Covid Lab Origin Considered By Bulletin Of Atomic Scientists

Covid Lab Origin Considered By Bulletin Of Atomic Scientists — Trust science, fine, but let’s allow skepticism of the scientist. He’s human, after all, and regardless of credentialing can be wrong, even intentionally so.

Almost from the beginning of the Covid crisis, prominent virologist and journals were declaring it to be definitively natural.

It came from bats. Really. No no no, it was not designed in a lab in China. It came from bats. Trump said it came from a lab? No, no, no. Orange man bad. It came from bats.

The authoritative The Lancet declared on Feb. 19, 2020 that suggesting otherwise was a “conspiracy theory”.

A letter from a group virologists led by Kristian G. Andersen of the Scripps Research Institute appeared in the March 17, 2020 of Nature Medicine saying “Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus”

The general media accepted these claims without question.

That’s changing.

Nicholas Wade published, May 5, an article about the origin of Covid 19 on the website of the widely respected Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.

While he doesn’t dismiss the possibility of a natural origin for Covid, he fully accepts the possibility — probability, actually — that it came from a lab in Wuhan.

More significantly, that if it should be found to have come from a lab, he lists those culpable for the disaster.

These would be Chinese virologists; Chinese authorities for the cover up — he does not believe the leak was intentional; the worldwide community of virologists whose desire for government money led them to successfully lobby for the removal of restrictions; and, the United States as we were responsible for funding the research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Repeat: The United States was responsible for funding the research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

And from where did this funding come? It was funneled through Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance by The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The directors of those organizations needed to give approval knowing full well for what it would be used. The NIH is directed by Francis Collins.

NIAID? That would be St. Anthony Fauci.

Wade ends his story with this:

What accounts for the media’s apparent lack of curiosity?

The virologists’ omertà is one reason. Science reporters, unlike political reporters, have little innate skepticism of their sources’ motives; most see their role largely as purveying the wisdom of scientists to the unwashed masses. So when their sources won’t help, these journalists are at a loss.

Another reason, perhaps, is the migration of much of the media toward the left of the political spectrum. Because President Trump said the virus had escaped from a Wuhan lab, editors gave the idea little credence. They joined the virologists in regarding lab escape as a dismissible conspiracy theory. During the Trump administration, they had no trouble in rejecting the position of the intelligence services that lab escape could not be ruled out. But when Avril Haines, President Biden’s director of national intelligence, said the same thing, she too was largely ignored. This is not to argue that editors should have endorsed the lab escape scenario, merely that they should have explored the possibility fully and fairly.

People round the world who have been pretty much confined to their homes for the last year might like a better answer than their media are giving them. Perhaps one will emerge in time. After all, the more months pass without the natural emergence theory gaining a shred of supporting evidence, the less plausible it may seem. Perhaps the international community of virologists will come to be seen as a false and self-interested guide. The common sense perception that a pandemic breaking out in Wuhan might have something to do with a Wuhan lab cooking up novel viruses of maximal danger in unsafe conditions could eventually displace the ideological insistence that whatever Trump said can’t be true.

And then let the reckoning begin.

The entire stinking temple needs to come down. Let it be Biblical.

Covid Lab Origin Considered By Bulletin Of Atomic Scientists
Covid Lab Origin Considered By Bulletin Of Atomic Scientists

One thought on “Covid Lab Origin Considered By Bulletin Of Atomic Scientists”

  1. To me this was and is a created political globalist fake pandemic, especially with the fake numbers.
    When the WHO recently announced that, because of these draconian lock downs for this plandemic that there were “zero” cases reported of the usual various flu’s that are always in our world going around, how planned is that? The number of deaths from this neo covid 19-2 is still not pandemic numbers according to graphs I see being printed, mind you, they all vary in numbers?? and still no more than a usual year in numbers and deaths reported?? Who can you believe? Great article again thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: