Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, September 16, 2020

Scientists in a new paper make strong claims regarding evidence that the COVID-19 virus did not originate in nature"the prevailing theory"but instead was made in a lab. According to six leading experts in evolutionary biology and infectious disease consulted by Newsweek, the paper offers no new information, makes numerous unsubstantiated claims and its scientific case is weak.

"This pre-print report cannot be given any credibility in its current form," says Andrew Preston, an expert in microbial pathogenesis at the University of Bath in the U.K.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

It was pointed out numerous times that this is a straw man.

No scientist has been able to rule out that the virus was collected in nature and then modified in a lab.

#1 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-09-17 02:15 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

What Sentinel just said.

#2 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2020-09-17 05:48 AM | Reply

"No scientist has been able to rule out that the virus was collected in nature and then modified in a lab."

What's your "rule out" P-Value, at a minimum?

What's your proposed mechanism of action of modification, next?

You know what, forget those questions.

If you're trying to paint a picture where China attacked the USA with a bioweapon, go right ahead.

I'd love to hear how China did this, and why the USA's massive death toll isn't Trump's fault.

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-09-17 05:52 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

No scientist has been able to rule out that the virus was collected in nature and then modified in a lab.
#1 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

That's what the pre-print claims. I read it last night.

The evidence is based entirely on cherry picked features within the genome that the authors claim are proof of genetic manipulation while weakly waving away alternative explanations such as convergent evolution.

#4 | Posted by jpw at 2020-09-17 09:25 AM | Reply

Trumpettes/GOP, people who are too stupid to understand that mandatory masking requirements stop the spread of an airborne virus, believe that they can spot markers of genetic engineering.

#5 | Posted by censored at 2020-09-17 09:39 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

What Sentinel just said.

Are you sure you want to be on that side, Doc?

#6 | Posted by YAV at 2020-09-17 10:02 AM | Reply

The article was interesting.
The comment section was filled with cries of "kill me I'm just too stupid to live."

#7 | Posted by YAV at 2020-09-17 10:09 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

... the paper offers no new information, makes numerous unsubstantiated claims and its scientific case is weak. ...

So, then... the Republicans jumped on it and have been propagating the conclusions of the paper?

#8 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-09-17 10:55 AM | Reply

No scientist has been able to rule out that the virus was collected in nature and then modified in a lab.
#1 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

Define "modified".

#9 | Posted by jpw at 2020-09-17 11:17 AM | Reply

What struck me most about the pre-print was the overt political tones in the writing. Right off the bat they take a stance of being suppressed and censored, despite the fact that there are thousands of journals out there, many of which are very unscrupulous and will publish most anything sent to them.

Not to mention they immediately discount information based on additional pre-prints written by others in their group as "evidence" that the information is fraudulent.

The entire thing is a fraudulent pile of circular nonsense drummed up by Steve Bannon.

#10 | Posted by jpw at 2020-09-17 11:19 AM | Reply

"Define "modified"."

Why are you acting like Snoofy here? You already know there are types of modifications done in labs which are basically controlled and "sped up" versions of evolution that occur in nature.

#11 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-09-17 12:49 PM | Reply

#11 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

I'm trying to see what your thoughts are.

I know what modified can mean and I know what the "Chinese virologists" claim when they say modified.

#12 | Posted by jpw at 2020-09-17 01:25 PM | Reply

"Why are you acting like Snoofy here?"

Just answer the questions.

Most of all, answer this question:

How do you rate Trump's performance when it comes to protecting America from the Chinese bioterrorism attack?

#13 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-09-17 06:53 PM | Reply

"How do you rate Trump's performance"

Very poor.

#14 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-09-18 04:59 PM | Reply

So why support him and vote for him?

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-09-18 05:10 PM | Reply

#15

Easy. AR-15 and SCOTUS.

#16 | Posted by willowby at 2020-09-18 05:15 PM | Reply

Easy. AR-15 and SCOTUS.

#16 | POSTED BY WILLOWBY

So you'll sell the country down river for a gun and to force your twisted worldview on us?

Tell me, willoby, why Trump then? You would have gotten both of those with any of the GOP candidates in 2016 and you would get those with any new GOP candidate in 2020.

I've never had it explained to me by a Trumper why they claim such mundane GOP policies drive their Trump cult status while requiring it to come from a non-GOP, toxic ------- who's clearly governing out of selfishness, greed and ego.

#17 | Posted by jpw at 2020-09-18 05:43 PM | Reply

"So you'll sell the country down river for a gun and to force your twisted worldview on us?"

Of course they will, JPW.

"Maybe you do not care much about the future of the Republican Party. You should. Conservatives will always be with us. If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. The will reject democracy."
David Frum, Trumpocracy: The Corruption of the American Republic

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-09-18 05:50 PM | Reply

Keep suckin' that straw man. It's funny how idiots politicize this, both by linking anyone who disagrees with their view with alleged support for Trump, and also by shamelessly putting forth a view that's analogous to claiming man-made climate change does not exist.

#19 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-09-18 06:01 PM | Reply

If you support Trump, you support global warming is a hoax.
And you also support trees spontaneously combusting, which is contradictory in its own right.
Almost like the trees are proving the Democrat Hoax is real.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-09-18 06:05 PM | Reply

and also by shamelessly putting forth a view that's analogous to claiming man-made climate change does not exist.

#19 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

Who did that?

#21 | Posted by jpw at 2020-09-18 06:12 PM | Reply

"Who did that?"

The article posted is pure political propaganda intended to paint such a picture about this topic. Even several of the comments on Newsweek's site skewer it for its unscientific hypocrisy.

#22 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-09-19 11:03 AM | Reply

"The comment section was filled with cries of "kill me I'm just too stupid to live.""

Kind of like your user page?

I didn't read all the comments, but there are many valid points including that this went beyond skepticism or scientific refutation and crossed the line into being a hit piece.

#23 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-09-19 11:11 AM | Reply

Newsweek isn't a scientific publication.
What they did report from the paper was accurate, though.
I've been following this virologist's -------- from when Steve Bannon found her and interviewed her months ago.
The whole thing is --------.

But to your point, if you're not aware of her, what's been found regarding SARS-CoV-2, the genome, then you can argue a nit here or a nit there. Her premise, however, is such a huge reach as to be ridiculous.

#24 | Posted by YAV at 2020-09-19 11:18 AM | Reply

"I've been following this virologist's -------- from when Steve Bannon found her and interviewed her months ago."

The article is not about Bannon's or Yan's claims or personal views. Those are just mentioned in passing as a pretext for a broader attack against any consideration of the proposition that it "originated" in a lab (i.e. could have been experimented on in a lab and made more deadly or infectious before it was transmitted (accidentally or otherwise) to humans outside the lab).

#25 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-09-19 12:18 PM | Reply

Do some research if you care this much. In fact, why haven't you? All you've done is say "oh Newsweek bad. They didn't repudiate these nonsensical "findings" with serious scientific data!" As if you'd care.

The entire paper is garbage, and the motivation of every single player from Bannon to Dr. Yan is so ridiculously transparent I'm surprised even you missed it.

You wouldn't have heard of this had it not been for Bannon or this Dr. and her colleagues that are playing right into the "blame China" game Bannon and Trump want played.

Morons getting played and loving it. Ain't America Great, Again.

#26 | Posted by YAV at 2020-09-19 01:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Easy. AR-15 and SCOTUS.
#16 | POSTED BY WILLOWBY

Bullshht.

At this point. The only reason to vote for Trump is you support fascism.

Your justifications are weak.

You're a fkkking Nazi. With a red hat on instead of a swastika

#27 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-09-19 02:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The article posted is pure political propaganda intended to paint such a picture about this topic. Even several of the comments on Newsweek's site skewer it for its unscientific hypocrisy.

#22 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

First, it has actual scientists commenting on the poor science. It's not political at all.

Second, Newsweek isn't a science magazine so not sure how you get the hypocrisy angle here...

#28 | Posted by jpw at 2020-09-19 02:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The article is not about Bannon's or Yan's claims or personal views. Those are just mentioned in passing as a pretext for a broader attack against any consideration of the proposition that it "originated" in a lab (i.e. could have been experimented on in a lab and made more deadly or infectious before it was transmitted (accidentally or otherwise) to humans outside the lab).
#25 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

Her association with Bannon and his Chinese expat agitator are absolutely relevant to the conversation.

And you don't need a pretext to disregard what she says. It's laughably bad and not even science.

#29 | Posted by jpw at 2020-09-19 03:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort