spent a summer banding em in several Knttucky caves, when several of us in school were helping each other with our honors projects

0 Replies

I wouldn’t eat a bat, mainly because they disgust me. The most common in Australia is the fruit bat/flying fox. There are people and groups that will rescue injured ones and nurse them - that want them protected at all costs. I’ve never understood it for an animal that’s often a pest, is not endangered (there are millions of the fuckers), and when they’re not screeching or at times making some towns unliveable, spend the rest of their time hanging upside down and pissing all over themselves.

0 Replies

Can someone explain to me why eating a bat is any more dangerous than eating a squirrel or a goose or even a deer?

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

This thread is ridiculous. And let me explain why?

I am going to bet (and please correct me if I am wrong) that you have never worked in a genetics lab. You probably have never set foot in a genetics lab. You have never extracted DNA. You have never used a spectraphotometer or any other equipment.

You have certainly never engineered a genetic organism. If I put you in a fully stocked lab and gave you a white coat and all the base material you needed, you wouldn't have a clue what to do.

And yet you are here giving your analysis. The experts; that is people who have education and actual experience doing genetic engineering are saying that this is highly unlikely.

And you, based on your own crazy conspiracy theories are saying the actual genetic engineers are wrong about genetic engineering because counterfeit money is on paper.

You are being ridiculous, pretending to have anything intelligent to say on a topic you know nothing about.

You shouldn't default to trusting experts just because you don't share their expertise.

Probably the default trust of expertise has led to a lot more leeway in lying/cheating/manipulating than it has honesty and truth.

Just look at what you are doing on the exponential virus thread with mathematical expertise. You are so convinced that your math expertise automatically translates into analytical validity that you are more prone to misrepresenting reality.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

I was reading an article about forensic epidemiology thats been going on in trying to understand the origin of the virus strains. DNA , almost right on to th present corona virus strain was found in wild animal stock. The original site where the virus became a human infection agent was in Hubai (China) where theres a big "wet market". These are markets that sell pets , specimens amd , most-importantly "Meat and ingested amulets" of many jungle animals.

The animal that seems (at this point) to be the target species for the virus origin is the Pangolin, which, is also one of the featured specimens of Hubais wet market. The scales, like an armadillo's but bigger are the most sought after pangolin feature. The virus was isolated from a specific source of specimens and , although not fully able to transfer to humans, was studied with fox bats, a popular food animal in the Hubai market.
Th present forensics (which, by the way, involves hundreds of scientists from all over the world, is concentrating on whether the bats were a "Host" species, and where the final mutation that made the virus transmissible to humans, first occurred.

Once this is all over, I hope it delivers a worldwide wake up on the growing lethality of these zoonotic viruses being introduced within dense populations of people.

Interestingly, the Pangolin was eaten as a ceremonial meal to promote "good health" in several Asiatic cultures.

Wait till were a species 12 Billion strong.

It sounds like you're implying there is an unintentional 'conspiracy' to consume these special meats for "good health" and the result is that zoonotic viruses are released into large, dense populations, which causes them to spread around and seek and thus weed out the least healthy people, which has sort of a survival-of-the-fittest effect on those populations; and the more the virus spread, the more health-weakened people are weeded out, and so it's not really a conscious conspiracy to spread new viruses around and weed out unhealthy people, but it has that de facto effect.

Is that a faulty interpretation of your post?

0 Replies

@livinglava,

Your problem is that you don't accept reality.

The reality is that real people are getting sick from corona virus. These real people are showing up at hospitals where they are really treated by real nurses and real doctors. And they are really dying.

We can accurately count the number of people who are dying. The doctors can look at the people who died and tell you with a great deal of certainty why they died, and if there is a doubt they can run an autopsy or a covid-19 test.

- When you count real people who are dying, the number reflects reality.

- Your strange speculations and conspiracy theories don't reflect reality.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Your problem is that you don't accept reality.

The reality is that real people are getting sick from corona virus. These real people are showing up at hospitals where they are really treated by real nurses and real doctors. And they are really dying.

We can accurately count the number of people who are dying. The doctors can look at the people who died and tell you with a great deal of certainty why they died, and if there is a doubt they can run an autopsy or a covid-19 test.

- When you count real people who are dying, the number reflects reality.

- Your strange speculations and conspiracy theories don't reflect reality.

The reality is that some people die of COVID19 while others recover. How do you explain the diversity of health outcomes?

You are being too aggressive toward theory, conspiracy theory or otherwise. 'Realists' are notorious for being anti-theory, as if realism itself isn't a form of theory.

You need to accept that whatever you're mode of theorizing, whether you're trying to be 'realistic' or whether you're exploring more broadly, the truth comes from right analysis and conclusions and if your 'realism' prevents you from discovering the right information and reasoning process to analyze that information correctly, it's going to cause you to propagate lies and obfuscate truth.

It should not comfort you when lies and BS seem subjectively 'realistic.'

And, btw, there is no such thing as objective realism. Realism is nothing more than a subjective attitude that presumes to understand reality by avoiding critical thinking that has the potential to elucidate misunderstandings.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Quote:

The reality is that some people die of COVID19 while others recover. How do you explain the diversity of health outcomes?

That's how diseases work. What is your point?

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

wait a minit.I think hes on to something. Not all people who smok get lung cancer.Those people are protected by the Goldberg Variations.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Quote:
The reality is that some people die of COVID19 while others recover. How do you explain the diversity of health outcomes?

That's how diseases work. What is your point?

The point is that the underlying conditions prior to COVID19 infection might be the determinant factor in the person dying and not the COVID19 infection itself.

This is a really important point, because if quarantining and social distancing leads to widespread decline in public health and immunity levels, e.g. because of inadequate exercise and inadequate exposure to normal pathogens that help the immune system stay in good working order, it could lead to more severe infections and thus more deaths when people do finally get infected with COVID19 or some other virus their immune systems aren't prepared to deal with.

0 Replies

@livinglava,

livinglava wrote:

You shouldn't default to trusting experts just because you don't share their expertise...

Would you consent to being operated on by someone who hadn't been to medical school? Yes or no.

Experts may be wrong about something, but you cannot share in that debates, because you don't know what you're talking about.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

livinglava wrote:
You shouldn't default to trusting experts just because you don't share their expertise...

Would you consent to being operated on by someone who hadn't been to medical school? Yes or no.

Would you consent to being operated on by anyone who had been to medical school? Yes or no?

Quote:

Experts may be wrong about something, but you cannot share in that debates, because you don't know what you're talking about.

1) There's no debate about it. No one is obliged to submit to experts on anything, so it's a question of whether or not you accept claims they make, not whether to debate them. "Debate" implies they have authority that they don't have. Expertise is not the same thing as authority.

2)Everyone has varying levels of expertise in different areas depending on what they've read, what they know from experience, etc.

So every debate or other discussion that occurs takes place between people with different levels of expertise. If people would stop debating and discussing by recognizing each others' expertise, there would never be another debate or discussion.

3) Enough authoritarian propaganda with expertise as the impetus for authoritarian submission. Stop (follow my authoritarian command here)

1 Reply

I understand how LivingLava's mind works.

How Conspiracy Theorists develop Conspiracy Theories

1. He comes up with an idea. He decides that this idea is the "Truth".

2. He searches for "facts" and quotes that support his new "Truth". His belief in his idea gets stronger.

3. He ignores any facts that contradict his new "Truth".

4. When the facts are persistent, he invents new conspiracy theories to explain them away. This leads to new "Truths".

Science, like most fields of study, is a team effort. It is a painstaking process of building expertise that has gone one through generations. Each generation of scientist learns the knowledge of past scientists and then builds upon it. The scientific community works in concert with a shared set of knowledge backed by fact and experiment.

Making Conspiracy Theories is a solitary process. LivingLava has built up his "Truth" by himself. He won't let anyone correct him. He won't change his ideas. He judges the work of real scientists and mathemeticians and geneticists by whether they confirm to his own personal "Truth". He doesn't need math. He doesn't need education. He doesn't need to listen to people who know more than him. All he needs is his own opinion on what sounds right to him.

This is why LivingLava can't accept experts. The experts have done things backwards... they spent time studying and and working to learn their field. Experts listen to each other, and are accountable to the facts.

Education is a process of finding how your current misunderstanding contradict with the facts, and then developing new understanding by changing your ideas. Without going through the process of education, you can't be an expert.

As Lava points out, not all education happens in school (although it is nearly impossible become an expert in an advanced field without school since there is too much material to cover). But education does mean being able to listen to people who know more than you, and dropping your ideas when they are shown to not match the facts.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Can someone explain to me why eating a bat is any more dangerous than eating a squirrel or a goose or even a deer?

I’m not sure it is. Flying foxes were/are hunted and eaten by Australian aborigines. They’ve been doing that for 40 to 50 thousand years.

0 Replies

Forums
» Corona GM conspiracy thread

Read Discussion
Reply to All

Corona GM conspiracy thread

Quick Links

My Account

able2know