The Covid Emergency is Over

[chaos]

That's part of the issue.  There actually was a point in time if you said it came from a lab, you were vilified, demonetized, canceled etc....there are plenty of examples of youtube and such doing this.

And that is just for something completely benign.  It was worse if you questioned the vaccine, provided alternative ideas, challenged efficacy, etc......the whole thing was incompetence at best, nefarious at worst.

The communication from the government was not honest.  It was one option, and one option only.

Revisionist history!!!!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/guy-in-dispute/ar-AA2aOpy9?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=6a8c3b28d6e94aa4a47b81e048ad814a&ei=12

What Fauci did not say was that the study’s lead author, computational biologist Kristian Andersen, had an $8.9 million grant pending with NIH when the paper was submitted, or that Fauci had personally initiated the scientists' examination of the origins question. Nor did Fauci tell reporters that in a Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference with a dozen scientists who studied the virus, a vast majority (10 of the 12) believed it was possible the virus had come from a lab.

Indeed, emails would later show that Andersen — the lead author of the paper — harbored strong suspicions that COVID-19 had emerged from a lab, not a wet market.

“Accidental escape [from a lab] is in fact highly likely — it’s not some fringe theory,” Andersen wrote to colleagues on Slack.

“[The] main thing still in my mind is that the lab escape version of this is so friggin’ likely to have happened,” Andersen wrote in another message to colleagues.

Today, most U.S. agencies, including the CIA, agree with Andersen that COVID-19 probably came from a laboratory in Wuhan.

Yet for years, the public was given a starkly different story: COVID-19 came from a wet market. People who suggested otherwise were not just wrong; they were peddling a racist conspiracy theory.

“We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,” said Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, in February 2020.

[Necrosis]

What is their evidence?

the studies don't corroborate this. Across the world, multiple countries have all done investigations, the data is published and is open source, you can read it.

[Humble Narcissist]

What is their evidence?

the studies don't corroborate this. Across the world, multiple countries have all done investigations, the data is published and is open source, you can read it.

You actually believe their studies after having lived through that?

[chaos]

You actually believe their studies after having lived through that?

At this point, the people that are wrong would have to swallow their pride in order to admit anything other than the "official" story. To accept the fact that there is a possibility the covid came from the lab would be to accept the possibility that they were duped by their "scientific community". That would then require them to question everything about their life and what they've blindly followed. It's a harsh reality once they wake up, if they do.

[Donny]

At this point, the people that are wrong would have to swallow their pride in order to admit anything other than the "official" story. To accept the fact that there is a possibility the covid came from the lab would be to accept the possibility that they were duped by their "scientific community". That would then require them to question everything about their life and what they've blindly followed. It's a harsh reality once they wake up, if they do.

100% as i wrote before a long time ago viruses have been exposed to the public before

[Necrosis]

You actually believe their studies after having lived through that?

The studies were never questionable. There actions may have been but if you look at the data its just giving you facts dude. It's just how it works. You have russia producing the same shit.

[Necrosis]

At this point, the people that are wrong would have to swallow their pride in order to admit anything other than the "official" story. To accept the fact that there is a possibility the covid came from the lab would be to accept the possibility that they were duped by their "scientific community". That would then require them to question everything about their life and what they've blindly followed. It's a harsh reality once they wake up, if they do.

I posted the best study to date which said that lab leak was possible but unlikely do to several factors. No one with a brain would say otherwise. People who are intelligent realize that you can't be certain on these things and should always be open to revision.

Even the scientists are not saying what you think they are saying. You are politicized. Read the actual data, its apolitical.

[chaos]

Behind the curtain talk between scientists = highly likely accidental escape from a lab.
Publicly scientists say = wet market.
Guess which one the morons believe?

LOL

[Grape Ape]

I posted the best study to date which said that lab leak was possible but unlikely do to several factors. No one with a brain would say otherwise. People who are intelligent realize that you can't be certain on these things and should always be open to revision.

Even the scientists are not saying what you think they are saying. You are politicized. Read the actual data, its apolitical.

I cannot say for certain which it was, and neither can anyone else, if if the data points towards a likelier zoonotic origin.

But you cannot argue how one theory was more readily accepted, and those who lobbied for  the other were cancelled, demonetized, fired, ridiculed etc.

This is exact opposite of what is supposed to happen.

[Primemuscle]

Behind the curtain talk between scientists = highly likely accidental escape from a lab.
Publicly scientists say = wet market.
Guess which one the morons believe?

LOL

I am not uninformed or a moron, and I believe both possibilities can be true. People—including scientists—often revise their views when new information comes to light. This is part of learning: there are no absolutes, so conclusions remain evolving and elusive.