The jab .... Have you had it and have you had any after effects ?

Start doing it then. My point is you keep using misapplied phrases in your arguments, either trying to claim people said something they didn't, or to try and support a point with misinformation.
No I don't at all, you're the same as me in that you can't prove where the virus came from. Now, unless you're two years old, you'll be able to understand exactly what I've just posted.
 
There's no concise evidence either way, it's as simple as that. I won't post anything else, clearly you are fragile and delicate.
Apart from the peer reviewed studies of the genomics of the virus that show that it is zoonotic in nature.

Yeah, apart from that…

FFS - and you are calling me fragile and delicate? You are coming across as thicker than a whale omelette - were you only ever trusted with the crow cannon for the majority of your career or was it digging holes under close supervision?
 
Apart from the peer reviewed studies of the genomics of the virus that show that it is zoonotic in nature.

Yeah, apart from that…

FFS - and you are calling me fragile and delicate? You are coming across as thicker than a whale omelette - were you only ever trusted with the crow cannon for the majority of your career or was it digging holes under close supervision?
Actually it was none of that. I am happy for you to call me dense, seeing as it's you that cannot accept that the virus origin is as of yet undiscovered. That is the facts.
 
Had my 2nd jab a week or so ago

Flu like symptoms nil

But shitting through the eye of a needle for a week - no idea if i picked up a stomach bug / dodgy Burger / muff dived a rancid hoower that coincided with the jab or if it was a side effect.

regardless its nice to be able to fart with confidence and not have to plan the days itinery so im always within sprinting distance of a crapper
 
No I don't at all, you're the same as me in that you can't prove where the virus came from. Now, unless you're two years old, you'll be able to understand exactly what I've just posted.
I never said I could. You however seem to believe conspiracy theories rather than scientific consensus.
 
Actually it was none of that. I am happy for you to call me dense, seeing as it's you that cannot accept that the virus origin is as of yet undiscovered. That is the facts.
Once again you show no understanding of how things work. It will never be "proven" the virus is natural as it is impossible to do so. Until you understand that, you will continue to make false arguments.
 
I never said I could. You however seem to believe conspiracy theories rather than scientific consensus.
I believe in the virus, had both jabs, but I don't believe in unproven facts. Just to be clear, I am saying that the origins of the virus are unknown, that is a fact, so how does that make me a conspiraloon? Gen question.
 
I believe in the virus, had both jabs, but I don't believe in unproven facts. Just to be clear, I am saying that the origins of the virus are unknown, that is a fact, so how does that make me a conspiraloon? Gen question.
There seems to two major theories. One that it is was generated through cross-species mutation at a live animal market in Wuhan or else it was an escaped virus from a nearby laboratory.

Initially, the live animal market theory was the one held by WHO and other official bodies. As time has gone on the laboratory escape possibility has gained traction. The consensus is that there is insufficient evidence available to be able to firm up or discount either theory, not least because of the Chinese authorities lack of cooperation with outside agencies.
 
Last edited:
I believe in the virus, had both jabs, but I don't believe in unproven facts. Just to be clear, I am saying that the origins of the virus are unknown, that is a fact, so how does that make me a conspiraloon? Gen question.

If you were simply arguing "we don't know", that would be fair. However much of your argument has been to push the lab theory:

Precisely, an act that gives more credence to the lab theories IMHO.

It's a split camp, I reckon there's as many claim It's from the lab as those who don't.

If it's zoonotic I am sure the boffins will be able to establish eventually where the jump occurred. Nothing so far.

No I am on about the Chinese lab, the Chinese were blaming other countries as soon as there was suspicion about the Wuhan lab. Prove it isn't from there.

Exactly, you can't can you.

I could probably find more, but the point is you appear to be pushing this viewpoint; one that is considered by most scientists to be unlikely.

Does that rule out the lab theory? No. But those who seem to insist on discussing it overlap with other conspiracies, so maybe you are not a duck, but many of those who are walking alongside you are waddling and quacking.
 
Actually it was none of that. I am happy for you to call me dense, seeing as it's you that cannot accept that the virus origin is as of yet undiscovered. That is the facts.

Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.


Despite much noise to the contrary, there is no credible evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was ever known to virologists before it emerged in December 2019, and all indications suggest that, like SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, this virus probably evolved in a bat host until an unknown spillover event into humans occurred



Still, there is one theory that can be dismissed. From the earliest days of the pandemic, there has been speculation that the new virus had escaped, or even been deliberately released, from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.


The aim of this perspective is to show that the current pandemic is unlikely to have resulted from either bioweapons or a laboratory leak


The review paper says: “There is no evidence that any early cases had any connection to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), in contrast to the clear epidemiological links to animal markets in Wuhan, nor evidence that the WIV possessed or worked on a progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 prior to the pandemic.”

Rather, it argues that “there is substantial body of scientific evidence supporting a zoonotic origin for SARS-CoV-2.”



Yep, there is definitely two sides to this story. On one there is science. On the other you have QAnon and the Cheeto in Chief.
 
There seems to two major theories. One that it is was generated through cross-species mutation at a live animal market in Wuhan or else it was an escaped virus from a nearby laboratory.

Initially, the live animal market theory was the most one held by WHO and other official bodies. As time has gone on the laboratory escape possibility has gained traction. The consensus is that there is insufficient evidence available to be able to firm up or discount either theory, not least because of the Chinese authorities lack of cooperation with outside agencies.
Cheers, so I am correct by declaring the origins of the virus as unknown ?
 
Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.


Despite much noise to the contrary, there is no credible evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was ever known to virologists before it emerged in December 2019, and all indications suggest that, like SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, this virus probably evolved in a bat host until an unknown spillover event into humans occurred



Still, there is one theory that can be dismissed. From the earliest days of the pandemic, there has been speculation that the new virus had escaped, or even been deliberately released, from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.


The aim of this perspective is to show that the current pandemic is unlikely to have resulted from either bioweapons or a laboratory leak


The review paper says: “There is no evidence that any early cases had any connection to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), in contrast to the clear epidemiological links to animal markets in Wuhan, nor evidence that the WIV possessed or worked on a progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 prior to the pandemic.”

Rather, it argues that “there is substantial body of scientific evidence supporting a zoonotic origin for SARS-CoV-2.”



Yep, there is definitely two sides to this story. On one there is science. On the other you have QAnon and the Cheeto in Chief.
Except nothings official, just like I've been saying all along.
 
Cheers, so I am correct by declaring the origins of the virus as unknown ?
Yes. You can find stuff that supports either of the main theories, as well as stuff that says that without more evidence, they don't know. I'd take all that as a 'we don't know for sure'. A 'we don't know for sure' does not sound to me like a conspiracy theory. Something quite different, in fact.
 
I've just received a SMS invitation to attend my clinic for a flu jab. By the time I get this and the Covid booster I'll have had more pricks in the last few months than Katie Price.
 

Latest Threads

Top