UJ's Hamster Died. We're All That's Left...
https://www.ujrefugees.net/
Lay out your case that this was a human created virus.Charliesheen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:19 pm I suppose it’s possible a virus could construct itself exactly like it was modified in a lab. There’s a first time for everything.
The genome sequence literally violates the laws of physics by having four amino acid parts having a positive charge. The original corona virus did indeed come from a bat but it was then spliced and engineered.spudoc wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:24 pmLay out your case that this was a human created virus.Charliesheen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:19 pm I suppose it’s possible a virus could construct itself exactly like it was modified in a lab. There’s a first time for everything.
The left likes the way we’ve become similar to the CCP, with official, govt approved facts that are defended by the press. Remember when the socials were criticized by leftists when they bowed to China and created censors within China? Now they literally applaud the same exact thing here in the US. It’s treasonous and frankly more dangerous to our democracy than a riot with zip ties and Buffalo hornsCharliesheen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:02 pm Why is it the left has to side with our enemies, over and over.
What’s the payoff for protecting the Chi-comma?
Biker wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:57 pmThe genome sequence literally violates the laws of physics by having four amino acid parts having a positive charge. The original corona virus did indeed come from a bat but it was then spliced and engineered.spudoc wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:24 pmLay out your case that this was a human created virus.Charliesheen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:19 pm I suppose it’s possible a virus could construct itself exactly like it was modified in a lab. There’s a first time for everything.
Of course. In fact, the more evidence stacks up, the more insane you would have to be to accept that it came naturally, with the only evidence you can cite is that China and Fauci said so. These progressive cunts are traitorsCharliesheen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:13 pm Keep swinging, comrade. That’s not the only marker signifying lab engineering.
If you read the rest of the article that Stapes posted there is a clear logical reason to ignore the data. The claim that it is impossible to have 4 positive charged amino acids in a row is false.Cassandros wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:39 pmOther than the fact that this information goes against the comfortable narrative you've put so much faith and emotional investment into already...
Is there a logical reason to ignore this data?
To "ignore the data".spudoc wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:12 pmIf you read the rest of the article that Stapes posted there is a clear logical reason to ignore the data. The claim that it is impossible to have 4 positive charged amino acids in a row is false.Cassandros wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:39 pmOther than the fact that this information goes against the comfortable narrative you've put so much faith and emotional investment into already...
Is there a logical reason to ignore this data?
i would say that in the end you will be proven wrong yet again and be crushed but you are a conspiracy nut and no amount of evidence will ever convince you otherwise.Cassandros wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:23 pmTo "ignore the data".spudoc wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:12 pmIf you read the rest of the article that Stapes posted there is a clear logical reason to ignore the data. The claim that it is impossible to have 4 positive charged amino acids in a row is false.Cassandros wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:39 pmOther than the fact that this information goes against the comfortable narrative you've put so much faith and emotional investment into already...
Is there a logical reason to ignore this data?
There's your first problem.
You are so full of stage one (denial) you are willing to find any reason to "ignore the data" and call it "good".
Like I told you before, its going to be rough for you over the next few weeks, lots of denial, anger, bargaining... but if you are honest with yourself, and you stop accepting cherry picked data, you will make through the process and accept that you were betrayed by those you blindly trusted.
Oh, the irony of you simultaneously "ignoring data" and calling me the "conspiracy nut".spudoc wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:33 pmi would say that in the end you will be proven wrong yet again and be crushed but you are a conspiracy nut and no amount of evidence will ever convince you otherwise.Cassandros wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:23 pmTo "ignore the data".spudoc wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:12 pmIf you read the rest of the article that Stapes posted there is a clear logical reason to ignore the data. The claim that it is impossible to have 4 positive charged amino acids in a row is false.Cassandros wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:39 pmOther than the fact that this information goes against the comfortable narrative you've put so much faith and emotional investment into already...
Is there a logical reason to ignore this data?
There's your first problem.
You are so full of stage one (denial) you are willing to find any reason to "ignore the data" and call it "good".
Like I told you before, its going to be rough for you over the next few weeks, lots of denial, anger, bargaining... but if you are honest with yourself, and you stop accepting cherry picked data, you will make through the process and accept that you were betrayed by those you blindly trusted.
From the piece I posted last week.The direct-from-bats thesis is a chimera between the natural emergence and lab escape scenarios. It’s a possibility that can’t be dismissed. But against it are the facts that 1) both SARS2 and RaTG13 seem to have only feeble affinity for bat cells, so one can’t be fully confident that either ever saw the inside of a bat; and 2) the theory is no better than the natural emergence scenario at explaining how SARS2 gained its furin cleavage site, or why the furin cleavage site is determined by human-preferred arginine codons instead of by the bat-preferred codons.
ah. okay, that makes sense. thanks.spudoc wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:28 amHe got an e-mail from a conspiracy nut. It’s not like the guy is a colleague of Fauci’s. He’s a self titled “independent researcher” who has no credentials.
At this point I believe its 50/50 either way. What I DO believe is that it did NOT come from some sleazy-ass wet market like the Chinese said it did. We should be smart enough by now to not believe anything the Chinese say.
50/50? I don’t see any evidence that it came about naturally. The only evidence we have if that is because China and Fauci said soCHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 06, 2021 12:03 pmAt this point I believe its 50/50 either way. What I DO believe is that it did NOT come from some sleazy-ass wet market like the Chinese said it did. We should be smart enough by now to not believe anything the Chinese say.
Stop acting like you understand any of the science.You’ve proven many times over you are no where near that intelligent. You’re just repeating talking points that you found on your favorite conservative news sources.Biker wrote: ↑Sun Jun 06, 2021 2:44 pm50/50? I don’t see any evidence that it came about naturally. The only evidence we have if that is because China and Fauci said soCHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 06, 2021 12:03 pmAt this point I believe its 50/50 either way. What I DO believe is that it did NOT come from some sleazy-ass wet market like the Chinese said it did. We should be smart enough by now to not believe anything the Chinese say.