Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9046 total)
66 online now:
AnswersInGenitals, dwise1, nwr, PaulK, Percy (Admin), ringo, Tanypteryx (7 members, 59 visitors)
Newest Member: Dade
Post Volume: Total: 887,249 Year: 4,895/14,102 Month: 493/707 Week: 48/176 Day: 11/37 Hour: 0/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   COVID vaccine works - we're saved!
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5999
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 76 of 143 (886094)
05-05-2021 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by anglagard
05-05-2021 4:47 PM


Re: The COVID Genocide Deserves a Name
Oh how I would love for the name Trump Virus, spoken with a hard edge of derision, to become the name used, but, the world has already anointed a name, covid or covid-19. The covid pandemic of 2020

It's already in world-wide use to describe not just the disease but the broad impact on world societies. Humans are rather stubborn when it comes to changing names, and right now this one is so embedded in world culture I don't see this changing anytime soon.

Unfortunately, only buried deep in the details of its history will the story be of the incompetence, the ego, the sheer stupidity, that allowed covid to run rampant over the world. But will not be recognized as genocide in the same league with the Armenian or the Rwandan actions.

The only legacy will be "just friggin' stupid".

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by anglagard, posted 05-05-2021 4:47 PM anglagard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by jar, posted 05-05-2021 6:47 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply
 Message 79 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-05-2021 7:27 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply
 Message 80 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 05-06-2021 3:43 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33413
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


(2)
Message 77 of 143 (886096)
05-05-2021 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by AZPaul3
05-05-2021 6:23 PM


Re: The COVID Genocide Deserves a Name
Also I'm not sure it's fair to label any part the Trump Virus beyond the US. The stupidity was near universal and while all governments were equally stupid in this case the US under Trump was more equal.

My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by AZPaul3, posted 05-05-2021 6:23 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2057
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


(1)
Message 78 of 143 (886098)
05-05-2021 7:24 PM


Trump's virus handling
i am still on some kind of fence wondering if the winds of fortune put the virus, COVID-19, into the end of Trump's only term. imagining the horrors of a 2nd Trump term versus some 578,000 dead? hmmm...still thinking in my best Jack Benny voice.

For certain, if he had come out for masks, and set up a logical plan to deal with it - perhaps used the playbook he was given, then he would have been re-elected. As it was, 74 million STILL voted for him!!!

hmmmmm...still thinking....


"I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside."

- xongsmith, 5.7d


  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2572
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


(6)
Message 79 of 143 (886099)
05-05-2021 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by AZPaul3
05-05-2021 6:23 PM


Re: The COVID Genocide Deserves a Name
Oh how I would love for the name Trump Virus, spoken with a hard edge of derision, to become the name used, but, the world has already anointed a name, covid or covid-19. The covid pandemic of 2020

I agree that we're stuck with the name. In my opinion Greg Abbott and Ron DeSantis and a number of other republican governors should all be tried for premeditated aggravated mass murder. They should all be fed human shit until they die.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by AZPaul3, posted 05-05-2021 6:23 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
AnswersInGenitals
Member
Posts: 628
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.3


(4)
Message 80 of 143 (886115)
05-06-2021 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by AZPaul3
05-05-2021 6:23 PM


Re: The COVID Genocide Deserves a Name
Trump's (in)actions didn't create the virus, but they did cause the virus to produce the pandemic, so the proper name would be the Trumpandemic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by AZPaul3, posted 05-05-2021 6:23 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by xongsmith, posted 05-06-2021 8:46 PM AnswersInGenitals has not yet responded
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 05-06-2021 9:26 PM AnswersInGenitals has not yet responded

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2057
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


(1)
Message 81 of 143 (886134)
05-06-2021 8:46 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by AnswersInGenitals
05-06-2021 3:43 PM


Re: The Trumpandemic
our own AIG suggests:
the Trumpandemic

love it. rolls off the tongue.


"I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside."

- xongsmith, 5.7d


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 05-06-2021 3:43 PM AnswersInGenitals has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20247
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.2


(1)
Message 82 of 143 (886136)
05-06-2021 9:26 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by AnswersInGenitals
05-06-2021 3:43 PM


Re: The COVID Genocide Deserves a Name
Keeping it as two words might work, too, because then it could be combined with other things to his credit like the Trump Insurrection and so forth.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 05-06-2021 3:43 PM AnswersInGenitals has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20247
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 83 of 143 (886821)
06-11-2021 10:22 AM


A Lab Origin for SARS-CoV-2
Was SARS-CoV-2 engineered in a Wuhan lab and then escaped? I believed the experts who last year said that the virus lacked the characteristics of engineered viruses. I was having trouble understanding why this possibility is suddenly receiving serious attention.

The article The origin of COVID: Did people or nature open Pandora’s box at Wuhan? - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists explains all this. Those who claimed lab engineering unlikely or lab escape unlikely had conflicts of interests. There is so much information in that article that I won't attempt to summarize it here except to make two damning points:

  • SARS-CoV-2 is excellent at infecting humans but not bats, making it extremely unlikely that it evolved in bats and then jumped to humans, even in a lab.
  • No SARS-CoV-2 antecedents have been found in the wild.

The article describes the possibility that gain-of-function experiments along with well established knowledge of what mutations increase infectivity created SARS-CoV-2 in a Wuhan lab, and then it escaped. If this proves true then another question is how well the Wuhan researchers understood the lethality of the pathogen they'd created.

--Percy


Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by PaulK, posted 06-11-2021 12:08 PM Percy has responded
 Message 85 by NosyNed, posted 06-11-2021 12:16 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16977
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 84 of 143 (886823)
06-11-2021 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Percy
06-11-2021 10:22 AM


Re: A Lab Origin for SARS-CoV-2
The choice of journal should be a bit of a red flag. It’s not the usual venue for this subject. From my own reading around it seems that the lab leak hypothesis is still unlikely even if it can’t be definitively ruled out.

Orac gives the lab leak hypothesis some Respectful Insolence

Wade’s article is not the first mentioned, but it’s there:

Basically, Wade’s argument seems to be that because a furin cleavage site of this sort hasn’t been seen in SARS-related beta coronaviruses before it must have been engineered. The problem is that such furin cleavage sites are common in a wide variety of viruses, including coronaviruses, and that scientists already had identified plausible mechanisms by which it could have ended up where it did in SARS-CoV2 last year…

More on site


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Percy, posted 06-11-2021 10:22 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Percy, posted 06-12-2021 11:21 AM PaulK has responded

  
NosyNed
Member (Idle past 10 days)
Posts: 8963
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 85 of 143 (886824)
06-11-2021 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Percy
06-11-2021 10:22 AM


Both?
I thought that the SARS-CoV-2 virus had been confirmed ( a year ago) as being similar to bat viri.

Is it possible that the virus did escape from the lab but was zoonotic and being examined in the lab? So the answer is sort of "both".

ABE: Now that I've read the article it does appear that what I say up there is redundant. (blush)

Edited by NosyNed, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Percy, posted 06-11-2021 10:22 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20247
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 86 of 143 (886840)
06-12-2021 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by PaulK
06-11-2021 12:08 PM


Re: A Lab Origin for SARS-CoV-2
PaulK writes:

The choice of journal should be a bit of a red flag.

How is it a red flag to appear in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which has branched out in recent years from its doomsday clock focus to all things of concern to humanity's future. By your criteria, isn't the appearance of the article you cite in Respectful Insolence, a widely respected doctor's blog but still just a blog, much more a red flag?

Nicholas Wade is a respected science writer with stints at Nature, Science and The New York Times. He did write a controversial book a few years ago.

From my own reading around it seems that the lab leak hypothesis is still unlikely even if it can’t be definitively ruled out.

It wasn't the lab leak hypothesis that received the lion's share of public attention. It was the engineered and leaked hypothesis. The possibility of its being engineered received the strongest rebuttals, the core objection being that SARS-CoV-2 possessed none of the characteristic signposts of having been engineered.

While it was also argued last year that a lab leak was extremely unlikely, perfectly following detailed protocols day after day for months and years on end without error or accident or equipment failure or unlikely sequence of events while constantly bringing newbies on board never seemed likely to me. Managers of such labs will of course argue strongly against the possibility of leaks, but I think the reality is that leaks are not an uncommon occurrence. Most viruses under study are not virulent human pathogens, so most leaks have few if any consequences.

Wade’s article is not the first mentioned, but it’s there:
quote:
Basically, Wade’s argument seems to be that because a furin cleavage site of this sort hasn’t been seen in SARS-related beta coronaviruses before it must have been engineered. The problem is that such furin cleavage sites are common in a wide variety of viruses, including coronaviruses, and that scientists already had identified plausible mechanisms by which it could have ended up where it did in SARS-CoV2 last year…

Furin cleavage sites might be common in a wide variety of viruses, but while they do appear in coronaviruses, their frequency cannot accurately be characterized as common. The possibility that the 12-nucleotide insertion appeared naturally cannot be excluded (and Wade says this) but neither can it be considered more likely than engineering, particularly since all attempts to track down natural origins for SARS-CoV-2 have hit dead ends.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Typo.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by PaulK, posted 06-11-2021 12:08 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by PaulK, posted 06-12-2021 11:56 AM Percy has responded
 Message 88 by PaulK, posted 06-12-2021 12:10 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16977
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 87 of 143 (886841)
06-12-2021 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by Percy
06-12-2021 11:21 AM


Re: A Lab Origin for SARS-CoV-2
quote:
How is it a red flag to appear in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which has branched out in recent years from its doomsday clock focus to all things of concern to humanity's future. By your criteria, isn't the appearance of the article you cite in Respectful Insolence, a widely respected doctor's blog but still just a blog, much more a red flag?

Because it’s not a journal with a great deal of expertise in this area.

quote:
By your criteria, isn't the appearance of the article you cite in Respectful Insolence, a widely respected doctor's blog but still just a blog, much more a red flag?

No. Why on earth would it be?

quote:
Nicholas Wade is a respected science writer with stints at Nature, Science and The New York Times. He did write a controversial book a few years ago.

And that makes him an expert on the genetics ? And I note that the controversial book you refer to was noted for getting the science wrong.

quote:
It wasn't the lab leak hypothesis that received the lion's share of public attention. It was the engineered and leaked hypothesis. The possibility of its being engineered received the strongest rebuttals, the core objection being that SARS-CoV-2 possessed none of the characteristic signposts of having been engineered.

Wade does claim that it was engineered.

quote:
Furin cleavage sites might be common in a wide variety of viruses, but while they do appear in coronaviruses, their frequency cannot accurately be characterized as common. The possibility that the 12-nucleotide insertion appeared naturally cannot be excluded (and Wade says this) but neither can it be considered more likely than engineering, particularly since all attempts to track down natural origins for SARS-CoV-2 have hit dead ends.

Even if it’s unusual in coronaviruses that makes it less than good evidence for engineering. I’d also like to know why you feel that engineering is at least as likely as a natural origin, given the weakness of the evidence. Orac points out that tracking down natural sources is not easy, so the failure to do so is not especially strong as an argument either.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Percy, posted 06-12-2021 11:21 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Percy, posted 06-12-2021 1:18 PM PaulK has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16977
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 88 of 143 (886842)
06-12-2021 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Percy
06-12-2021 11:21 AM


Re: A Lab Origin for SARS-CoV-2
To further add, this paper published in Nature states that
It is clear from our analysis that viruses closely related to SARS-CoV-2 have been circulating in horseshoe bats for many decades.
- although these viruses were not known,

This rather emphasises the point that tracking down a natural source is difficult - there are so many viruses in circulation and we only know of a fraction of them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Percy, posted 06-12-2021 11:21 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20247
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 89 of 143 (886846)
06-12-2021 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by PaulK
06-12-2021 11:56 AM


Re: A Lab Origin for SARS-CoV-2
PaulK writes:

quote:
How is it a red flag to appear in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which has branched out in recent years from its doomsday clock focus to all things of concern to humanity's future. By your criteria, isn't the appearance of the article you cite in Respectful Insolence, a widely respected doctor's blog but still just a blog, much more a red flag?

Because it’s not a journal with a great deal of expertise in this area.

quote:
By your criteria, isn't the appearance of the article you cite in Respectful Insolence, a widely respected doctor's blog but still just a blog, much more a red flag?

No. Why on earth would it be?

I was just puzzled by your "judge a book by its cover" criteria, which you still haven't justified or explained.

quote:
Nicholas Wade is a respected science writer with stints at Nature, Science and The New York Times. He did write a controversial book a few years ago.

And that makes him an expert on the genetics ? And I note that the controversial book you refer to was noted for getting the science wrong.

It's far more nuanced than that, plus you're engaging in the poisoning the well fallacy: "He was wrong about this, so therefore we can conclude he's also wrong about that without considering it on the merits."

The reality is that he was criticized for speculating beyond what the science would support. Wade acknowledges this himself, saying "evidence for his thesis is 'nearly nonexistent.'" (A Troublesome Inheritance - Wikipedia) Attempts to connect I.Q. to race are a lightning rod for criticism, as Charles Murray discovered years ago with The Bell Curve. I think most critics within the scientific community experienced moral repugnance first and tried to find things to criticize second.

It is also speculating beyond what the science supports to claim there is no connection between I.Q. and race. Most attempts to settle the issue either way founder upon cultural, social, educational, geographic and environmental differences. The idea feels racist to me and so I reject it, but I have to concede the issue is not a settled one scientifically.

quote:
It wasn't the lab leak hypothesis that received the lion's share of public attention. It was the engineered and leaked hypothesis. The possibility of its being engineered received the strongest rebuttals, the core objection being that SARS-CoV-2 possessed none of the characteristic signposts of having been engineered.

Wade does claim that it was engineered.

His claim is more nuanced than that. He feels it more likely it was engineered and escaped than that it evolved in the wild and either migrated to humans from there or was gathered from bat caves by researchers and then escaped by infecting one or more researchers.

Furin cleavage sites might be common in a wide variety of viruses, but while they do appear in coronaviruses, their frequency cannot accurately be characterized as common. The possibility that the 12-nucleotide insertion appeared naturally cannot be excluded (and Wade says this) but neither can it be considered more likely than engineering, particularly since all attempts to track down natural origins for SARS-CoV-2 have hit dead ends.

Even if it’s unusual in coronaviruses that makes it less than good evidence for engineering.

How do you reach that conclusion?

I’d also like to know why you feel that engineering is at least as likely as a natural origin, given the weakness of the evidence.

I haven't reached any conclusions myself, but why do you think the evidence weak?

Orac points out that tracking down natural sources is not easy, so the failure to do so is not especially strong as an argument either.

The longer we go without finding the natural origin the more likely some other origin becomes. And this is just one of many arguments. I only mentioned two in my post.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by PaulK, posted 06-12-2021 11:56 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by PaulK, posted 06-12-2021 1:42 PM Percy has responded
 Message 91 by nwr, posted 06-12-2021 5:45 PM Percy has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16977
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 90 of 143 (886847)
06-12-2021 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Percy
06-12-2021 1:18 PM


Re: A Lab Origin for SARS-CoV-2
quote:
I was just puzzled by your "judge a book by its cover" criteria, which you still haven't justified or explained.

It’s not about judging a book by it’s cover it’s simply a concern that the choice of venue indicates that the article might not have had sufficient review.

quote:
It's far more nuanced than that, plus you're engaging in the poisoning the well fallacy: "He was wrong about this, so therefore we can conclude he's also wrong about that without considering it on the merits."

Wrong again. It’s that we can’t consider him a reliable authority.

quote:
The reality is that he was criticized for speculating beyond what the science would support. Wade acknowledges this himself, saying "evidence for his thesis is 'nearly nonexistent.'

Really? This is what the scientists said:

As discussed by Dobbs and many others, Wade juxtaposes an incomplete and inaccurate account of our research on human genetic differences with speculation that recent natural selection has led to worldwide differences in I.Q. test results, political institutions and economic development. We reject Wade’s implication that our findings substantiate his guesswork. They do not.

Presenting an “incomplete and inaccurate account” is more than simply speculating beyond the evidence. 139 scientists signed that letter and another 4 added their names after publication.

quote:
How do you reach that conclusion?

The only thing that makes the furin cleavage special is that it increases infectivity in humans - but we’re only looking that this virus because it is highly infectious in humans. So an unusual but known feature - with a plausible natural origin - isn’t exactly strong evidence. Surely we’d expect something of the sort.

quote:
I haven't reached any conclusions myself, but why do you think the evidence weak?

I’ve explained about the furin cleavage above, and I’ve pointed out that we don’t have a strong expectation of finding the natural source. But apparently you won’t explain why you think that the evidence makes a lab release as likely as a natural origin.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Percy, posted 06-12-2021 1:18 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Percy, posted 06-12-2021 5:55 PM PaulK has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021