Neville Chamberlain et al. wearily disallayed suspicion about Hitler, even after enjoying the best seller ‘Mein Kampf’, and thought nothing about purge happy Stalin, when he declared to his daughter Svetlana, that, “It is very painful to kill one person, but a sinch to kill millions”
The measure of sanity is for some, not a judgment that can be quantified, since merely personal behest qualifies.
Tbh. Meno, I’m always happy to believe the scarier truth, than the comforting lie.
Conspiracy theories are always comforting because they usually take a scary truth - In this case a killer disease can come out of nowhere, go right round the world and may well end up killing X million number of people and turning our nice, safe, predictable lives upside down all in the space of weeks with no warning - which is terrifying because it is pretty much completely out of our control, it’s the world trying to kill us, and replace it with the more comforting conspiracy theory, which just adds human agency - which is something under our control (or at least ‘someone’s’ control), someone to blame, someone to exact vengeance against, someone who at least took us seriously. Y’know, James Bond stuff.
We dumb primates love a good story.
“Random shit happened, and killed Grandma. The end. But actually little Joey, it could happen again anytime, and this time maybe you or I will die too, and there would be nothing you or I could do to stop it, no-one to fight, no-one to blame, except ourselves a little, for thinking it could never ever happen.” Is a terrible story.
“Once upon a time there was an evil empire waging economic and bio war against the free kingdoms of the west, bent upon our destruction. [Interlude with magic, elves and hobbits]. Finally the empire was nuked into non-existence by the brave warriors of the fellowship of the democracies. So it will never happen again. And Grandma died heroically. The end.” Is much better. Little Joey whispers “Ooh those guys were so evil Mum.” and goes off to sleep soundly.
Let’s all grow up and realise that the universe really doesn’t give a shit, and will kill us by accident if we don’t start taking precautions as a species.
Bioweapon.
The virus didn’t originate with China, that is a cover story they’re trying very hard to pin on China as they plan for the next big war. [Against China]
Who are “they”…? Why is it to their advantage to pursue hostilities…? What are your sources…?
Those who want to initiate a global government and one world currency, call them whatever you like.
I don’t care if people believe me or not, at this point such is irrelevant to me.
Do not fall for the organized psyop that in the end seeks war against both China and Russia.
there are conspiracy theories circulating everywhere and all of them are equally credible in the face of indequate information. so there’s that. and we could speculate all day with the alex joneses of the world and not get one step closer to knowing what’s going on. but one thing is absolutely certain amid all this speculation; the world is watching capitalism’s failure to perform in a crisis that unequivocally exposes how ugly and incompetent it truly is. this crisis is a blessing in that respect. hate to put it that way, but sometimes niggas gotta learn the hard way.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnS0NjLA8Zo[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4NZvb1R-VM[/youtube]
hahahahah look at this asswipe. go to 1:18 and listen to his reasoning in defense of price gouging. notice that his excuse for jacking up prices is to prevent the wealthy from buying up all the stock… so those who he just got done saying ‘can’t afford it’, can have access to it. wait what.
notice also that the problem he claims is prevented is caused by other capitalists and/or wealthy people. wait what.
i couldn’t watch the rest. didn’t need to. in less than three minutes i knew. i just knew.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s1jFPN5vmo[/youtube]
I don’t like capitalism however, I don’t like communism either. I want an alternative for both since for me neither are much of an option at all, just two faces of the same coin.
Alex Jones is controlled opposition by the C.I.A. for the dumb idiot masses. He’s funny however concerning satirical material making fun of him though.
Those whacky illuminati guys again huh…? Whoo boy. I heard they live in the hollow inside of the earth and pipe up diseases to wherever they like.
You guys ever read Cory Doctorow…? Dunno how feasible his concept of collective high-tech gift societies is, but might serve as a halfway house to something better.
I dunno how incompetent it may be, its biggest oversight atm. has simply been to cut everything so back to the bone in the name of efficiency, that there are zero stockpiles for out-of-context emergencies like uh, a pandemic out of nowhere.
You realise though, if the powers that be had upheld a policy of stockpiling, and maintained redundant capabilities massive enough to absorb the effects of a possible future global pandemic… that the same people condemning it now for capitalism’s shortfalls would have been condemning it back then for wasting precious resources on useless, gloom-mongering pessimism.
Humans. Gotta love 'em. We are complicit people, every time we chose to buy a product that was cheaper than the others without ever sparing a thought as to WHY it was cheaper.
Nah, they live in underground private bunkers in Switzerland, Chile, Paraguay, Argentina, and New Zealand.
That’s just what they want you to believe.
Actually they’ve encoded themselves into your junk DNA. As soon as you’ve recovered from covid 19 and developed resistance, your body will spin a strange coccoon and then promptly turn into soup. From the goo will emerge the fresh, wrinkled form of a member of the Shadowy Council of the Golden Dawn. Covid 19 is not actually a disease at all but a catalyst for the final revolution.
All praise the Hierophant…!!!
The premise of the forum rests on major , delineated assumptions of possible reasons for the virus.
One necessary element being the exploration for ‘intelligence’ as a correlative structural hierarchy which may preexist, as a formative agent between the derivative connection between the stable and the less defined forms of bio-chemical substantive inherence in newer, functionally devised forms of ‘intelligence’.
Behavioral defenitions, as that has developed conjecturally and philosophically, as the Ayer et. al. Viennese-Oxford group suggested, has become vogue, within epistemological cohesion with modern biochemical standard basis of virology.
The definition of ’ intelligence’ has therefore, became up ended in this hall of mirrored similarities of meaning.
The idea that micro-intelligence, overcomes quantitative limits if human intelligence, appears as a reversal -from major categorical qualifiers of intelligent meaning structures; may not actually be a negation of them: but a quantum separation by degrees less then 180 degrees. In other words, the standard definition may not completely negate a microbe-deliniations of a total erasure of process between them.
Just commenting on some of the faulty assumptions within the basic structural mistakes in microbiology.
If held to the same token, the morphological viral ability to change different modalities; I.e.- viral mutations resulting from infusion of immuno-therapeutic agents, can parallel definitional interprerations ; of archaic modes of behaviour within the viral modes.
The disqualified modes of viral intelligence , may imply the vast quantitative superiority of a subliminal force of intelligence to be reconed with: where probable unreasonable assumptions may underlie methodical viral self induced changes/replications upon various injected agents introduced as response to immunological agents.
The whole epistemological orientation may interpret demolition of cognitive field, as science is elevated against natural process.
This would make absolute sense, within the era ofnthe Great Plague, when The Church implied such methods of applying ‘intelligence’; as eating of the forbidden tree.
To use natural anti-process then, as a way to inflict domination and power, may not be a far stretch. It would create an anti-anti agent, based on a format resembling an AI that has been programmed to resist.
{This can be interpreted as an ironic excercise in the idea of devolution ,but the morphological deviations need not be apprehended purely on basis of quantifiable data, as per principia mathematica .
Instead, the former broader sets of partially integrated links, may be a more suitable starting point}
In addition to the biochemical aspect pertaining to global conflict resolution, there hides another virtually upheld position.
That is: consistent with the idea, that the advent of democracy, signaling the demise of authorial ancien regime geopolitics, the triumvirate: communism-national socialism-capitalism has suggestively not been solved, even despite Trumpism’s neo Kantian overtures. The major conflicts from 1848 on through WW I & WW 2, are one continuous power struggle , for the bargaining of contingent wills.
The reason politics plays into it, as a decompensatory tool, may be, because we have reached a limit in the gap between what is achievable via. human intelligence.
Now, when AI takes up the slack. an new form of interrelational set formation tangles with human intelligence, and a sort of bio-mechanistic-chemical reaction is formed.
A necessary hybrid arises, and such tools, may yet be seen more in their redempting use, then any other adapting hierarchy.
The alogarythm of the triad mentioned above, can not merely be shorted out of the equation by mode of absolute categorical disassociation between the pure and the formative material dialectical process, and as such, the decompensation of substantial elements have to be accounted for.
Hence, the relative uncertainty surrounding the current epidemic, its intentional OR accidental emergence.
{Again on the level of irony}
So the Chinese connection is merely a project conceived by other neo-conservative group(s) to dissuade any others who may presume on other possible scenarios? Or, perhaps , being none other, a way to assert the facf, that same any other, all doubts be erased?
{Pros and cons}:
Fact check: Did the coronavirus originate in a Chinese laboratory?
The claim: The coronavirus may have originated in a Chinese laboratory.
As the new coronavirus spreads, misinformation about its origins circulate the internet.
One of the most prominent examples of false information about the virus is an article published in January by the right-leaning Washington Times that claims the coronavirus may have originated in a research laboratory in Wuhan, China.
More: Fact check: Coronavirus originated in China, not elsewhere, researchers and studies say
The article quotes a former military intelligence officer who claimed the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a maximum-security Chinese laboratory granted authority to research dangerous pathogens, likely was involved in a biological weapons program.
USA TODAY contacted the author of the article, Bill Gertz, with a request to comment on the source of the claim but did not get a response.
The claim has spread beyond the The Washington Times. People on multiple platforms and networks have shared the same or a similar version of the conspiracy.
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., has suggested to Congress and Fox News that there may be a connection between the Wuhan lab and the origin of the virus. And conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh wrote in an article in February that “it probably is a ChiCom (Chinese Communist) laboratory experiment that is in the process of being weaponized.”
Former White House strategist Steve Bannon repeated a similar claim on Fox News in March. And opinion columnist Steven Mosher touted the idea in the New York Post in February.
Vox reported the claim also has been shared widely via message boards in China, prompting Chinese officials to release a statement denouncing the information.
What researchers say: COVID-19 originated in nature.
Researchers have been racing to learn about the virus since it was recognized in December 2019 as a new strain. Medical journals have pointed toward animals in nature as the origin of the virus.
There is no evidence to suggest that the virus was created in a Chinese laboratory. People who have claimed it started in a lab cite only the geographical proximity of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a research lab in Wuhan, and the market where some researchers believe the virus transferred from animals to humans.
Richard Ebright, a professor of chemical biology at Rutgers University, said in an interview with The Washington Post: “Based on the virus genome and properties, there is no indication whatsoever that it was an engineered virus.”
The Washington Post reported most countries have abandoned their bioweapons programs after years of work did not yield satisfactory results.
The Scripps Research Institute released a study that rejects the notion that the virus was man-made. Researchers concluded that if the virus were engineered, its genome sequence would more closely resemble earlier and more serious versions of the coronavirus.
“If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen, they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness,” the report said. “But the scientists found that the SARS-CoV-2 backbone differed substantially from those of already known coronaviruses and mostly resembled related viruses found in bats and pangolins.”
A statement in the Lancet, a medical journal, written by public health officials who have been following the progression of the virus also asserted that animals are the likely source: “Scientists from multiple countries have published and analysed genomes of the causative agent, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and they overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.”
Fact check: Coronavirus originated in China, not elsewhere, researchers and studies say
The statement referenced multiple academic and government sources that supported the Lancet article’s conclusion. These sources include the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; Nature; U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine; the New England Journal of Medicine; the Chinese Medical Journal; and the medical journal Infection, Genetics and Evolution.
Researchers who analyzed the genome of the coronavirus found its sequence shared a very high resemblance to a coronavirus in bats, but it’s possible other animals may have been involved in the transmission process.
“2019-nCoV is 96% identical at the whole-genome level to a bat coronavirus,” a study published in the science journal Nature said.
Another study published in the Lancet found results based on samples collected from nine patients who had contracted the virus corroborated the theory that the virus had come from bats. Researchers concluded the genome sequences of the coronavirus “was closely related … to two bat-derived severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-like coronaviruses.”
Although scientists say they believe bats were likely the original host, it’s also very possible, the study notes, that the virus was transferred from a bat to another animal that may have been at the seafood market in Wuhan.
Our ruling: False
The claim is that the coronavirus began in a Chinese laboratory. We rate this claim FALSE, based on our research. Overwhelming scientific evidence suggests the coronavirus originated in nature, and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.
Our fact-check sources:
Statement from The Lancet
A study published in the science journal Nature
Lancet: Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding
Washington Post: Experts debunk fringe theory linking China’s coronavirus to weapons research
South China Morning Post: Chinese research lab ‘badly hurt’ by man-made coronavirus rumours
NY Post: Don’t buy China’s story: The coronavirus may have leaked from a lab
Fox News: Bannon on coronavirus fears impacting global economy
Rush Limbaugh
Fox News: Tom Cotton on coronavirus origins
Sen. Tom Cotton’s Twitter
Science Daily: COVID-19 coronavirus epidemic has a natural origin
National Academies
Vox: The conspiracy theories about the origins of the coronavirus, debunked
Originally Published 2:55 p.m. PDT Mar. 21, 2020
Updated 8:12 a.m. PDT Mar. 22, 2020
© Copyright Gannett 2020
{It appears, the conclusion was reached using various sources, some simply periodicals and magazines, some from reputable institutions. The majority conclusion is that the bat is responsible . But not to leap inordinately to as of yet an unfounded presumption.}
Shit really…? It was Batman all along. 
That’s it, I’m boycotting all his movies.
Ok, but seriously… If it wasn’t a conspiracy , then maybe the bat: but a singular type if bat: The Vampiinre bat
In the past 15 years, two outbreaks of severe respiratory disease were caused by coronaviruses transmitted from animals to humans. In 2003, SARS-CoV (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus) spread from civets to infect more than 8,000 people, leading to a year-long global public health emergency. MERS-CoV (Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus), first identified in 2012, consistently jumps from dromedary camels to people, resulting in periodic outbreaks with a roughly 35 percent fatality rate. Evidence suggests that both viruses originated in bats before transmitting to civets and camels, respectively. While many other coronaviruses in nature are not known to infect people, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV are notable for their ability to infect a variety of different species, including humans.
New research published in Cell Reports from scientists at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) shows how MERS-CoV can adapt to infect cells of a new species, which suggests that other coronaviruses might be able to do the same. NIAID is part of the National Institutes of Health.
To cause infection, a virus must first attach to a receptor molecule on cells of the host species. This interaction is highly dependent on the shape of the receptors, which the host genes control. To evaluate how MERS-CoV evolves to infect host cells, the scientists tested 16 bat species and found that the virus could not efficiently enter cells with receptors from the common vampire bat, Desmodus rotundus. They then grew virus on cells that had vampire bat receptors and observed the virus evolving to better infect the cells. After a few generations, the virus had completely adapted to the vampire bat receptor. By studying how the shape of MERS-CoV changed over time to attach to the new host receptor, the scientists found similarities with prior studies of SARS-CoV. Thus, while these two viruses are different, they use the same general approach to enter the cells of new species.
Understanding how viruses evolve to infect new species will help researchers determine what is required for viruses to emerge and spread in new hosts. These findings also may be important for developing new vaccines, which viruses often evolve to avoid.
The scientists, part of a viral ecology group at NIAID’s Rocky Mountain Laboratories, next plan to work with other, related viruses to determine if they also efficiently adapt to new species.
Story Source:
Materials provided by NIH/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Note
{This viral evolution is baxed on a study of vampire bat behavior, that is long and overly technical, but the next of it can be summarized by the following:
The vampire bat is a particularly intelligent species , having extended social relationship to other kinds of bats. The live on a shared-reward type of co-existence, whereby the socially bond , and share food: (blood sucked out of cow ankles , for instance).
The earn this bondage by careful , gradual give and take, of many behavior effects.
As such, their buildup of virally modified immunity, has a causal relationship with transmission to other species.
The point being, with data showing a relation between specific and general criteria of transmission, what could be the probable function of mixing specific inter-specie transmission with a more generally specified artificial transmission?
I do not think that this possible scenario has been sufficiently been ruled out by the read of the above quoted article; and it may just be, that the sort of denials in the article are politically motivated moves to avoid the transmission of affective political underpinnings.
Scary, but in an age of collusion, where no one is certain to deduce even a most probable certainty-these underpinnings are merely juxterpositioned within a quantum AI series of probable outcomes
Simply, AI has not of yet been proven to be that reliable.
Some of the effects:
Ventilators are removed from older patients to you get ones, after they are informed of better survival values.
Does not these tactics resemble the extended behavior matrix of the under lying bargaining between various bat types, managed by the vampire bat?
Such effects may be transmitted to implant into the viral DNA/ RNA as sequenced behavior indexes: thereby forming programs of behavior-that expand into a modicum of ‘hybred’ intelligence between the effected agent ( the brain) and the effect or ( the molecular and genetic content , within the brain; of which it is constituted)
In an age of artificiality and simulation, it may be difficult to rule out such a program.
Genetic studies of heredity have been going on for a very long time now, and the notorious use of human studies, may certainly point to a failure.
However a micro biological understanding , need not be so casually dismissed.
The Guardian - Back to home
Trump administration
US intelligence agencies under pressure to link coronavirus to Chinese labs
Senior Trump administration figures said to be demanding evidence on virus’s origins
Patrick Wintour
Senior figures in the Trump administration have put pressure on US intelligence agencies to provide evidence to support claims that the coronavirus outbreak originated in state-run laboratories in China, a report in the New York Times claims.
Intelligence analysts fear Donald Trump is looking for propaganda to be used in the escalating blame game over whether China covered up the crisis or even generated the virus in its laboratories – a theory that remains unproven.
The office of the director of national intelligence said in a statement on Thursday that it had concluded that the virus was “not manmade or genetically modified”, but it disclosed that officials were still examining whether the origins of the pandemic could be traced to contact with infected animals or an accident at a Chinese lab.
“The intelligence community [IC] also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the Covid-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified,” said the statement. “The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan.”
Trump fans flames of Chinese lab coronavirus theory during daily briefing
In recent days Trump and his allies have sharpened their rhetoric on China, accusing it of failing to act swiftly enough to stop the spread of the virus or sound the alarm about the outbreak.
Most scientists who have studied the genetics of the coronavirus provided by China say the overwhelming probability is that it jumped from animal to human in a non-laboratory setting, as was the case with previous pandemics.
Those reported as pushing US intelligence agencies to lend credence to the theory that the virus was created in Chinese labs include the US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, the deputy national security adviser, Matthew Pottinger, and Richard Grenell, the acting director of national intelligence.
In numerous TV interviews, Pompeo has said China suppressed information on the virus and withheld key facts from the World Health Organization, and he has hinted that he believes the virus originated in Chinese laboratories.
But the suggestion that intelligence agencies are being put under pressure to produce evidence represents a step up from such comments. Such a finding would turn the international disaster into something akin to biological warfare, or a lab accident of catastrophic proportions.
More than 1 million people have been infected and more than 60,000 have died in the US from the virus, adding political urgency to Trump’s desire to shift blame for the crisis on to China.
China has been resisting an international inquiry into the origins of the outbreak in Wuhan and, under pressure, says it is a matter for the WHO to investigate. The proposal is unlikely to mollify Trump, who has condemned the WHO as Chinese-centric and has suspended US funding from the UN agency pending a review.
Chris Patten, the former governor general of Hong Kong and a long-term critic of Chinese efforts to control democracy in the former colony, has joined the calls for an international inquiry, accusing China of initially covering up the outbreak.
The calls for an inquiry have been strongest in Australia, leading to a diplomatic confrontation between the Australian prime minister, Scott Morrison, and the Chinese ambassador to Australia, Cheng Jingye. The calls have also been supported by Winston Peters, New Zealand’s foreign minister.
Peters said: “It is very hard to conceive, no matter what country it is, of there not being a desire from every country around the world – including the country of origin – for an investigation to find out how this happened.”
Jingye has warned of a Chinese boycott of Australian goods and services.
Beijing has been caught in a bind, with its diplomats sometimes saying it is not even clear whether the virus originated in China, contending that it is a legitimate matter for inquiry by scientists, but then rejecting an international inquiry into the source of the outbreak. Chinese diplomats distinguish between an international inquiry, which they say is likely to be a political blame game, and a dispassionate examination by WHO scientists.
Critics of China counter that the WHO’s record shows it has neither the will nor the investigative powers required to look deep into the entrails of the Chinese Communist party and expose any cover-up. The WHO is dependent on the cooperation of its member states for access and has no mechanism to punish countries that keep its officials in the dark.
Proposals have been floated for the WHO to be given the power to impose sanctions on countries that are not transparent with it, but this proposal would need to pass the WHO’s general assembly, and would require nation states handing over a degree of sovereignty to a multilateral body.
The Chinese ambassador to the UK, Liu Xiaoming, delivered a lengthy rebuttal to the prospect of an international inquiry last week. “You’re talking about independent investigation. It’s up to the WHO. We support the WHO. We believe we should play by international norms and international rules, not by some other countries’ rules. Some other country even sues China at its local court. It’s absurd,”he said in remarks to the Asia Society in London.
“This is not the first time that some politicians want to play world police. This is not the era of ‘gunboat diplomacy’. This is not the era when China was still in a semi-colonial and semi-feudal society. This is the third decade of the 21st century. Those people cannot understand it. They think they still live in the old days when they can bully China and the world. If the WHO does not act their way, they stop their support and criticise the WHO to be ‘China-centric’. That’s simply not right.
“So we are calling for international cooperation. That’s the only weapon and only way out to win this battle against the virus. Not by scapegoating, not by playing games, not by politicising the virus, not by spreading a political virus.”
CIA
© 2020 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.
Sure, it’s just a coincidence that a lab working on the corona virus and the exact species of bat said to be the origin of the disease happens to be in Wuhan AND this is a lab that State Department officials wrote a memo back home to say that the safety was not good at this lab. It is also a lab that the US gov had invested millions in.
this just shows ignorance of how viruses in gain or effect research are experimented on and enhanced. Or it is disinformation. Check out the virologist Chakra superstar posted a video of here…
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=195585&p=2764389#p2764389
And if you listen to the virologist, she explains how she tinkered with viruses in the openended way they do, in gain of effect experiments, in wildlife tissues. It is not engineering. It’s not cut and paste. This is bs denial.
The difference is yet, a very wide grey area. What if, the acquired a natural evolutionary virus and succeeded to modify it in accordance to some intrinsic variation, succeeding a natural looking virus within laboratory setting.
That may not be analyzed . with all the money spent on virility, and defense, mutations may be contrived.