The origins of the Covid-19 pandemic, which began in Wuhan, China in late 2019, are well established. However, how it began remains a heated topic of debate. Two competing hypotheses—one of which is hindering scientific progress and potentially obstructing the development of vaccines and other antiviral agents in the U.S.—are at the forefront of this controversy.

 

The zoonosis hypothesis suggests that SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for Covid-19, was naturally transmitted from an animal to one or more humans at a wet market in Wuhan, which sells fresh produce, meat, fish, and live animals. On the other hand, the lab leak hypothesis proposes that the virus was either modified (possibly through gain-of-function experiments) or even created at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and somehow escaped the laboratory. While many politicians, pundits, and members of the general public favor the lab leak theory, most scientists, particularly virologists, do not. This schism threatens their legitimate and socially important work, as outlined in a peer-reviewed publication from August 1 in the Journal of Virology, written by 41 virologists, myself included.

 

The zoonosis hypothesis is supported by solid evidence. Viruses often spill over from animals to humans, usually as dead-end events without sustained human-to-human transmission that could spark a pandemic. Wildlife coronaviruses have long been capable of infecting humans. An estimated 66,000 people are infected with SARS coronaviruses each year through human-bat contact, almost all resulting in asymptomatic infections with little or no further transmission. That said, zoonotic transfer of three different coronaviruses (MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2) from other animals to humans has led to epidemics or pandemics in the past 25 years. The 2002-2003 SARS-CoV-1 outbreak started in a Chinese wet market, and the 1918 influenza pandemic, which originated from an animal-human crossover, most likely from a pig in the U.S. heartland, killed an estimated 50 million people worldwide.

 

The illegal wildlife trade and wet markets constitute a $20 billion global industry with clear zoonosis risks. The closer humans and “exotic” animals mingle, the greater the risk of viral transmission. There is potential for a devastating pandemic if the H5N1 avian influenza virus enters birds, cattle, and sporadically, humans in the U.S.

 

In contrast, the lab leak hypothesis is essentially evidence-free, relying on a chain of unproven and highly speculative events. A recent New York Times guest essay by Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute of M.I.T. and Harvard, reiterates arguments first made between 2020 and 2022 but presents no new evidence.

 

Both online and scientific literature support the zoonotic transfer hypothesis while countering the notion of a lab leak. Five out of seven reports from the U.S. intelligence community favor the zoonotic origin of SARS-CoV-2, based on declassified scientific evidence and investigations. These five reports found no evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology possessed SARS-CoV-2 or a closely related virus before the end of December 2019 and concluded that it is unlikely that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered.

 

Yet, the lab leak hypothesis is now dominating public discourse. It is being promoted by right-wing politicians and media celebrities and even embraced by high-profile newspapers like The New York Times. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, has accepted the lab leak as an established fact, dismissing the zoonosis hypothesis on dubious grounds. This is significant as their report outlines future government policies on relations with China.

 

Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), testified in June 2024 before the House of Representatives subcommittee investigating the Covid-19 pandemic. He stated that people should keep an open mind on the competing hypotheses, pending definitive proof for one or the other. Despite his balanced stance, Fauci faced vicious abuse, with some even suggesting that he should be “prosecuted” and imprisoned for “crimes against humanity” because NIAID had sent grant funds for coronavirus research to the Wuhan Institute of Virology via an EcoHealth Alliance subcontract.

 

My concern, shared by many other virologists, is that the evidence-light lab leak hypothesis is damaging the virology research community at a time when its role is crucial in the face of pandemic threats. The attacks on Fauci are not unique. Coronavirus virologists have been falsely accused of engineering SARS-CoV-2, allowing it to escape from a lab due to inadequate safety protocols, participating in an international cover-up, and taking grants as bribes from NIAID for favoring the zoonosis hypothesis. There is mounting harassment, intimidation, threats, and violence towards scientists, particularly vile in the online space.

 

In a survey conducted by Science magazine, 38% of 510 researchers publishing coronavirus research reported receiving insults, threats of violence, doxing (publicly revealing personal information), and even face-to-face threats. Another survey of 1,281 scientists found that 51% had experienced at least one form of harassment, sometimes repeatedly for years.

 

As a result, scientists have withdrawn from social media platforms, rejected public speaking opportunities, and taken steps to protect themselves and their families. Some have even diverted their work to less controversial topics. There are now long-term risks that fewer experts will help combat future pandemics and that scientists will be less willing to communicate the findings of sophisticated, fast-moving research on global health topics. Pandemic preparation research has already been deferred, diverted, or abandoned. Most worrisome is that the next generation of scientists has well-founded fears about becoming researchers on emerging viruses and pandemic science.

 

All virologists embrace the need for laboratory safety. None ignore the implications of the lab leak hypothesis—that a dangerous virus could escape from a research laboratory in the future. However, lab leak anxiety underpins proposals for policies that would unnecessarily restrict research on vaccines and antiviral agents in the U.S. The overarching concern is that the lab leak narrative fuels mistrust in science and public health infrastructures. The increasingly virulent and widespread anti-science agenda damages individual scientists and their institutions and hinders planning to counter future epidemics and pandemics.

 

Science is humanity’s best insurance policy against threats from nature, but it is a fragile enterprise that must be nourished and protected. Scientific organizations need to develop programs to counter anti-science and protect the research enterprise in the face of mounting hostility.

 

The rhetoric being thrown at virologists must be toned down. Viruses are the real threats to humanity, not virologists. John P. Moore, Ph.D., is a professor of microbiology and immunology at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York City. This essay is adapted from a longer article written with 40 colleagues that was published in the Journal of Virology.

 

Credit: Stat News  2024-08-05

 

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

Cigna offers a variety of health insurance plans designed to meet the minimum requirement for medical treatment coverage, with benefits reaching up to THB 3 million. These plans are tailored to provide comprehensive healthcare solutions for expatriates, ensuring peace of mind and access to quality medical services. To explore the full range of Cigna's expat health insurance options and find a plan that suits your needs, click here for more information.

I'm a microbiologist of over 35 years standing (yikes, has it been that long). During that time, I worked developing ways to detect the worst pathogens known to man, and unknown to man. I was also a biological safety officer for a major Plc (in addition to being a senior researcher). These days I preach microbiology from an office.

 

We started talking about this virus in early January 2020, and, as you do, speculate about its origins.

 

98% of the microbial world is completely unknown, The potential for new diseases is infinite. The world only starts picking up on them well into the infection's development. Many burn out, without making a single headline.

 

Take MERS; this was another coronavirus, related to SARS, and related to Sars-Cov-2. It made the headlines around the world when some elderly Saudi was evacuated to London with a respiratory illness, and an Anglo-Dutch team identified the virus. MERS has an incredibly high  mortality rate. But at least 6 months before this virus was identified, I was writing articles on the Amman cluster, where some doctors and ER nurse died following a short respiratory illness. It seemed significant to me at the time, and later on was confirmed to be MERS.

 

MERs had the potential to cause a frightening pandemic, and for a few years, we were anxiously keeping an eye on the annual haj, and the potential for new cases. But they never happened. Its not gone away, there are still cases. His high mortality rate probably limits forward transmission,

 

But MERS appeared following a change in human behaviour. All emerging infectious diseases follow the same  path. Flu, an avian virus, impacted humans farming pigs 2000+ years ago. It was about the time when someone invented the pig sty, rather than taking the pigs out to forage. MERS emerged because of the wealth of the Gulf. It became commonly associated with elderly Arab men who kept a few camels. Saudi Arabia imports camels, due to rising demand for camel meat, camels for racing and for old men wishing to keep a few camels around after retiring from a prosperous job. The camels mostly come from the Canaries, Australia (the feral Afghan camels) and Sudan. The MERS virus was only found in Sudanese camels. The change in human behaviour was Saudi Arabia now being full of wealthy old men pining for something resembling the Bedu lifestyle in old age (ie the good old days). and all buying camels.

 

The story of COVID-19, and its origins, will occupy entire lifetimes. We still do not know exactly where Spanish Flu came from, thought there is strong circumstantial evidence that it emerged in China in 1917 (newly discovered old Chinese medical records), about the time the British and French were recruiting coolies to serve on the Western Front, and these coolie battalions were then shipped via Canada and Kansas. What really caused this virus to take off, besides the unusual act of mostly young Chinese men being shipped off to France, was the end of WW1. There was a priority to evacuate men in the hospitals home. Other soldiers remained at their posts, allowing a virus to circulate among relatively fit men living in close proximity, leading to recombination events, and selection of a strain with heightened virulance. After 120+ years, we are getting closer.

 

As for COVID-19, my working theory why this EID becames a pandemic so quickly was, again, due to a change in human behaviour, this time "Globalisation". Wuhan, by 2020, had become part of a global supply chain for the textiles and car parts industries, leading to particular traffic between Wuhan and Italy. The city's residents had become much more properous, and were enjoying a lifestyle far better than during their parents in the 1960s, when there was genuine hunger. Part of this means indulging in exotic meats. This prosperity attracted the attention of Western banks, who has invested heavily into the surrounding farming sector, pushing traditional farmers out onto lands not farmed before, increasing the chances of first contact with novel disease causing organisms.

 

The increased farming activity has also driven up demand for fertiliser. The area is well known for bat guano deposits, that itinerant miners excavate. Let it be remembered that coronaviruses circulate among the bat community Bats has really slow immune systems, and these viruses don't really bother them.

 

There are a number of scenarios for transmission. Wuhan is a prosperous city, with more more coming from the rural area. One reason is to bring in livestock for the wet market. There is more prospect of human to human contact, and livestock to human contact. Then you have all the international visitors.

 

One cannot disregard the laboratory, but as a microbiologist with experience of the kinds of facilties involved, I find it incredibly unlikely. Some assume if it came from the lab, it must be some sort of engineered strain. well, maybe, probably not. The Wuhan Institute of Virology has a number of functions. One of which is to conduct research on novel pathogens. Around the world, in the major metropolises, you will find research institutes looking at some of the nastiest pathogens know. For instance, Colindale in London, is one of Health England's main reference labs, the other being the civvie lab at Porton Down. Where my lab was, was in one of the Home Counties close to London, and it was a private lab.

 

The other function of the Wuhan lab was as a reference lab, meaning they received clinical samples coming from hospital labs for further investigation. Every city will have at least one hospital, and typically, that hospital will have a pathology laboratory, which will include a virology section. In those labs, the scientists are deliberately propagating viruses to identify them. That means producing millions up millions of viruses. And mostly this will be in fairly open bench BSL2 and BSL3 labs; the scientists aren't usually wearing  breathing apparatus. Hazardous work can be conducted in open front laminar flow cabinets venting to atmosphere via a HEPA filter.

 

So a lab origin might be from a BSL 4 research lab, a lab that was newly built by a French firm, and which was apparently in good corder, with a combination of physical and non-physical (ie training) controls in place. Another origin would be from the reference lab, which would be at a lower standard, but there are still controls in place. If reference labs didn't have controls for BSL-2 labs, then why aren't they the source of STDs in your city?

 

But lab leaks do occur, when someone circumvents a control. The last smallpox death in the UK was in 1978, a forensic photographer in Birmingham. The photographer's office was below a lab looking at Smallpox. For many years it was thought poorly maintained ducting was to blame. But this has been ruled out.

 

As a result of death, the head of the Birmingham Medical School microbiology department took his own life. He had been harassed by the Press and others, who accused him of genetically manipulating the Smallpox virus, utter nonsense.

 

Where it emerged from; its still most likely a zoonitic infection. 60% of all human infections have crossed the species barrier

Thank you for that  well written item. It is a nice change from the usual nonsensical claims that come from the mentally ill collective who offer imagined convoluted plots.  I too believe that the origin of the illness is due to the consumption of wild animals. It's nothing new as we have seen this play out before with Ebola and the African consumption of  "Bush Meat".   

The Wuhan  animal market aka wet market has been documented as a gruesome horrific place.  Live animals are kept in small cages, terrified. They are often tormented and tortured as the Chinese believe that the resulting adrenaline will give the consumers of the animal flesh, vitality and vigor. The animals are not fed and are often dehydrated which makes them at greater risk of infection as their immune systems become impaired.  China has gone to great lengths to over up the horrors of these wet markets. The  animal vendors at Bangkpok's Chatuchak market offer a similar risk and Thai authorities have refused to stop the inhumane activities. the threat has been repeatedly documented, but the powers that be and the  community at large has ignored the warnings.

 

Today we are on the edge of another international health crisis with a resurgence of MPox  aka Monkey Pox. Initially centered in the Congo, because vaccines were not made available and quarantines not  effected, the disease has spread and risks exploding. European infections have been increasing in the past 2 weeks and it is only a matter of time before it spreads in  the Americas. Fortunately, vaccines exist to contain the spread, but the issue will be if people at risk will take the vaccine or fall prey to the ignorance of the anti science  group who are opposed to vaccines and preventative measures. Will governments act or will be they be afraid of a repeat of the  covid conspiracy nutters?

On 8/14/2024 at 12:44 PM, Patong2021 said:

Thank you for that  well written item. It is a nice change from the usual nonsensical claims that come from the mentally ill collective who offer imagined convoluted plots.  I too believe that the origin of the illness is due to the consumption of wild animals. It's nothing new as we have seen this play out before with Ebola and the African consumption of  "Bush Meat".   

The Wuhan  animal market aka wet market has been documented as a gruesome horrific place.  Live animals are kept in small cages, terrified. They are often tormented and tortured as the Chinese believe that the resulting adrenaline will give the consumers of the animal flesh, vitality and vigor. The animals are not fed and are often dehydrated which makes them at greater risk of infection as their immune systems become impaired.  China has gone to great lengths to over up the horrors of these wet markets. The  animal vendors at Bangkpok's Chatuchak market offer a similar risk and Thai authorities have refused to stop the inhumane activities. the threat has been repeatedly documented, but the powers that be and the  community at large has ignored the warnings.

 

Today we are on the edge of another international health crisis with a resurgence of MPox  aka Monkey Pox. Initially centered in the Congo, because vaccines were not made available and quarantines not  effected, the disease has spread and risks exploding. European infections have been increasing in the past 2 weeks and it is only a matter of time before it spreads in  the Americas. Fortunately, vaccines exist to contain the spread, but the issue will be if people at risk will take the vaccine or fall prey to the ignorance of the anti science  group who are opposed to vaccines and preventative measures. Will governments act or will be they be afraid of a repeat of the  covid conspiracy nutters?

 

What's your thoughts now after the US intelligence said its likely it came from a lab.

Seeing as we have the "experts" here  perhaps they can remind us of the

infection fatality rate of SARS COVID 19  ?

 

A link in case they can't  or are unwilling to.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9613797/

4 hours ago, blaze master said:

 

What's your thoughts now after the US intelligence said its likely it came from a lab.

 

The US intelligence conclusion was conditional. The conclusion offered by the CIA  was;

"CIA assesses with low confidence that a research-related origin of the COVID-19 pandemic is more likely than a natural origin based on the available body of reporting. CIA continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the COVID-19 pandemic remain plausible" 

 

You are reading far more into the January statement than is there. Nobody has denied that there may have been a lab incident. It is the origin of the  new virus variant that is in question. There is ;longstanding credible and reliable data that shows the link between infectious disease and the Chinese wet markets. They are horrible evil places. There is also reliable evidence that shows that many of the worst variants of avian flus originate in Asia  due to Asian agricultural and farming practices. 

 

SARS Cov-2 virus is a variant of an existing virus. It is not entirely new. Viruses evolve and new variants are regularly created. This is how the world exists. The general consensus is that the virus originated in China and is  linked to the  Chinese animal abuse customs and lack of hygiene at their markets. It is plausible that samples were taken of the new respiratory virus once it was manifested in humans,  and sent for study at the laboratory. The outbreaks in China occurred at the same time the virus was under study and it may have infected lab workers who then  infected the general public. Breaches have occurred at other infectious disease facilities. 

 

The virus itself mutates and as the multiple variants that appeared over the past five years demonstrate, shows the same pattern of modification as other SARS related viruses. The medical research consensus does not deny that there were samples of the virus at the lab, nor the regional origin of the virus. Rather, the question that has never been resolved was whether the viruses at the lab were derived from infected patients or whether they were the result of viral engineering.  Past experience indicates that  the  viruses at the lab came from human sampling and that human error or maybe even sabotage allowed the virus to enter the general population.

 

Claiming that the virus was human created, allows a distraction from the underlying ongoing  problem of the wet markets, the oversight of the Chinese microbiology facilities and safety at those facilities. The Chinese  research facilities do not have the same moral or ethical constraints that western facilities have. Unethical  or sloppy research practice can result in catastrophic damage, but does not necessarily indicate or prove that a virus was engineered and then released.

1 minute ago, Patong2021 said:

Claiming that the virus was human created, allows a distraction from the underlying ongoing  problem of the wet markets

 

Both the wet market situation and the actual origin of the virus are important. 

 

So did covid 19 that effected our world come from a lab or not ? Not talking about the evolution of it after it hit us. The initial virus. 

 

Where did it come from a lab or wet market. Intelligence thinks it came from a lab. Regardless of ceftaintly the statement made is that it did. 

 

If you think that's reading too much into it that's your opinion.  I see it differently. 

 

5 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Unethical  or sloppy research practice can result in catastrophic damage, but does not necessarily indicate or prove that a virus was engineered and then released.

 

Nor should it be dismissed considering the things you have mentioned. 

8 hours ago, blaze master said:

Regardless of ceftaintly the statement made is that it did. 

No.

 

8 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

CIA continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the COVID-19 pandemic remain plausible" 

 

How about a simple induction of deduction. A mysterious virus appears in a fresh market 27km from a lab that hacks deadly viruses that was partially funded by hacks like Fauci who concealed such funding with the help of a communist controlled state that withheld information and are responsible for missing whistle blower scientists that worked at that lab. Well folks, theres your answer.

33 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No

 

No. 

14 hours ago, blaze master said:

 

What's your thoughts now after the US intelligence said its likely it came from a lab.

 Did you read the two first post. Well written and quite reasonable explained both scenarios

 

When science becomes blurred and political, we are screwed.

 

How convenient cia officially could had been leaked 25.01.25 when Trump started his 2. Economic war talks against China?

25 minutes ago, Hummin said:

 Did you read the two first post. Well written and quite reasonable explained both scenarios

 

 

I did. I believe it was a lab leak. 

5 minutes ago, blaze master said:

 

I did. I believe it was a lab leak. 

I choose not to get my mind diluted, and also have a friend who travelled the world dealing with viruses in India and Africa, an professor actually, and have no reason to disbelief her. 

 

She told me exactly what was going to happen early February 2020, and made me decide not to leave Thailand. She have no evidence this was a lab leak, or better say, an forced lab leak.

1 hour ago, blaze master said:

 

No. 

I have an argument, the statement from the CIA.

You have nothing.

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

I have an argument, the statement from the CIA.

You have nothing.

 

You left out where they said it was a low probability. Which means they think that it was but will still investigate. Common sense really but somehow you seem to be missing that part. 

 

So you have nothing. 

6 hours ago, Hummin said:

I choose not to get my mind diluted, and also have a friend who travelled the world dealing with viruses in India and Africa, an professor actually, and have no reason to disbelief her. 

 

She told me exactly what was going to happen early February 2020, and made me decide not to leave Thailand. She have no evidence this was a lab leak, or better say, an forced lab leak.

 

I toldy wife in 2020 what was going to happen as well. Writing was on the wall. 

13 hours ago, blaze master said:

Writing was on the wall.

You read her the WEF pandemic playbook ?

DW: COVID pandemic likely unleashed by lab mishap: Germany's BND

 

https://www.dw.com/en/covid-pandemic-likely-unleashed-by-lab-mishap-germanys-bnd/a-71897701

 

The BND reached its conclusions as early as 2020, the papers said, giving them a likelihood rating of 80% to 95%, but the assessment was kept from the public at the time.

 

MSN: German Govt Reportedly Concealed Intel That Wuhan Lab Leak Was 80 To 95% Likely

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/german-government-reportedly-concealed-intel-that-wuhan-lab-leak-was-80-to-95-likely/ar-AA1ANJ0W

 

On 2/19/2025 at 5:24 PM, blaze master said:

You left out where they said it was a low probability.

 

CIA didn't say that.

 

They rated their assessment as "low confidence."  This is usually overlooked in the tinfoil nutjobbery propaganda pieces, for good reason.

 

Low confidence generally means questionable or implausible information was used, the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or significant concerns or problems with sources existed.

 

It means, no surprise, that an unsubstantiated rumor was published as "fact" for political purposes on.............Jan 25, 2025.

On 8/14/2024 at 11:44 PM, Patong2021 said:

Thank you for that  well written item. It is a nice change from the usual nonsensical claims that come from the mentally ill collective who offer imagined convoluted plots.  I too believe that the origin of the illness is due to the consumption of wild animals. It's nothing new as we have seen this play out before with Ebola and the African consumption of  "Bush Meat".   

The Wuhan  animal market aka wet market has been documented as a gruesome horrific place.  Live animals are kept in small cages, terrified. They are often tormented and tortured as the Chinese believe that the resulting adrenaline will give the consumers of the animal flesh, vitality and vigor. The animals are not fed and are often dehydrated which makes them at greater risk of infection as their immune systems become impaired.  China has gone to great lengths to over up the horrors of these wet markets. The  animal vendors at Bangkpok's Chatuchak market offer a similar risk and Thai authorities have refused to stop the inhumane activities. the threat has been repeatedly documented, but the powers that be and the  community at large has ignored the warnings.

 

Today we are on the edge of another international health crisis with a resurgence of MPox  aka Monkey Pox. Initially centered in the Congo, because vaccines were not made available and quarantines not  effected, the disease has spread and risks exploding. European infections have been increasing in the past 2 weeks and it is only a matter of time before it spreads in  the Americas. Fortunately, vaccines exist to contain the spread, but the issue will be if people at risk will take the vaccine or fall prey to the ignorance of the anti science  group who are opposed to vaccines and preventative measures. Will governments act or will be they be afraid of a repeat of the  covid conspiracy nutters?

So you were a 6' apart double mask wearer then, did you attack others that didn't want to get a jab?

I thought it was a lab leak from very early on,

the totally  deranged  response by worldwide governments

( Sweden being a notable exception though there were others)

only reinforces my view that they also thought it was an engineered bio weapon escaped from the lab ! 

why else would they throw out their very own "pandemic play book"  and do the total opposite ?  resulting in totalitarian censorship of any dissenting opinions,shaming, coercion, de banking and mandatary adoption of a

"novel treatment"  ohh and don't forget no way to sue the makers of

"novel treatments"  for injuries caused by their "product"   that alone is a huge red flag !!!

4 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

CIA didn't say that.

 

They rated their assessment as "low confidence."  This is usually overlooked in the tinfoil nutjobbery propaganda pieces, for good reason.

 

Low confidence generally means questionable or implausible information was used, the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or significant concerns or problems with sources existed.

 

It means, no surprise, that an unsubstantiated rumor was published as "fact" for political purposes on.............Jan 25, 2025.

 

You can chose to believe whatever you want. 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9qjjj4zy5o

 

Nothing unsubstantiated about it. 

 

 

1 hour ago, blaze master said:

 

You can chose to believe whatever you want. 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9qjjj4zy5o

 

Nothing unsubstantiated about it. 

 

 

 

Do you tinfoilers even bother to read the links you post?

 

This is the second sentence in YOUR linked article:

 

But the intelligence agency cautioned it had "low confidence" in this determination.

 

Further into the article, which shirley, you must not have read:

 

The review offered on Saturday is based on "low confidence" which means the intelligence supporting it is deficient, inconclusive or contradictory.

 

How you say................"fake news"?

1 minute ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Do you tinfoilers even bother to read the links you post?

 

This is the second sentence in YOUR linked article:

 

But the intelligence agency cautioned it had "low confidence" in this determination.

 

Further into the article, which shirley, you must not have read:

 

The review offered on Saturday is based on "low confidence" which means the intelligence supporting it is deficient, inconclusive or contradictory.

 

How you say................"fake news"?

 

Fake news ? You need help.

Just now, blaze master said:

 

Fake news ? You need help.

 

Then why publicly state the political assessment is with "low confidence," which is an admission your sources were worthless and weak, and in a word, UNcredible.

 

Why not "moderate confidence", indicating you had some faith in your statement.

 

Heck, why not announce it as being with "high confidence" and technically a "slam dunk."

 

No, this is simply a political message that will be picked up by the conspiracy sites and repeated ad nauseam, believe by suckers.

 

• High confidence generally indicates judgments based on high-quality information, and/or the nature of the issue makes it possible to render a solid judgment. A “high confidence” judgment is not a fact or a certainty, however, and still carries a risk of being wrong.^[1]
• Moderate confidence generally means credibly sourced and plausible information, but not of sufficient quality or corroboration to warrant a higher level of confidence.^[1]
• Low confidence generally means questionable or implausible information was used, the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or significant concerns or problems with sources existed.

2 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Then why publicly state the political assessment is with "low confidence," which is an admission your sources were worthless and weak, and in a word, UNcredible.

 

Why not "moderate confidence", indicating you had some faith in your statement.

 

Heck, why not announce it as being with "high confidence" and technically a "slam dunk."

 

No, this is simply a political message that will be picked up by the conspiracy sites and repeated ad nauseam, believe by suckers.

 

• High confidence generally indicates judgments based on high-quality information, and/or the nature of the issue makes it possible to render a solid judgment. A “high confidence” judgment is not a fact or a certainty, however, and still carries a risk of being wrong.^[1]
• Moderate confidence generally means credibly sourced and plausible information, but not of sufficient quality or corroboration to warrant a higher level of confidence.^[1]
• Low confidence generally means questionable or implausible information was used, the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or significant concerns or problems with sources existed.

 

It's clear they think there is a possibility it came from a lab. Pretty sure thats the whole point.

 

Nothing tinfoil hat about that but you froth on. 

2 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

 

 

 

You want to believe it was not a lab leak,

You also want to believe that there is no other intelligent life in the entire vastness of the universe ?

9 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Do you tinfoilers even bother to read the links you post?

 

This is the second sentence in YOUR linked article:

 

But the intelligence agency cautioned it had "low confidence" in this determination.

 

Further into the article, which shirley, you must not have read:

 

The review offered on Saturday is based on "low confidence" which means the intelligence supporting it is deficient, inconclusive or contradictory.

 

How you say................"fake news"?

 

You see only what you want to see. That's not science. They said that lab leak was their #1  choice, the most likely cause, but the confidence level was low.   

 

"Give me the apple pie, but my mom's was better". Question, what did he eat?

27 minutes ago, blaze master said:

 

It's clear they think there is a possibility it came from a lab. Pretty sure thats the whole point.

 

Nothing tinfoil hat about that but you froth on. 

 

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat." -Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld