interesting.
this is the first thing i've seen posted where anybody says explicitly what the nucleotide content of the part hypothesised to be man made would be. not in the actual thread but n a screenshot in one of the replies.
still don't think i buy that its man made. its natural early on to consider all hypotheses, as they were in february- you can read spike by jeremy farrar, he certainly did not believe it was man made by the time he wrote that. by april when more analysis had been done they had abandoned that hypothesis due to lack of evidence. having updated your views in the light of new evidence isn't a cover up, its what scientists are supposed to do.
i really wish i remembered the rest of that book now. serves me right for being drunk while reading it, mostly i twas to do with them not being listened to by bojo et al rather than the science side.
my guess of why they abandoned it, apart from the evidence against it being man made that i've outlined repeatedly, is because there's approx 600 bp different between sars-cov2 and its closest known relative. so you need to account for the other 588, and that probably has something super dumb in it that no one would engineer on purpose. but you can't say that in a publication lol.
apnews.com
