Welcome to PILOT SPIN!
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
"Science" is now the State Religion.
Oppose it and you will be ostracized. Stake-burning later.
You know exactly zero about bio warfare. Zero, and not on iota more.
Methinks the personal attacks on Steingar are too, well, personal.
Talking about reviews by students is absurd. Most people leaving negative reviews are pathetic people in their own lives.
Look at Amazon reviews for instance:
#1 This is the best product I have ever used.
#2 This product sucks and is the worst thing I have ever used.
Reviews suck. And pointing them out here about a fellow poster sucks even more.
(I can say that about Lucifer after some of the things he said about me in PMs).
Quite possibly. My cleaning skills are pathetic. Then again, I doubt your average janitor can do many of the things I can do.
I'd be very interested in the "explode" comment. Context is everything.
I asked your credentials for evaluating viral sequences, something you appear to think you are able to do. I gave you mine.
Worked in a. virology lab for a couple months, taught a course on the subject. Your credentials?
I often award points when my students stump me. I usually try and find them an answer too. You won't find that on rate my professor, its mostly a bitch fest.
Did already. Yeah, you can parse out codons in this one stretch that Western scientists deduced this year. A year and a half ago no one knew about it. Moreover, even if you do, making an entire virus is a much bigger deal. Obviously you think yourself an expert in molecular bioscience. Hint, you aren't. I read that piece and found it utterly laughable.
@steingar The following is from Lucifer's link here: https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/06/experts-assert-rare-genome-sequencing-shows-coronavirus-bioengineered-optimized-for-human-infectivity/
Is this accurate?
In the case of the gain-of-function supercharge, other sequences could have been spliced into this same site. Instead of a CGG-CGG (known as “double CGG”) that tells the protein factory to make two arginine amino acids in a row, you’ll obtain equal lethality by splicing any one of 35 of the other two-word combinations for double arginine. If the insertion takes place naturally, say through recombination, then one of those 35 other sequences is far more likely to appear; CGG is rarely used in the class of coronaviruses that can recombine with CoV-2.
In fact, in the entire class of coronaviruses that includes CoV-2, the CGG-CGG combination has never been found naturally. That means the common method of viruses picking up new skills, called recombination, cannot operate here. A virus simply cannot pick up a sequence from another virus if that sequence isn’t present in any other virus.
Quay and Muller point to the “double CGG” sequence as the “damning fact” suggesting a laboratory origin. Natural-origin believers would have to explain it away:
Proponents of zoonotic origin must explain why the novel coronavirus, when it mutated or recombined, happened to pick its least favorite combination, the double CGG,” they wrote. “Why did it replicate the choice the lab’s gain-of-function researchers would have made?
“At the minimum, this fact — that the coronavirus, with all its random possibilities, took the rare and unnatural combination used by human researchers — implies that the leading theory for the origin of the coronavirus must be laboratory escape.”
You two are basically agreeing with each other. Only difference is one of you thinks it’s already been done and the other says we don’t know because China is secretive, it’s unlikely but if they did it’s very bad.
So you both agree it is (or would be) very bad. This might be the first time I’ve seen an aligned thought between you two although it’s a tiny dot amongst acres of disagreement.
Patent nonsense. The Scientists who were there published their findings in peer reviewed journals for all to see. Their funding mechanisms are similarly publicly available.
Perhaps you should explain what it is that you think "gain of function" research actually is. Should be entertaining.
Context on this might be nice.
If our intelligence agencies really knew that the Chinese could create a pandemicable virus from whole cloth I suspect you'd not know a thing about it. I imagine intelligence like that gets classified to the deepest levels.
I honestly don't think the Chinese are up for it.
More importantly, what functions do you gain? Maybe you can make it more infective in tissue culture cells, but that doesn't in and of itself translate to more infective in the field. And if you trying test a virus like that in the field it is very likely to get away from you.
Moreover, most of the "gain of function" blather is based on stuff we know a year and a half later.
That stuff wasn't known a year ago.
The problem with all this is I can't deny any of this. It all took place in China and that place might as well be a black box. All I can say is if they really engineered COVID they've already won. They can just keep on spinning off lethal viruses until the cows come home, and they win the whole game. They'll kill everyone and take over the world. You think this is bad, try a hemorrhagic virus. Or something that affects the immune system. If you really believe they engineered COVID you should be very, very afraid, because if they're that good they'll do it again. Remember, we can't do this.
