| Just after we thought the question about the origin of coronavirus has been settled, a new study from Norwegian virologist Birger Sørensen is now reigniting the debate about the possible origin of the deadly coronavirus. In a new peer-reviewed paper published together with Professor Angus Dalgleish of St George’s Hospital at the University of London, Sorensen claimed the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is not natural in origin. According to the study, which was published in the Quarterly Review of Biophysics, the authors found that the coronavirus’s spike protein contains sequences that appear to be artificially inserted. “The inserted sequences should never have been published. Had it been today, it would never have happened. It was a big mistake the Chinese made. The inserted sequences have a functionality that we describe. We explain why they are essential. But the Chinese pointed to them first,” Sørensen told the NRK. |
Related
Off Guardian: AUDIO: The Collapse of the COVID-1984 NarrativeDaniele Pizzati: German Official Leaks Ministry of Interior Report Denouncing Corona as ‘A Global False Alarm’
I am actually coming around to the idea that this was supposed to be THE virus, the genetically engineered virus that caries out the Georgia Guidestones/ Agenda 21 agenda and wipes out much of the human population, but it didn't work.
ReplyDeleteThen why the control efforts? Maybe not all the rulers were on board with releasing the virus and started control efforts when it was released. Or it could be that the control efforts were deliberately designed to be intrusive but ineffectual (since real epidemic control efforts would stop all travel, but not interfere much with daily life even in infected areas) to encourage the virus.
Without inside information, there are many more or less plausible theories as to the cause of the current pandemic. Unless there is some epic whistle-blower event, we may never know, which is the correct interpretation. The alternatives are worth reviewing, however, for what they may indicate as to the future course of events.
DeleteAmong the hypotheses that seem reasonable are:
(1) A lab leak. A bug that was being manipulated for some more or less sane and justifiable reason got loose.
(2) A highly infectious but fairly benign virus was deliberately set loose to prepare the world to deal effectively with something much worse, for example, a biowarfare agent designed to kill all those it infects.
(3) As (2) but designed to prove through the effectiveness of China's response, the superiority of Chinese civilization over Western civilization, and to undermine Western economies, thereby facilitating the rise of China to a position of world dominance.
(4) As (2) but intended to rationalize a 1929-style stock market collapse, thereby absolving the current US administration from blame in the run up to the 2020 Presidential election.
(5) A bug designed to take out a certain group of people while leaving everyone else unharmed. For example the elderly might have been targeted. But if so, the effectiveness, although real, was not sufficient to significantly reduce the burden of the unproductive retired population of the developed world. Another target might be a racial group, e.g., sub-Saharan Africans who are responsible for most of the world's population growth. For this, however, there is no evidence apparent. The reported impact of Covid19 on the African states is slight.
(6) ..... There are too many possibilities!!! Maybe others will contribute to the list.
The high infectivity of this corona virus is one of the things fascinating me from the beginning.
ReplyDeleteThere was little doubt the bug was spreading rapidly. (I didn't doubt it anyway, because the sources I considered reliable, e.g. Science, the magazine, characterized it as such.)
What was more difficult to comprehend was the way the infectivity was coupled with low virulence. That linking of high infectivity with low virulence was harder to comprehend, but also obscured by all the "hype" surrounding its deadliness. I put "hype" in quotation marks because I am mainly thinking of the Chinese response, which, if it was hype, was highly effective hype in persuading the world this viral outbreak warranted the most extreme containment measures. I am also thinking of the real event of massive death counts in Lombardy, Italy, which were real in one way and hyped in another. What was behind the death counts was the corona virus but also remarkable circumstances of co-morbidity which were ignored in the original telling of coverage by the MSM.
I think of the Chinese government as competent. The question is, competent to what end? It seems very likely to me the Chinese come out significantly better than the US. This could have been their intention.
I could also see how high infectivity and low virulence serves the intentions of the Chinese, and maybe the global elite in some relationship with the Chinese. The American middle class has been destroyed as a potentially powerful blocking force in American political life. It has been impoverished. It just doesn't know that yet. This has been the coup d'grace of a project at least forty years old. There's going to be some pain, and the newly-formed "mass" is going to say uncle soon enough. It is going to accept the terms presented to it. They are going to look pretty good, anyway, to the people living under overpasses and "autonomous zones" of idiocy. They'll get three hots and a cot, just as in the military. They will be ruthlessly controlled, but with the high tech surveillance which will be used, for the most part this will be invisible and painless. It won't be noticed. Many will shed a few pounds and get some discipline in their lives, and will grumble about it, but even as I see it, this will be "for their own good."
Agree. the outlook for the masses does not seem good. They should just shut up and die, as Kevin Williamson so eloquently explained in the National Review in 1916 -- thereby perhaps materially, if inadvertently, aiding Donald Trump in gaining the Presidency.
DeleteWhat we are likely to see is a redefinition of middle class. There will be the proles, and the techies. The latter will become the real middle class, i.e., a usefully educated class that performs necessary social functions, such as designing executive jets for the elite, writing track and trace software to keep the underclass under, etc.