These people whine so much that these papers are not the consensus in the field. Except their actions tell another story. They know the consensus is natural origin.
These people whine so much that these papers are not the consensus in the field. Except their actions tell another story. They know the consensus is natural origin.
@DanielPrantner What consensus? Maybe you have polled the worldwide virology community? Please share the results with us? Or are you relying on one weak paper?
@PaulPsykes Multiple papers in the top tier journals defines the consensus view.
@DanielPrantner You mean the covid commission in Lancet that acknowledges the real possibility of a research related incident or the head of the WHO saying all hypothesis remain on the table?
@PaulPsykes Two theories can be on the table while the consensus is that one is more likely.
@DanielPrantner Does not look like we have reached any consensus at this stage. In addition many of those promoting zoonosis are hopelessly conflicted, reliant on NIH/Fauci funding who stand a lot to lose if the science of virology is to blame for the creation of this monster.
@PaulPsykes Who is 'we'? I suggested the relevant experts have.