Why was it immediately deemed a "conspiracy" to say covid came from a lab?

[Cooke 2,041]

Even more evidence 

[jehurey 3,299]

4 hours ago, Cooke said:

Even more evidence 

what's the evidence.

 

use your keyboard..............and actually type it.

 

these videos are not evidence.........they're youtube videos.

 

you're already been told that before.

[Cooke 2,041]

53 minutes ago, jehurey said:

what's the evidence.

 

use your keyboard..............and actually type it.

 

these videos are not evidence.........they're youtube videos.

 

you're already been told that before.

Yes because a youtube video is just moving pictures with no words. Like a silent film. 

[jehurey 3,299]

6 minutes ago, Cooke said:

Yes because a youtube video is just moving pictures with no words. Like a silent film. 

so you don't have any evidence.

 

or you're too embarassed to actually be caught typing it.

 

thanks, that's what I thought.

[Cooke 2,041]

7 minutes ago, jehurey said:

so you don't have any evidence.

 

or you're too embarassed to actually be caught typing it.

 

thanks, that's what I thought.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/03/the-virus-hunting-nonprofit-at-the-center-of-the-lab-leak-controversy

 

Here is the very thorough article in question. 

[jehurey 3,299]

1 hour ago, Cooke said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/03/the-virus-hunting-nonprofit-at-the-center-of-the-lab-leak-controversy

 

Here is the very thorough article in question. 

 

 

Quote

The paper Bloom had written—known as a preprint, because it had yet to be peer-reviewed or published

 

the article appears to be about a "preprint" being edited or deleted because they used--what Fauci called--a "loaded word" when describing that researchers at Wuhan requesting to have a genetic sequence deleted from a database.

 

Quote

If the Chinese scientists wanted to delete their sequences from the database, which NIH policy entitled them to do, it was unethical for Bloom to analyze them further, he claimed. And there was nothing unusual about the early genomic sequences in Wuhan.

The person who made this report used the word "surreptitiously" as if the researchers in Wuhan were doing something they weren't supposed to, when that is not the case.

 

Oh, by the way, lets repeat that last sentence, again:'

 

Quote

 And there was nothing unusual about the early genomic sequences in Wuhan.

So.............this has nothing that promotes the idea of a "lab leak."

 

This is an article about them fighting about an early draft of a report, and people thinking that they were being pressured to eliminate that report.

 

So.................you have nothing?

[Cooke 2,041]

Jehurey is a Chinese bot. It all makes sense now. He will do anything to protect Chinese interests. 

[Cooke 2,041]

How much do CCCP memberships cost these days?

[jehurey 3,299]

3 hours ago, Cooke said:

Jehurey is a Chinese bot. It all makes sense now. He will do anything to protect Chinese interests. 

So, you don't dispute a single thing that I just typed out.

 

.............because what I typed out came from the very article you posted.

 

Correct?

 

 

[Substatic 422]

So was this ever confirmed or is all you've got youtubes?

[Mr. Impossible 427]

1 hour ago, Substatic said:

So was this ever confirmed or is all you've got youtubes?

 

I don't follow any of this shit but if you have to ask why people doubt conspiracy theories it's because it's usually stupid people repeating them. Hurts all credibility. 

[Twinblade★ 3,984]

On 2022-04-06 at 9:00 PM, Cooke said:

Jehurey is a Chinese bot. It all makes sense now. He will do anything to protect Chinese interests. 

 

You're only realizing this now? He has fervently defending China all throughout the pandemic.

[Goukosan 2,283]

36 minutes ago, Twinblade said:

 

You're only realizing this now? He has fervently defending China all throughout the pandemic.

 

So that makes Trump a Russian bot, because he has been defending and praising Putin for over 5 years now 

[Cooke 2,041]

4 hours ago, Substatic said:

So was this ever confirmed or is all you've got youtubes?

Confirmed by WAPO and NYT and pretty much everyone except for Jehurey 

[Substatic 422]

17 hours ago, Cooke said:

Confirmed by WAPO and NYT and pretty much everyone except for Jehurey 

 

Do you have the link where it was confirmed Covid came from a lab?

 

 

[Cooke 2,041]

21 minutes ago, Substatic said:

 

Do you have the link where it was confirmed Covid came from a lab?

 

 

Nope. We don't know where it came from yet. The point was it was unacceptable and censored if you say it came from a lab even though there was absolutely  no evidence it came from a natural occurence.  Most evidence points to it being altered in a lab because of the furin cleavage sites. The odds of that mutation happening naturaly is 1 in a trillion occurrence. 

 

Also it containing a patented DNA sequence of Moderna from 2016 is also extremely suspect. 

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fviro.2022.834808/full

[jehurey 3,299]

1 hour ago, Cooke said:

Nope. We don't know where it came from yet. The point was it was unacceptable and censored if you say it came from a lab even though there was absolutely  no evidence it came from a natural occurence.  Most evidence points to it being altered in a lab because of the furin cleavage sites.

No, there is no such "evidence" of it being "altered"

 

You don't have any, do you?

 

And yes..............it is acceptable for people to criticze a preliminary report that has unfounded accusatory language.

 

This preliminary report makes it seem like as if the Wuhan lab was doing something "surreptitiously" and used that word, and they got called out on it because there is no need to be "surreptitious" about something that they have the right to do.

 

This is the best you got??????????

 

Them arguing over the use of a word in a PRELIMINARY report?

[Cooke 2,041]

1 hour ago, jehurey said:

No, there is no such "evidence" of it being "altered"

 

You don't have any, do you?

 

And yes..............it is acceptable for people to criticze a preliminary report that has unfounded accusatory language.

 

This preliminary report makes it seem like as if the Wuhan lab was doing something "surreptitiously" and used that word, and they got called out on it because there is no need to be "surreptitious" about something that they have the right to do.

 

This is the best you got??????????

 

Them arguing over the use of a word in a PRELIMINARY report?

Because you said so that makes it not true? Lol at least back it up with EVIDENCE 

Edited April 11, 2022 by Cooke

[jehurey 3,299]

Just now, Cooke said:

Because your said so that makes it not true? Lol at least back it up with EVIDENCE 

i did. i posted the article and highlighted the section where they argued exactly for those reasons, and they stated that the wuhan lab has the right to request a gene sequence to be removed from the database.

 

I already posted that

 

you already saw that i posted that

 

why are you pretending to play stupid...........i already SHOWED YOU the evidence.

[Cooke 2,041]

1 hour ago, jehurey said:

i did. i posted the article and highlighted the section where they argued exactly for those reasons, and they stated that the wuhan lab has the right to request a gene sequence to be removed from the database.

 

I already posted that

 

you already saw that i posted that

 

why are you pretending to play stupid...........i already SHOWED YOU the evidence.

Still waiting for the evidence it came from nature jehurey. Come on, show us the Chinese are filthy disgusting people with their gross wet markets with live exotic animals for consumption where this virus obviously came from. Show us.