OT: Coronavirus XXXVI: Bat Scratch Fever

Status
Not open for further replies.

LaGu

Registered User
Jan 4, 2011
7,500
3,823
Italy
Isn’t the scientific method about empiricism or is it now acceptable to just hand wave and call stuff conspiracies before running enough tests?
Well yes, that is not contrary to my point though. But just because I make shit up does not mean you have to investigate it to prove me wrong. If you make it up then a lot of the burden of proof is on you. Anyhow, that would be my point of view. What they did was extensive research into this theory already before being there, and now they even went there to inspect the facility and interview concerned staff. This creates a press release saying what most of us expected it to say, and people go off because of it. People are pissed off because the WHO is not saying what they want them to say, it is really ironic calling them puppets since that is exactly what many seem to think they should be.


edit: Anyway, I will not go much further down this road, there are issues with the WHO which need to be addressed. I know on here there is a strong and vocal anti-WHO contingent, some of the criticism is definitely justified. This one though is not, and all this over the top constant bashing is really counterproductive to that and to what we actually need going forward from this organization.
 
Last edited:

ThePhoenixx

Registered User
Aug 7, 2005
9,285
5,751
Well yes, that is not contrary to my point though. But just because I make shit up does not mean you have to investigate it to prove me wrong. If you make it up then a lot of the burden of proof is on you. Anyhow, that would be my point of view. What they did was extensive research into this theory already before being there, and now they even went there to inspect the facility and interview concerned staff. This creates a press release saying what most of us expected it to say, and people go off because of it. People are pissed off because the WHO is not saying what they want them to say, it is really ironic calling them puppets since that is exactly what many seem to think they should be.


edit: Anyway, I will not go much further down this road, there are issues with the WHO which need to be addressed. I know on here there is a strong and vocal anti-WHO contingent, some of the criticism is definitely justified. This one though is not, and all this over the top constant bashing is really counterproductive to that and to what we actually need going forward from this organization.

Wow. So now the scientific process is complete when you get to 'unlikely'. The most damaging virus in the world and the investigative science is now down to pop psychology status. No real scientific journal would ever accept such a finding as anything close to fact.

Then you go on to claim that, "most of us expected it to say". So now you speak for a country of people who you have not seen for a year because you are all jailed in your homes. I'm not surprised you feel this way due to where you live. They are running your country. You need to believe.
 

ThePhoenixx

Registered User
Aug 7, 2005
9,285
5,751
Well yes, that is not contrary to my point though. But just because I make shit up does not mean you have to investigate it to prove me wrong. If you make it up then a lot of the burden of proof is on you. Anyhow, that would be my point of view. What they did was extensive research into this theory already before being there, and now they even went there to inspect the facility and interview concerned staff. This creates a press release saying what most of us expected it to say, and people go off because of it. People are pissed off because the WHO is not saying what they want them to say, it is really ironic calling them puppets since that is exactly what many seem to think they should be.


edit: Anyway, I will not go much further down this road, there are issues with the WHO which need to be addressed. I know on here there is a strong and vocal anti-WHO contingent, some of the criticism is definitely justified. This one though is not, and all this over the top constant bashing is really counterproductive to that and to what we actually need going forward from this organization.
Here is the narrative they are pushing. It's obvious now that it came from some other country and crossed some other border. It's not from Wuhan.

COVID-19 may have taken 'convoluted path' to Wuhan, WHO team leader says | Ottawa Sun

“The possible path from whatever original animal species all the way through to the Huanan market could have taken a very long and convoluted path involving also movements across borders,” Embarek told a nearly three-hour media briefing..."

"Embarek said work to identify the coronavirus’s origins points to a natural reservoir in bats, but it is unlikely that they were in Wuhan."

Liang Wannian, head of China’s expert panel on the outbreak, said there was evidence of coronavirus infections that could have preceded the first detected case by “several weeks...”

This suggests that we cannot rule out that it was circulating in other regions and the circulation was unreported,” he told the briefing..."

"Members of the team sought to rein in expectations for the mission, with infectious disease expert Dominic Dwyer saying it would probably take years
to fully understand the origins of COVID-19." End quote

It took three weeks to conclude that it must have come from somewhere else. Well...very unlikely, but no need of further study. ;)
 
Last edited:

harpoon

Registered User
Dec 23, 2005
14,194
11,344
Well yes, that is not contrary to my point though. But just because I make shit up does not mean you have to investigate it to prove me wrong. If you make it up then a lot of the burden of proof is on you. Anyhow, that would be my point of view. What they did was extensive research into this theory already before being there, and now they even went there to inspect the facility and interview concerned staff. This creates a press release saying what most of us expected it to say, and people go off because of it. People are pissed off because the WHO is not saying what they want them to say, it is really ironic calling them puppets since that is exactly what many seem to think they should be.


edit: Anyway, I will not go much further down this road, there are issues with the WHO which need to be addressed. I know on here there is a strong and vocal anti-WHO contingent, some of the criticism is definitely justified. This one though is not, and all this over the top constant bashing is really counterproductive to that and to what we actually need going forward from this organization.
Although I disagree with a lot of your comments, I think you’ve been mostly reasonable in your posts in these threads, and no doubt your reaction to the subject has been coloured by the tragic loss of life in the region in which you reside. So I’m going to try my best to reply to this post with as much courtesy as I can muster.

I think throughout the series of threads on this topic (what number are we even on now? Thirty something?) ... anyway, it’s become apparent that the information consumed by everyone is not the same. Why is this? I guess it’s because many regular people continue to have faith in the msm. I don’t mean anything negative or insulting by using the word ‘regular people’, I just want to identify that group of people who, for reasons I am unable to understand, refuse to recognize that the msm has morphed into a corrupt force in society that is actively pursuing agendas not at all in common with the good of the people. Sadly, I believe if one is obtaining their information strictly from a few traditionally ‘recognized’ sources they are running a great risk of being ill informed, or worse, purposely misinformed. It is ironic then that these same folks will dismiss publications and media outlets outside of their ‘approved’ regular channels as being ‘alternative’ or ‘biased’ or ‘conspiracy driven’. Somehow they have failed to notice the bias, the agenda, the distortion within their own approved sources.

For this reason I feel like it’s only by consuming a wide variety of media sources that one is able to cobble together something resembling a true picture of what is going on. I read the Guardian every week for example even though I find it to be a loathsome rag full of half truths and propaganda. Similarly I will also read Breitbart from time to time to see the slant they have taken on a particular topic even though I’m well aware that they are an agenda driven operation. I often find the best sources are foreign papers and websites who exist to some extent outside of the bubble in which western civilization is engaging in its cultural death match.

I guess it’s none of my business what media anyone consumes ... until someone poses the sort of questions that you pose in the post above. You demand that ‘someone prove’ that the covid virus originated in a PRC laboratory and was released on the world either through a shocking failure in safety protocols or something more sinister.

Please ask yourself what proof would satisfy you. I suggest that proof of the level you probably require is not available. And never will be. This is PRC we are dealing with here. Run by one of the most corrupt governments the world has ever seen. With a track record of atrocities and human rights violations that beggars belief. There is no length to which they would not go, no low to which they would not stoop, to achieve their goals. And they’ve now had a full year to cover their tracks. You think they left any evidence lying around? You think any impartial investigator will ever have full and free access to the sites and people involved? The only chance the world might ever have to know the truth about Wuhan is if a whistleblower came forward. That could still happen I guess but we all know PRC doesn’t wait for whistleblowers to step forward. They will proactively arrest and detain indefinitely.

Many many sources offering such ‘proof’ as is available have been posted in this thread and it’s previous versions. I know because I have posted some of them. If you honestly cared to inform yourself you would have read these articles as they were posted. Even on the subject of whistleblowers, articles have been posted several times identifying key figures from WIV, and citizen journalists, who have ‘disappeared’. There have been articles by reputable and qualified scientists saying quite certainly that a laboratory leak cannot be ruled out and indeed must be one of the main scenarios considered by any investigation. Many articles. Either you didn’t read them, or along the vein of what I posted above, you glanced at them before dismissing them as not being published in the ‘right’ sources or not coming from the ‘right’ sort of doctor. That’s on you. Im not going to sift through these threads to repost stuff that you could find on your own if you were so inclined.

But let’s speak about the WHO since their bias is very easy to prove. Today Peter Daszak - the only person to be a member of both the WHO and Lancet teams investigating the origins of this virus - has once again used his pulpit to praise PRC and urge the citizens of the world to ‘pay no attention’ to the USA and their crazy theories about laboratory leaks. Daszak is clearly up to his eyeballs in conflict of interest and is in no way a credible person to be investigating his pals at the WIV. See the quotes below which can be found in any number of newspapers.

Daszak is the contractor who funded the WIV's research on bat SARS-related coronaviruses, with subcontracts of $200 million in USAID funding and $7 million in NIH funding. In addition to the funding EcoHealth Alliance receives from USAID, NIH, and other agencies, which it funnels into the WIV, the firm received US$30 million from the US Department of Defense.

When asked whether Daszak had been involved in the controversial gain of function experiments on bat coronaviruses at the WIV, Ebright (the Board of Governors Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Rutgers University, and Laboratory Director at the Waksman Institute of Microbiology) said: "Daszak has been a contractor, a collaborator, and a co-author on work at the WIV on construction and analysis of novel chimeric coronaviruses." Ebright said this makes "it clear that WHO and Lancet reviews cannot be considered credible investigations."

I urge you to read the article linked below in full. It contains a complete shredding of Daszak and the WHO investigation. Daszak is btw the same guy who wrote an op/ed in the Guardian defending the best practices of WIV and also rounded up some of his bought and paid for colleagues to sign and circulate a letter stating that WIV was never a possible source for the virus. In fact he has really been a one man crusade stomping out any fires that may reflect badly on PRC. This guy is as corrupt as the day is long. And the really sad thing is that the WHO is such a bunch of sock puppets that they don’t even care about his conflict of interest. It’s right out in the open. This is how little respect they have for people like you who believe in their ‘good work’. They are basically giving the world the finger as they pocket the checks and enjoy the hospitality of their good friends in PRC. You say above that we should be less hostile toward WHO so that we can all get ‘what we need from this organization going forward’. What we ‘need’ is for this organization to disappear and be replaced by something that is actually fit for purpose.


WHO inspector has conflict of interest in Wuhan COVID probe: Prominent biologist | Taiwan News | 2021/02/04

Sorry for the messed up fonts. Copy pasting from several sources and can’t seem to get them to sync up on my mobile.
 
Last edited:

Sensmileletsgo

Registered User
Oct 22, 2018
5,100
4,307

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
UCP MLAs Pitt, Barnes join group opposing COVID-19 restrictions | Calgary Sun

Yup. Outside the Atlantic provinces Alberta is doing the best on covid so far.

It really has become ideological. This Liberty group pushing for fewer restrictions. The other side of the political spectrum arguing we are opening up too fast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oilers'72

ThePhoenixx

Registered User
Aug 7, 2005
9,285
5,751
Would not be good if covid was spreading through dogs. I can't get my dog to socially distance whatsoever, he loves sniffing other dogs butts too much.

If it was just dogs who sniffed we may be safe.

sniff.gif
butt.gif
 

Drivesaitl

Time to Drive
Oct 8, 2017
45,304
54,861
Duck hunting
Why should they be spending time and resources on one of the most far fetched theories around?
C'mon. Far fetched is scientific models saying 70% of Americans will contract Covid and 20M will die in US alone. Far fetched is purporting the most unlikely scenarios due to some whacked model with unrealistic variable coefficients plugged in. Far fetched is Scientists telling people that its more important to protest than exercise safety during a global pandemic. Theres been no end of far fetched coming out of our MSM, our leaders, of apparent Scientists. When the Lancet publishes a protocol list of Scientists signng on that we must support China, must acknowledge all their outstanding efforts, their version of truths etc. You know that things have been co-opted.

I've wanted to cite this article for a longtime. Its an exceedingly well written piece. Your couple of posts gives me a reason to post it. Not just to you, but to the board, to anybody reading. Its even why I took a Science refresher course during the summer. I wanted to separate what was purported vs actual scientific principle, statement, conclusion, methodology etc. What this gives is more acuity in seeing when quoted Science is not actually Scientific in principal. Its unfortunate one needs to go to these lengths to evaluate incoming information now.


Jonah Goldberg: Listen to science — but listen carefully | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (post-gazette.com)
 
Last edited:

NeverForget06

Here we go again !
Jan 7, 2013
6,467
5,143
Edmonton
C'mon. Far fetched is scientific models saying 70% of Americans will contract Covid and 20M will die in US alone. Far fetched is purporting the most unlikely scenarios due to some whacked model with unrealistic variable coefficients plugged in. Far fetched is Scientists telling people that its more important to protest than exercise safety during a global pandemic. Theres been no end of far fetched coming out of our MSM, our leaders, of apparent Scientists. When the Lancet publishes a protocol list of Scientists signng on that we must support China, must acknowledge all their outstanding efforts, etc. You know that things have been co-opted.

I've wanted to cite this article for a longtime. Its an exceedingly well written piece. Your couple of posts give me a reason to post it. Not just to you, but to the board, to anybody reading. Its even why I took a Science refresher course during the summer. I wanted to separate what was purported vs actual scientific principle, statement, conclusion etc.


Jonah Goldberg: Listen to science — but listen carefully | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (post-gazette.com)
Thanks for sharing this article. It really articulates some of the problems I have been having with the "use" of science. Everything is so political that it becomes harder and harder to get through to the facts. This is especially true where "science" doesn't align with your political views so you just find some other "science" that does. It shouldn't work that way.
 

Dorian2

Define that balance
Jul 17, 2009
12,248
2,229
Edmonton
Yup. Outside the Atlantic provinces Alberta is doing the best on covid so far.

It really has become ideological. This Liberty group pushing for fewer restrictions. The other side of the political spectrum arguing we are opening up too fast.

Yup. Meanwhile, the people without an agenda quietly take care of business and help to drive down infection rates by acting responsibly and thinking clearly. The old KISS principle at work.
 

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
Meanwhile, the people without an agenda quietly take care of business and help to drive down infection rates by acting responsibly and thinking clearly.

Everyone was forced to stay home with the last lockdown. Bars and restaurants can seat people for in-dining now. Anyone criticizing the re-opening of these businesses is going purely on ideology.
 

oilers'72

Registered User
Jul 3, 2006
5,635
4,456
Red Deer, Alta
Yup. Meanwhile, the people without an agenda quietly take care of business and help to drive down infection rates by acting responsibly and thinking clearly. The old KISS principle at work.

Actually, Alberta is further down the curve (77 average daily rate per million). Saskatchewan, Quebec, Ontario and BC are leading in rates. Manitoba, Atlantic Canada and the Territories all have fewer rates.
 

oilers'72

Registered User
Jul 3, 2006
5,635
4,456
Red Deer, Alta
Actually, Alberta is further down the curve (77 average daily rate per million). Saskatchewan, Quebec, Ontario and BC are leading in rates. Manitoba, Atlantic Canada and the Territories all have fewer rates.

As for case fatality-ratio, Alberta is tied with Saskatchewan (1.35). Nunavut, Northwest Territories, Newfoundland & Labrador and Prince Edward Island all have better rates.
 

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
27,205
21,405
Yup. Outside the Atlantic provinces Alberta is doing the best on covid so far.

It really has become ideological. This Liberty group pushing for fewer restrictions. The other side of the political spectrum arguing we are opening up too fast.
That's when you know you are doing it the right way. When half say it's too restrictive and the other half say not enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oilers'72

soothsayer

Registered User
Oct 27, 2009
8,511
10,693
Meanwhile at Earls Crossroads. :help::shakehead



Question: People in Alberta aren't allowed to gather in houses, but they're allowed to gather in restaurants. What if I invite people over and just give the government the 100 bucks I'd spend on a meal and drinks?
 

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
That's when you know you are doing it the right way. When half say it's too restrictive and the other half say not enough.

I spoke privately to an MLA. Lots of angry calls from constituents. Half are angry because the lockdown restrictions are too tight. The other half are angry because the restrictions aren't severe enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joestevens29

joestevens29

Registered User
Apr 30, 2009
52,498
15,065
Question: People in Alberta aren't allowed to gather in houses, but they're allowed to gather in restaurants. What if I invite people over and just give the government the 100 bucks I'd spend on a meal and drinks?
You are technically only suppose to be with your household or if single your 2 person cohorts.

However, you only need one person at a table to give information, so they really have no idea if you live together or not. If 3 guys meet up how does the establishment really know that you are all single?
 
  • Like
Reactions: soothsayer
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->