dasv

By all means scrutinize claims but claims are not invalidated by attacking the source rather than the claim.

Condescension and sarcasm is ad hominem: "try making an argument"

oh my god. 1. it is a fallacy and 2. it absolutely undermines your counter argument. I have provided links for you to understand the fallacy. It is not my fault if you won't read them. Don't be irrational.

also given that you don't even accept you are continually the fallacies as corner stones of your argument - you are in no position to lecture me on whether or not I should point them out. It's not a magic spell to identify them in another's argument: it's basic analysis.

Why are you so aggressive and condescending? Try not resorting to ad hominem. I have made continual arguments.

that was Chan's claim

meow

YANSS 076 – The Genetic Fallacy We often overestimate and overstate just how much we can learn about a claim based on where that claim originated, and that’s the crux of the genetic fallacy, according to the experts in this…

perhaps another podcast would help your understanding of this point. youarenotsosmart.com/2016/05/19/y...

"The features of the virus are nonsensical series of choices" - the virus literally featured the exact furin cleavage site within the DARPA funding request proposal by the wuhan lab. So no.

no it isn't: it's the genetic fallacy.

only 1 sample was A and that was 6 months after outbreak.

please link evidence.

academic.oup.com/braincomms/a...

some people are still experiencing an auto-immune reaction to the vaccine now. The only thinking preventing it from killing them is blood thinner drugs taken continuously in perpetuity.

yeah I guess subconsciously I've taken an interest in covid origins because of the second/third order effects on me (covid led to pandemic which led to vaccine development which led to vaccine side effects - which led to near death experience)

great time to sell Open AI stock if you are an insider. The benefit of the doubt is being given freely with execution (eventual profitability) an unfalsifiable future side issue.

so far so good - there's a similar problem on the vaccine side. I got VITT which made anti-vaxxers think I was one of them. I went on to have 3 pfizer vaccines after the 1 astrazeneca vaccine that nearly killed me.

Well I am very interested indeed - especially given the impact of covid on my own life, the impact on the globe.

It's not a one-off. There are at least *seven* Barrowman companies with identically named tax haven "shadow companies"

The question is: why?

you are not sure why it matters what the origin of covid was?

OK but I'm just saying the reasons for having a default are based on circumstantial evidence which has been used in this debate as a justification for why the lab leak theory is wrong (the evidence is circumstantial)

Also the lab was only operating at a very low biosafety level - BSL-2 - which is essentially: you wear a hood and there's airflow in the hood. Nowhere near the level needed for such dangerous viruses. And when samples were taken from the wild, they didn't suit up either.

Around that time a military general was sent by the Chinese government to take charge of the lab - which to me sounds suspicious though I agree it's not proof of anything.

One of the problems in proving the lab leak theory is that the database of genetic samples was deleted (I think Q4 2019). So even if there was a sample more closely related than the Laos sample (96% related) it can't be demonstrated: because the data has been deleted/classified.

those are both circumstantial pieces of evidence too. But the lab leak theory has even more circumstantial evidence than the zoonitic origin theory.

Troll. I did provide evidence - you just couldn't be bothered to listen to it or read it. But it's pointless engaging with trolls. The reason I am writing this is not for you but for others who may read this thread. To those people: the account I am replying to is a truly vile human being.

"The systemic increase in AMPARs provides a direct biological explanation for the cognitive symptoms, highlighting a target for potential treatments. For example, drugs that suppress AMPAR activity could be a viable approach to mitigate brain fog."

You couldn't address a single point. Pathetic.

? it's you who is getting blocked, not me.

Again - ad hominem. I love it when people accuse me of being stupid because it's one thing I can guarantee I am not.