COVID's many conspiracy theories
From the Wuhan wet market to Antarctica and claims of no-virus
The red herring called the Wuhan wet market
Many natural origin papers claimed the Wuhan wet market was the epicenter of the SARS2 outbreak, but most of the early COVID cases were not linked to the Wuhan wet market.
The lead author of the 2022 natural origin paper, Michael Worobey, admitted that 75% of the early cases had “no no no and no” connection to the market (120/155). The Wuhan wet market is near the city center, so any outbreak in Wuhan (with 12 biolabs) would center around downtown.
Worobey admitted his paper did not prove a Wuhan wet market origin, but it worked well to muddy the waters in Wuhan.
Since SARS1 came from a Hong Kong area wet market, the initial working case definitions for SARS2 cases were based on an epidemiologic link to the Wuhan market. Chinese scientists were (rightfully) looking for cases near the market.
Fauci’s well-funded virologists are trying to distract from the first US sample (WA1). The virologists limit the discussion to the Wuhan wet market strain (Lineage A vs B). Worobey mentioned the WA1 sample but only focused on lineages A and B.
The WA1 sample was collected in Wuhan but isolated in Seattle, Washington. The early sample was then sent to the US CDC in Atlanta, Georgia.
The man who would become (America’s) Patient Zero for the new coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. appeared to do everything right. He arrived Jan. 19 (2020) at an urgent-care clinic in a suburb north of Seattle with a slightly elevated temperature and a cough he’d developed soon after returning four days earlier from a visit with family in Wuhan, China…
The (WA1) patient in Washington told doctors that he had not visited the animal markets in Wuhan, nor had he come into contact with anyone who was sick…
The man had been traveling solo in Wuhan since November…
Bob Garry of Tulane admitted that SARS2 sample, called WA1, was ancestral to the Wuhan wet market strain (lineage A & B).
This essentially means that WA1 is more similar to the SARS2 strain that escaped from Dani Anderson’s BSL4 lab.
By analyzing the lab animals that efficiently transmit WA1, we are studying the lab that created SARS2.
The SARS2 sample called WA1 makes Fauci very nervous, because it proved all five transmission models for SARS2 are inside his Rocky Mountain Lab in Montana.
The WA1 sample was isolated by the US CDC from a Wuhan traveler, and shipped around to US labs for diagnostics and testing. In the process, we learned the Wuhan sample transmits efficiently in five American (lab) animals. Outside of humans, there are only five mammals on this planet that efficiently transmit SARS2 (i.e. WA1 progenitor from Wuhan).
American deer are the only “wildlife reservoir” on the planet. There is a tiny receptor-binding domain difference between North American white tailed deer and Eastern Hemisphere deer. It is called K31. American virologists use American deer to develop self-spreading animal vaccines.
American deer mice (no relation to American deer) are used for developing self-spreading vaccines.
Remember the Danish mink outbreak? They were American mink, which are not found in China but are at the Rocky Mountain Lab.
Syrian hamsters were not found in Wuhan, but RML used them to develop aerosolized bat vaccines.
Egyptian fruit bats are well-known Western lab bats because they are easy to feed and breed, unlike Chinese bats. The fruit bats are kept at Fauci’s lab in Montana.
The exclusive list of SARS2 lab animals was only found at Rocky Mountain Lab, before the 2019 outbreak in Wuhan.
Why Wuhan?
Most scientists focused on natural origins will try to draw you into the debate over the Wuhan wet market. But the question is: why Wuhan? Only Baric can provide the answer.
Bioweapon theory
Fauci’s former boss, Bob Kadlec, claims SARS2 was a PLA mind control op, or “Cognitive dominance through biology.”
Kadlec’s theory apparently comes from comparing neurology notes with Stanford Professor of Neurobiology & Bioengineering Michael Lin. Where does this come from? SARS2 causes neurological disease in humanized mice.
Biology science writer Matt Ridley continues to push a bioweapon theory that COVID was “pre-adapted to humans,” not mammals. He goes on to imply Zhou Yusen from Beijing was killed for creating COVID.
Because Ridley sees COVID circulating in humans, he thinks it was designed for humans. COVID was pre-adapted for bat-to-bat transmission. If we call them “humanized bats,” will lab leakers like Ridley get it?
No Virus conspiracy
If you spend too much time online, you inevitably encounter the No Virus cult.
Every pandemic has its No-Virus cult. For AIDS, it was Peter Duesberg and RFK Jr. They claim HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, but don’t back it up with any evidence.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01312.x
This theory is somewhat similar to the 9/11 truthers who claim there were no planes. This loosely affiliated group of trolls will tell you there was no SARS2 virus because we can’t see it. These are the same people who once claimed COVID was a “plandemic” by World Government types. The argument is based on the inability to grow the virus in a petri dish.
https://rumble.com/v3tafrv-do-viruses-exist.html
Viruses need a host, like you and me. Viruses are not considered living organisms because they lack cell structure and cannot reproduce.
Well, let’s freeze COVID and look at it:
This picture was taken in Hamilton, Montana, during the early stages of the pandemic. That’s right, the Rocky Mountain Lab that created COVID had a novel method of seeing COVID.
It’s a freeze frame of COVID using cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM). The technique involves flash-freezing molecules in liquid nitrogen and bombarding them with electrons to capture their images with a special $5M camera.
The No Virus cult was half-right, because humanized mice are not a transmission model for COVID.
History of No Virus
Dr Sam Bailey Dr Sam Bailey appears to be the originator. You can tell Bailey realizes she is carrying Ralph Baric’s water with verbiage like this:
Despite the numerous patents involving, “methods for producing recombinant coronavirus,” and federal grants to the likes of “gain of function specialist” Dr Ralph Baric and his team at UNC Chapel Hill, there is nothing in any of these documents that contain scientific evidence that viruses exist.
Sasha Latypova does the same, “I can point you to the official National Academies of Science report, with Baric as co-author, stating in no uncertain terms that it is not possible to predict transmissibility and virulence from the genotype of the virus.”
The scientific community does not have sufficient knowledge to create a novel, viable life form, even a virus, from the bottom up. Designing an infectious viral genome de novo by sequence requires the accurate prediction of protein structure and function, the design of protein-protein interactions and protein machines, all of which must produce progeny virions efficiently in an order of magnitude more complex host cell.
Baric’s technology allows him to “recover” a live virus from a genetic sequence. But he needed a template to copy, like RaTG13:
As Dr Raszek outlined, “We are talking about creating viruses at will.”
Antarctica conspiracy debunked
Hungarian researchers thought they had found early SARS2 samples from January 2020. It was debunked since the sample came from June 2020.
That's not even remotely all the theories around. I'm completely missing the link to EVALI, the Samoan events in 2019, Event 201, and a lot more.
Oh and the 'virus don't exist' is a psyop.
Great work Jim, you really contributed a lot to this debate, and maybe solved it. Any news from or about Dani?