Covid-19 Outbreak of new SARS-like coronavirus (Covid-19)

[Jabberwocky]

I will believe it to be natural the day they put the animal that they can 100% prove it jumped from a bat to that animal to then us.

this sentence shows your lack of comprehenson of how science works. it does not deal in proofs. formalised theories such as those found in theoretic physics deal with proofs and theorems, but you can never prove anything in science. there are models (theories) and data (evidence).

to provide the evidence you request we would need to have sequenced the viromes of all bats and other potential reservoirs in wuhan from before the moment sars-cov-2 arose. you're asking for time travel. if we start sequencing the viromes of local fauna now we could probably make a good guess but it will be like maybe 95% certainty at best because that is how this works.

Till that day i will of my free thought will believe it to be a man made engineered sars 1 virus to covid 19.

can you explain how it was engineered?

options that i know of are (and i already explained these in my previous post):
mutagenic processes: easy to detect, you said in a previous post that you understand chemistry so it should be clear to you why this is the case.
forced evolution through a host with a similar respiratory system and possible some immune fuckery: in the same way we think that this came from a bat due to signatures in the genome, this would leave signatures in the genome. bats respiritory systems arne't similar enough to ours for them to be a viable host for this type of engineering.

so, am i wrong, i.e. was it one of those, or is there another option? you seem convinced, so surely you can explain to me where i'm going wrong and have evidence to back up your assertion?

In not one instance were the criteria met for national lockdowns or any of the authoritarian measures put in place.

really? what should the criteria have been? nearly 5 million are dead worldwide and 150k in the UK. how many would need to die before you thought limiting your freedom to save them was justifiable?

So I ask, why the need to "vaccinate" against that? Why be distracted by the virus narrative when the REAL virus is the fundamental changes to our reality, society and functioning within those aspects? Unless you simply want to be asleep while it all happens, it is wise to be conscious and present to it unfolding so you are decisions and your life is directed in the best possible way for you.

so do you debate the existence of SARS-COV2?

And thats why I say violence because if I choose not to be sucked into your sickness and you force me to be sucked into that darkness, isnt that violence? Isnt that like forcing me to have sex with you or take a drug I dont want to take?

no, it is not remotely similar.

@birdup.snaildown FLF has been completely misrepresenting you. please don't be taken in. you don't come across as brainwashed or controlling, more like thoughtful, intelligent, and articulate.

edit: can you please stop comparing this to sexual and physical violence, and controlling abuse. survivors of these want to read this thread without their ptsd being triggered. i'm in fucking tears cos i'm low right now and the quoted sentence has really upset me. i'm not controlling you, this isn't violence, its a plea. i moderate where i go on this site, the tv i watch, what i read, etc, to avoid triggering my ptsd. i guess i can put you on ignore but i'm probably not the only people being hurt by these comparisons so its probably better if you stop. unless you are hurting people on purpose.

 

[finitelifeform]

this sentence shows your lack of comprehenson of how science works. it does not deal in proofs. formalised theories such as those found in theoretic physics deal with proofs and theorems, but you can never prove anything in science. there are models (theories) and data (evidence).

to provide the evidence you request we would need to have sequenced the viromes of all bats and other potential reservoirs in wuhan from before the moment sars-cov-2 arose. you're asking for time travel. if we start sequencing the viromes of local fauna now we could probably make a good guess but it will be like maybe 95% certainty at best because that is how this works.


can you explain how it was engineered?

options that i know of are (and i already explained these in my previous post):
mutagenic processes: easy to detect, you said in a previous post that you understand chemistry so it should be clear to you why this is the case.
forced evolution through a host with a similar respiratory system and possible some immune fuckery: in the same way we think that this came from a bat due to signatures in the genome, this would leave signatures in the genome. bats respiritory systems arne't similar enough to ours for them to be a viable host for this type of engineering.

so, am i wrong, i.e. was it one of those, or is there another option? you seem convinced, so surely you can explain to me where i'm going wrong and have evidence to back up your assertion?



really? what should the criteria have been? nearly 5 million are dead worldwide and 150k in the UK. how many would need to die before you thought limiting your freedom to save them was justifiable?

so do you debate the existence of SARS-COV2?

no, it is not remotely similar.

@birdup.snaildown FLF has been completely misrepresenting you. please don't be taken in. you don't come across as brainwashed or controlling, more like thoughtful, intelligent, and articulate.

edit: can you please stop comparing this to sexual and physical violence, and controlling abuse. survivors of these want to read this thread without their ptsd being triggered. i'm in fucking tears cos i'm low right now and the quoted sentence has really upset me. i'm not controlling you, this isn't violence, its a plea. i moderate where i go on this site, the tv i watch, what i read, etc, to avoid triggering my ptsd. i guess i can put you on ignore but i'm probably not the only people being hurt by these comparisons so its probably better if you stop. unless you are hurting people on purpose.

Freedoms are never taken away, unless you are a criminal or unless there is a threat to the entire population that we could not recover from quickly enough to keep our infrastructure going ie a nuclear attack, war etc. What has happened as a RESULT of the measures taken have caused the damage, not the alleged pandemic.

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

My belief is that the virus wasn't altered, which is why they're not finding signs that it was altered, but that it just came from the lab.....but this is just me guessing based on what we know - not that i know....im just saying lol

i also have the belief that what we've all done so far, with each country maybe doing something a little different as far as lockdowns and such, is all part of the learning process on the fly....im not too sure what else could've been done other than what we've all done as a planet so far

if some countries are forcing vaccination, i think that's terrible


something else that's happening so far, numbers-wise, is that you're 6 times more likely to die as a hospitalized patient from the Delta variant being fully vaccinated than you are by not being vaccinated at all.....so here's another reason for me to continue to stand on the sidelines and watch what develops...and if you're wondering where im getting that from, here it is:



"More importantly, a June 11 PHE report shows that as a hospital patient, you are six times more likely to die of the COVID Delta variant if you are fully vaccinated, than if you are not vaccinated at all.

The information shows up in Table 6 of the 77-page document, which are labeled as the attendance to emergency care and deaths by vaccination status and confirmed Delta cases from February 1 to June 7.

Of 33,206 Delta variant cases admitted to the hospital, 19,573 were not vaccinated. Of those, 23 (or 0.1175 % died. But, of the 13,633 patients who were vaccinated with either one or two doses, 19 (or 0.1393 % died, which is an 18.6% higher death rate than for the unvaccinated patients. Seven of the 5,393 patients who were partially vaccinated with one dose died, or 0.1297%.

Of the 1,785 patients who had both vaccine doses 14 days or more before admission, 12 (or 0.6722 % died. This death rate is 5.72 times higher than that for unvaccinated patients. Put another way, if all 33,206 patients had been fully vaccinated, there would have been 223 deaths."

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

CDC panel finds ‘likely’ link between mild heart inflammation in adolescents and COVID-19 vaccine

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) safety panel said there is a “likely association” of mild heart inflammation in adolescents and young adults after they were vaccinate…

thehill.com

so now you have the CDC recognizing the link in heart inflammation, so this should be interesting with what develops with Universities mandating these shots and whether they can enforce that....i would think they're gonna lose in court but we'll see

 

[Jabberwocky]

@finitelifeform can you maybe precis your answers to my questions in one or two sentences? i read the entire post and couldn't see anything relevant to the post of mine you quoted.

@Mr. Krinkle 23 vs 19 is too low for any statistical power, you can't get a decent p value or effect size out of it. a difference of 0.0218 percentage points will not be statistically significant. your quote doesn't differentiate between the type of vaccine received. the last sentence is untrue unless the author has taken into account all potential confounding factors. there may be a higher death rate in vaccinated patients (i have no idea, and would want to differentiate by vaccine), but those numbers are a typical example of how to lie with statistics, rather than evidence of that.

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

@Mr. Krinkle 23 vs 19 is too low for any statistical power, you can't get a decent p value or effect size out of it. a difference of 0.0218 percentage points will not be statistically significant. your quote doesn't differentiate between the type of vaccine received. the last sentence is untrue unless the author has taken into account all potential confounding factors. there may be a higher death rate in vaccinated patients (i have no idea, and would want to differentiate by vaccine), but those numbers are a typical example of how to lie with statistics, rather than evidence of that.

i agree - it's too small of a number for sure, but something interesting to follow as it continues to develop

 

[tubgirl.jpg]

Violence in this way is your will to try and control me

And thats why I say violence

isnt that violence?

That is violence against other

where violence,

IS a form of violence

types of violence;

what violence entails.

form of violence.

that violence means

Your use of the word "violence" is very violent.

 

[Jabberwocky]

i agree - it's too small of a number for sure, but something interesting to follow as it continues to develop

agreed, if the trends suggested play out it'll be a fucking disaster, but i'm not too worried yet.

i know this is important to you so i'll say now you absolutely have my permission (!) to post further data on this cos i'm very interested but too busy moving house and being a fuckup to keep tabs on it myself.

Sure, could you post your questions again? I feel I have already answered sufficiently. If we are seeking to just reinforce your perspective over mine and by asking questions you intend for it to be pointless that I do then will just go round in circles.

i have not stated my perspective on the questions i asked so its not possible for me to be seeking for you to justify mine. you stated something contraversial (quoted in my post above, the post that you quoted)- that the criteria at which a national lockdown would be necessitated were never met- and i asked you what your criteria were.

so, under what criteria is a national lockdown justified in your opinion? this answer requires 1 or 2 sentences max, unless you have expertise in epidemiology in which case you could probably write an essay, but you haven't indicated as such in your posts.

further, i asked, given nearly 130k died in the UK, and we're approaching 5 million deaths worldwide, how many deaths do you think are necessary before lockdowns are justified? because my inference is that your claim that the conditions for lockdowns were never met implies that you think we shouldn't have had any lockdowns, but we know empirically lockdowns prevent deaths, so your number must be >5 million worldwide for your position to be internally consistent.

the answer to the above it a number. no words needed.

i also asked whether you deny the existence of sars-cov2. this is a yes or no question. in the case of no, i would ask you to explain the existence of all the sars-cov2 genomes on NCBI and GISAID, and the browsers such as that hosted by UCSD and nextstrain. its a lot of data to just fabricate.

the three questions, to make clear, are:

1) under what conditions is a lockdown justifiable?
2) how many deaths are necessary to justify a lockdown?
3) do you thinks SARS-COV2 exists?

 

[ageingpartyfiend]

Holy Shit

as you were

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

Im just gonna touch on this once:

we don't agree, it's ok - sometimes we get hostile towards one another during it all - it happens - it's ok - i don't hold a grudge, i don't think it's violent, i don't think any less of anyone except for FUBAR, but i'll eventually get over that too....i keep calling bird "she" and "her" just to be an asshole, and he doesn't pay attention to me when i do it either - she's used to it by now - we've been going back and forth for pages and pages and pages - it's a fun thread if you ask me, so either enjoy it or move on and maybe start a new thread to talk about the large amount of "violent messages" at BL so you can have that debate there instead of here

jesus christ already lol

 

[Jabberwocky]

And what do you get out of my answers? What are you seeking from this?

i get further clarification of your position so i can form an appropriate response.

I see mention quite a lot about academic/intellectual stuff.

because it is literally my job to save people's lives by detecting airborne microbes, i have 6 years of relevant professional experience, and i've focused specifically on sars-cov2 since january. a lot of what i've learned at work is relevant to this thread so i mention it, and i try to do so in lay terms.

Am I less of a person if I am not?

nope. i am quite literally asking you to clarify what you yourself has said as clearly as i know how.

 

[ageingpartyfiend]

We can become obsessed with our own self importance sometimes

Demonstrable truth

 

[Jabberwocky]

Its a thread about everyone as far as I can see.

this is where you're wrong. this is a thread about covid. i have asked you some specific questions about that topic that you are refusing to answer.

there are loads of threads on bluelight where you can talk random shit but this thread is about covid only.

please answer my questions because your evasion serves you poorly and i wouldn't like you to make a bad impression of yourself by appearing to have misunderstood the purpose of a thread entitled 'outbreak of new sars-like coronavirus' and mistaken it for an obviously social thread such as 'random msn gibberings' in eadd.

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

Right - im easily the most important to this thread, followed by chinup because she shuts me down on everything i post : )

alright back to the program....

13-Year-Old Michigan Boy Dies 3 Days After Second Dose of Pfizer Vaccine, Aunt Says ‘Moral, Ethical, Health’ Questions Need Answers

Initial autopsy results showed the previously healthy boy suffered from myocarditis, an inflammatory heart condition CDC officials have acknowledged is "likely" linked to mRNA COVID vaccines.

childrenshealthdefense.org

not good....

 

[Jabberwocky]

Right - im easily the most important to this thread, followed by chinup because she shuts me down on everything i post : )

obvs. duh! sorry i'm drunk.

anyway unfortunately i have to shut you down again. i checked out the credentials of Nass and Wallace, mentioned in the article you posted, and while they are both doctors, they do not have expertise in immunology/vaccinology/epidemiology (notably neither do i and i'm guessing neither do you). the article seems to place a lot of weight on vaers but when i had a hangover the day after getting my 1st shot i coulda put that on vaers and it would have been quoted in any vaers-related adverse reaction stats. its not valid.

it does seem that there is a trend occuring for teenage/early adult males getting heart problems and if i or a close relative were in that demographic i'd probably tell them to hang fire on any covid vaccine at this point. but when i am not drunk i might look into the risk/benefit analysis Wallace carried out and see whether the article's claims of underestimating the risks of the jab and overrating the risks of covid are supported by data.

ffs @finitelifeform again an essay length post without answering my questions. wtf? i'm experiencing this pandemic. many close friends have had covid. friends of my parents have died. my parents are extremely clinically vulnerable. i don't demand you fall in line i'm politely requesting you to answer three questions. you have not once, in your insanely long posts in reponse to me, even addressed a single thing said by myself in the posts of mine you quote. you haven't once challenged me, you've just gone off on irrelevant tangents.

and do not fucking accuse me of abusive behaviour because i am asking you to clarify your own postion. ffs. i'm not asking you to comply with anything, i'm asking you questions about your own opinion. this is a forum, in a thread on a given issue, we discuss that issue.

myself and @Mr. Krinkle disagree a lot, but we have a dialogue, because one of us posts something, and the other responds with something relevant to that post. neither of us is being abusive because we are disagreeing and sometimes we find mutual ground, which is the point of these debates. you can't have fruitful debate without disagreement. but i can't have a debate with you because you won't even answer very basic, clearly posed, questions based on your own comments regarding the issue at hand.

 

[Deleted member 521610]

i think you covered that one perfectly. the mind just boggles really. it reminds me of some sociologist friends talking about 'rape in the online space,' i had to leave the room and do my ptsd in peace for that one.

i'm now wondering if FLF thinks the government is abusive because they tell you to eat fruit and veg, drink water, wear a seatbelt, and will put you in prison for drinking and driving.


i don't think anyone with half a brain on this forum is saying anything definitive about where this virus came form because it is not known. the closest bat coronavirus to date was found in 2013 and if you assume that it evolved naturally from that at the same rate sars-cov2 is evolving today, then there simply wasn't time. forced evolution via mutagenic processes would leave distinct artifacts in the genome, forced evolution though animals with similar respiritory systems (civets or ferrets) would have distinct host signatures, because microbial genomes evolve towards their host genomes to evade the host immune system. so though i am not completely sure that the lab leak theory is untrue, i don't see how it can have happened and leave no signatures in the genome (which i've been analysing for my job since january, if you have a signature, show it to me and i'll resign). given that many close collaborators with scientists in the WIV have come out and stated that they do not think a lab leak is likely, i defer to their expertise.

if you recall, i was firmly anti-lab leak, but after extensive discussion with someone better at articulating their arguments than you, i have changed my opinion to 'more data needed but still unlikely.' consider this if your aim is to genuinely convince people of your beliefs.

we are now finding similar coronaviruses just by researchers checking samples in their freezers in japan, south east asia, all over the place. so it seems to me that a group of extensively similar viruses has been floating around over basically the whole of asia for nearly a decade. given that, eventual zoonosis seems inevitable. i don't know what work has been done to sequence the viromes of bats in wuhan, but that is what you'd need to do to find the actual reservoir that it jumped from, were covid of natural origin. just because the closest relative found so far was 1000 miles away, it doesn't mean that that IS the closest relative.

You can try discredit everything i have said but so far everything i have said has been proven even by proper investigators into the origins of covid-19 which is that it originated in the wuhan lab and is no longer a matter of debate only for those who are still getting paid as a white monkey by the Chinese to dance and proclaim otherwise.

I have provided ampule proof before anywhere was even locked down that this came from the wuhan lab and the shills tried to discredit me but i had the information straight from the Chinese news before it was known widely i was already looking into this mysterious new illness that seemed to be popping in late 2019 with wuhan arrivals at many work places here. I was like hmm strange everybody is gettin a wack new flu suddenly i traced it back and saw a massive millitary cover up going on in wuhan in jan of 2020. Thats when i knew it was a bioweapon leaked out of the lab. I knew i would be right that no proof will ever be given to us of the so called animal it hopped to humans because it didnt exist. Covid-19 is a human made virus by the batwoman researcher who should be tracked down and taken to criminal court for mass murder and negligence.

I have discredited the main stream narrativite because its a lie. I question all scientists now because i know 99% of them are liars and wanting free money from whoever will pay them to speak.

Its a corrupt world and lucky i have the power of the critical thinking to assess these claims and do not watch television

 

[Jabberwocky]

so far everything i have said has been proven even by proper investigators into the origins of covid-19 which is that it originated in the wuhan lab and is no longer a matter of debate only for those who are still getting paid as a white monkey by the Chinese to dance and proclaim otherwise.

source? cos i've been looking into stories from collaborators at WIV and they disagree with what you say. so please, post one credible link.

a new coronavirus was already being reported in wuhan in january, i think the chinese military are capable of a better coverup than literally having what they are covering up reported widely in western media, so your claim regarding that is patently untrue.

i am not getting paid by the chinese. tbh i'd love some free money so if you know where i can apply please share the details.

i really don't get how you think 99% of scientists are liars when they brought you the computer you're using to post this, the internet you're using to communicate, and every mod-con you have in your house. we get paid by publications in academia, which go through a rigorous peer review process, and are subjected to market forces in industry, i.e. our products work or we lose our jobs. are you claiming china is paying 99% of scientists, peer reviewers, and consumers, to maintain the veneer that science works? and if nt how can you explain the obvious triumphs of science?

 

[Deleted member 521610]

you didn't believe in them in last year so its not even worth taking my time to repeat the sources of information i gave out all last year. Because you still wont believe it. We are never going to agree on the origins of covid 19. But the truth will be the truth no matter the opinions of the people on the internet. Sciencetists are well known to come up with fancy sounding buzz word research for funding now that china just offers free money to researchers to become pro communist it is evident that science is now fake and people should carefully assess each claim made by science to see if it stacks up to logical proofs. Theortical physics will be just that a theory till proven by direct objective proof of said claims.

The computer im sitting on was made by engineers a whole different breed of folk compared to them lying scientists. you can only trust yourself in this world.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Sciencetists are well known to come up with fancy sounding buzz word research for funding now that china just offers free money to researchers to become pro communist

how do i get this free money i was some!!!

though i'm not becoming a communist, bolsheviks murdered my great grandfathers (almost) entire family then the soviets had a good go at the next generation. but still i want free money since i work my ass off on covid for v little money. you seem to know this is happening so surely you can tell me where to sign up?

i trust myself within the limits of my expertise. when it comes to doctors, i trust them with my medical problems. when it comes to rocket scientists at nasa/spacex, i think it better they control takeoffs than me. we are a community and should respect the expertise of each member of that community.

i have posted my sources and arguments many times. so if you can't be arsed to do that, and you haven't even responded to my objections to your position after i repeated them taking care to state them clearly and concisely, can you at least link us the post where you provided sources and presumably addressed my objections?

as an aside, jargon is needed in science. otherwise it becomes impossible to talk about. to use an example from a different field, which is therefore hopefully less divisive in this thread. if instead of hilbert space i had to say 'banach space with the l2 norm' every time, oh fuck even banach space and l2 norm wouldn't be allowed, so i guess instead of hilbert space i would say ''complete normed vector space with the euclidean (insert symbols here as it doesn't admit an easy wordy definiton) norm" but oh fuck do we have the words for "norm" or "vector" yet. i could go on. my point is that technical subjects require technical jargon and if you are going to profess knowledge of a technical subject you will be expected to understand the technical jargon. its not buzz words, its speaking precisely. or in this context as precisely as life sciences admit, but thats another debate entirely.

 

[Deleted member 521610]

buzz word is not jargon. buzz word is the latest in the bullshit of consumerism research. Like when nanoparticle research was all the rage and cold fusion and whats next to replace it when the public get bored from hearing all this make belief bullshit sold them to steal their hard earned tax payers money.