Claim That Covid-19 Came From Lab In China Completely Unfoun

[Winfield Hill]

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say


--
Thanks,
- Win

 

I love it when people espouse a good conspiracy theory. I really love it when you cannot tell which side is pushing the crazy theories

 

[John Larkin]

On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com>
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 3:46:22 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Scientists are no different than musicians....He who pays the piper calls the tunes

 

[whit3rd]

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:

On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science. The
resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

 

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 4:13:47 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.. The
resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

Science is a funny thing. When it flies airplanes and fires guns and heals people....the funny thing is....pretty much every one believes in science. The problem is when "scientists" make grand pronouncements , that funny enough , have huge political ramifications, with no proven anything....It is pretty much should be treated as bunk. And that data you talk about....It is usually twisted and distorted to drive an agenda.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 13:06:40 -0700 (PDT), blocher@columbus.rr.com
wrote:

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 3:46:22 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Scientists are no different than musicians....He who pays the piper calls the tunes

They are as driven by emotion and ego as musicians too. The computer
simulations are all over the place.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 13:13:42 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science. The
resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

The problem now is too little observation, too little reliable data,
and too many opinions and simulations that are having gigantic
consequences.

The follow-up books, a year or so from now, will be fun. The good ones
will name names.





--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Winfield Hill]

whit3rd wrote...

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

You should re-read the material. Here's one statement:
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."

https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1

That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."

Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."





--
Thanks,
- Win

 

[Phil Allison]

John Larkin wrote:

-------------------

Scientists are no different than musicians....
He who pays the piper calls the tunes

They are as driven by emotion and ego as musicians too. The computer
simulations are all over the place.

** Does anyone sensible really think that modelling future outcomes based on numerous guesses and hunches is doing science ?

It sure ain't the well founded "scientific method".

Seems the public have been conned into calling it science - because "scientists" are the ones doing it. Hmmmm....

"The science is settled" & "I believe in the science" are catchphrases trotted out to prove one's feelings about AGW have virtue.

IMO - all they really show is how gullible you are - or maybe something worse.


...... Phil

 

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 4:50:44 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill wrote:

whit3rd wrote...

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

You should re-read the material. Here's one statement:
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."

https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1

That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."

Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."





--
Thanks,
- Win

It really matters not if it escaped from a lab or if it was some crazy bat virus from a slaughter market in Wuhan. What matters is why the immediate coverup. Why stopping those other scientists (you know the ones in China that were trying to get the word out about this thing and the Communists did what communists do....they lied, and punished their scientists. So the real question is what do we do with a communist country that want the benefits of interacting with the world, but refuses to play by the rules. What do all these scientists have to say about that. Also , are these scientists bothered that the Commies shut down Chinese scientists......Funny, I never read any stories about the comradary of scientists regarding these things.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 13:56:02 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
<pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

-------------------

Scientists are no different than musicians....
He who pays the piper calls the tunes

They are as driven by emotion and ego as musicians too. The computer
simulations are all over the place.


** Does anyone sensible really think that modelling future outcomes based on numerous guesses and hunches is doing science ?

It works OK for well-behaved, reasonably linear systems, which aren't
the most interesting or important systems.

It sure ain't the well founded "scientific method".

Seems the public have been conned into calling it science - because "scientists" are the ones doing it. Hmmmm....

TOP scientists!

"The science is settled" & "I believe in the science" are catchphrases trotted out to prove one's feelings about AGW have virtue.

IMO - all they really show is how gullible you are - or maybe something worse.


..... Phil


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

Phil Allison wrote:

"The science is settled" & "I believe in the science" are
catchphrases trotted out to prove one's feelings about AGW have
virtue.

"I believe in science" is a useful phrase because it marks the people
who wouldn't know science if it fell on them.

So does "the science is settled" to a lesser degree.

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

Winfield Hill wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

I didn't know you had to be a scientist to determine that. But it was a
lab if a food market is a lab.

Amazing how ancient people in the middle east figured out that some
things are not safe to eat and the Chinese still haven't.

 

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 3:06:35 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say


--
Thanks,
- Win

Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.

ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.

Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.

There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.

The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.


Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[John Robertson]

On 2020/04/18 1:50 p.m., Winfield Hill wrote:

whit3rd wrote...

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

You should re-read the material. Here's one statement:
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."

https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1

That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."

Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."

The fact that this and SARS both appeared in November (2002 and 2019) is
interesting.

Any meteor showers that peak at that time of the year? Mostly the Leonid
occur at that time. Perhaps someone has some time to poke around
archives a bit to see if any other disease outbreaks happened after
meteor showers.

So I did a brief search and found this scientist who proposes more or
less exactly that:

https://profchandra.org/

Didn't recall seeing any mention of him before. I also see that Fred
Hoyle and Prof Chandra had written a book on the subject...

Perhaps other scientists will look into this without preconceptions and
either refute it or endorse the theory as needing more attention.

John

 

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 4:50:44 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill wrote:

whit3rd wrote...

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

You should re-read the material. Here's one statement:
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."

https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1

But that's a profoundly unscientific statement on its face -- who
cares whether it's a "virus backbone" previously used in Western
research? How would that prevent anyone who wanted to, at any time,
from acquiring a sample and studying it? And how does this individual
purport to know the particulars of every virus and viral experiment
in all the world's labs?

It's a preposterous statement. Further, who cares? That he's not
aware of anyone using it before, does not mean Wuhan virologists
could not have collected it, collected then modified it, or even
synthesized it.

I'm not arguing for any theory. But these are thoroughly unscientific
rebuttals.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[whit3rd]

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 1:38:59 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:

The problem now is too little observation, too little reliable data,
and too many opinions and simulations that are having gigantic
consequences.

Nonsense, as usual. You've also said there's too much news coverage.
We have a pandemic on a globe with 7.8 billion inhabitants
and you pronounce a finding of 'too many opinions'?

> The follow-up books, a year or so from now, will be fun.

Oh, you have some supporting data and a good model that predicts that?
Me, I'm predicting a practical vaccine for 'a year or so from now'. That's
my idea of fun.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-04-18 16:13, whit3rd wrote:

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.

What do you mean "we", paleface?

The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's normal,
and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school science
education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science. The
resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

Dream on. You should see some of the dreck I get sent to peer-review.
Thirty years of watching the average quality go straight into the tank
would probably cure even you of that Pollyanna view of science you keep
trotting out.

It's a great pity, but 21st Century science has fallen a long way from
the 20th Century.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-04-18 16:50, Winfield Hill wrote:

whit3rd wrote...

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

You should re-read the material. Here's one statement:
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."

https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1

That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."

Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."

Funny how having several colleagues get disappeared for saying otherwise
will do that.

Cheers

Phil


--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com