I had some years ago pointed out that the New York Times is in the business of disinformation, which is deliberate misleading as opposed to unintentional misleading.
The guest essay is clearly a brazen attempt at deflecting blame to another party, in this case, a Chinese woman scientist. There is ample circumstantial evidence that a virus with a furin cleavage site was created in a lab in the USA, transported to another US lab to make it airborne, and then airlifted to a BSL4 lab in Wuhan to be tested in Chinese horseshoe bats. The experiment in the BSL4 lab was not being done by the Chinese woman scientist who actually worked in a different (BSL2) lab quite some distance away. Another member of Peter Daszak's team was conducting the experiments in the Wuhan BSL4 lab. So to suggest that the leak was due to inadequate and suboptimal precautions in a BSL2 lab in Wuhan is laughable.
The New York Times, sadly, devolved into a propaganda pamphlet many years ago.
Nice timing. Fifteen minutes or so before I opened this new post I'd just finished reading Oct 23, 2023, having finally got to the beginning of this cycle. Correct me if wrong, seems that might have been the first time you and Lincoln were talking - and it's exactly what was 'talked about' that has me momentarily disoriented.
"I am trying to come across to your way of thinking in that Baric was a good guy and this was all an accident."
If you don't object to clarifying this, could you summarize the intermediate steps which brought you from what I understand to be "Baric's failed bat vaccine" to the clear message of your present post(and letter to NYT). A whole bunch of other questions arise from this new post, but I'll spare you further ... for now!
Lincoln and I debated Baric on Twit, but that Oct 2023 exchange summarized the small difference. I'm bipolar with Baric. It's like a seesaw. Clarified in the book, not here on the blog. But I treat him like a benevolent scientist to bring the reader to true evil: Vincent Munster. Baric's furin cleavage site caused a "jumping of species" in Wuhan BSL4. Munster's transmission research infected the rest of us.
From that video you posted on Twitter I wonder why the Lab Leakers are ignoring Letko creating consensus RBD for MERS hACE2 viruses (Discovered by Chinese in North Africa) which Ralph Baric is now using to grow HKU5 using a chimeric virus. He had previously been unable to grow HKU5.
Apparently Letko is working with WIV which doesnt really bother me but I wonder who is funding that work?
And nice to know Letko found Russian sarbecovirus RBD has as good affinity to human Ace2 as SC2 and evades COVID Vax or Omicron immunity but an antiviral he helped develop works (motive).
I had some years ago pointed out that the New York Times is in the business of disinformation, which is deliberate misleading as opposed to unintentional misleading.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/zp95CKipUtXc
The guest essay is clearly a brazen attempt at deflecting blame to another party, in this case, a Chinese woman scientist. There is ample circumstantial evidence that a virus with a furin cleavage site was created in a lab in the USA, transported to another US lab to make it airborne, and then airlifted to a BSL4 lab in Wuhan to be tested in Chinese horseshoe bats. The experiment in the BSL4 lab was not being done by the Chinese woman scientist who actually worked in a different (BSL2) lab quite some distance away. Another member of Peter Daszak's team was conducting the experiments in the Wuhan BSL4 lab. So to suggest that the leak was due to inadequate and suboptimal precautions in a BSL2 lab in Wuhan is laughable.
The New York Times, sadly, devolved into a propaganda pamphlet many years ago.
Nice timing. Fifteen minutes or so before I opened this new post I'd just finished reading Oct 23, 2023, having finally got to the beginning of this cycle. Correct me if wrong, seems that might have been the first time you and Lincoln were talking - and it's exactly what was 'talked about' that has me momentarily disoriented.
"I am trying to come across to your way of thinking in that Baric was a good guy and this was all an accident."
If you don't object to clarifying this, could you summarize the intermediate steps which brought you from what I understand to be "Baric's failed bat vaccine" to the clear message of your present post(and letter to NYT). A whole bunch of other questions arise from this new post, but I'll spare you further ... for now!
Lincoln and I debated Baric on Twit, but that Oct 2023 exchange summarized the small difference. I'm bipolar with Baric. It's like a seesaw. Clarified in the book, not here on the blog. But I treat him like a benevolent scientist to bring the reader to true evil: Vincent Munster. Baric's furin cleavage site caused a "jumping of species" in Wuhan BSL4. Munster's transmission research infected the rest of us.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5474123/
Every time I claim Baric's No See'm research has merit and purpose, I'm trying to shut up Richard Ebright, who's covering up for Western Academia
https://x.com/R_H_Ebright/status/1880387686340653291
From that video you posted on Twitter I wonder why the Lab Leakers are ignoring Letko creating consensus RBD for MERS hACE2 viruses (Discovered by Chinese in North Africa) which Ralph Baric is now using to grow HKU5 using a chimeric virus. He had previously been unable to grow HKU5.
Apparently Letko is working with WIV which doesnt really bother me but I wonder who is funding that work?
And nice to know Letko found Russian sarbecovirus RBD has as good affinity to human Ace2 as SC2 and evades COVID Vax or Omicron immunity but an antiviral he helped develop works (motive).
Should be an interesting 4 years
For lab leakers, it's not about lab leak.
Page 13 of Letko's emails discussed FCS, but they ignored it in Jan 2020 paper:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1N9v2vdgmWE69MN0KBs6LGu20agbPFVLe/view
I guess Letko et al at Washington State Uni thought they would be part of $125M USAID Predict extension, but it was canceled
https://www.bmj.com/content/382/bmj.p2002