In March 2020, the science community went all in on claiming that there was no evidence that the dreaded Covid19 virus was created in a lab - that instead it was natural.

This was a relief for the Chinese who were absolved of any wrong-doing. Since Trump had suggested the virus was Wuhan lab creation, it was a relief also for those who reflexively assumed whatever Trump said was wrong.

A high profile paper published in Nature Magazine wrote: “Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus,”. The paper was used to 'disprove' the lab leak claims by social media censors to suppress any claims that it was a lab leak.

In recent days, its been revealed that the authors themselves didn't believe their paper. Writing privately to co-authors, the paper's lead author wrote "“[The] main thing still in my mind is that the lab escape version of this is so friggin’ likely to have happened because they were already doing this type of work and the molecular data is fully consistent with that scenario,”. Other authors wrote in similar terms.

So why lie? Dr Fauci, the head of the US NIH, had already begun moves to push the anti-lab leak claims. NIH had been funding research at the Wuhan Lab. It seems from research done by Senator Rand Paul, that this funding was illegal. Hence Fauci's desire to kill any implication that the lab was involved.

It also seems that these lying authors were on the brink of getting a $8.9 million grant from NIH, pending Fauci's approval. (As they say, follow the money).

There are now growing calls from high profile institutions and scientists for the paper to be withdrawn.

The lab leaked theory was called a right-wing conspiracy theory. Trump was pilloried. Other scientists were ostracised and censored.

It now seems they were right. The dreaded virus was designed in a Chinese lab. The only outstanding issue now is whether it was released accidentally or on purpose.

As with the claims about the vaccine, we were lied to.

Taken from the BBC:

"Given the massive human toll of the pandemic with the
recorder deaths of about 6.9 million people worldwide -
most scientists think understanding how and where the
virus originated is crucial to prevent it happening again."

Prof. Dale Fisher, of Singapore National University
Hospital told the BBC that:

"We do need to be a bit patient, but we also need to be
diplomatic. We can't do this without support from China.
It needs to be a no-blame environment."

There's more at:

http://bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57268111

Dear mhaze,

You claim: "It now seems they were right."

Rubbish.

And old news.

The discussion between the authors were before they had completed their analysis and should be taken in the context 'until we know more everything is on the table'.

Ultimately the lab developed theory, based on their analysis, could not be sustained.

"The features in SARS-CoV-2 that initially suggested possible engineering were identified in related coronaviruses, meaning that features that initially looked unusual to us weren’t.

Many of these analyses were completed in a matter of days, while we worked around the clock, which allowed us to reject our preliminary hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 might have been engineered, while other “lab”-based scenarios were still on the table.

Yet more extensive analyses, significant additional data and thorough investigations to compare genomic diversity more broadly across coronaviruses led to the peer-reviewed study published in Nature Medicine. For example, we looked at data from coronaviruses found in other species, such as bats and pangolins, which demonstrated that the features that first appeared unique to SARS-CoV-2 were in fact found in other, related viruses.

Overall, this is a textbook example of the scientific method where a preliminary hypothesis is rejected in favor of a competing hypothesis after more data become available and analyses are completed."

Facts be damned, eh?

The paper was offered for publication in mid-Feb 2020. The conversations between the papers authors where they acknowledged that it was more likely to have been a lab leak took place between January 30 and Feb 28 of that year.

"Richard H. Ebright, the Board of Governors Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Rutgers University, said " “Newly released messages from the authors show they did not believe the conclusions of the paper and show the paper is the product of scientific fraud and scientific misconduct.” Repeat" "scientific fraud and scientific misconduct.”

" “In fact there is no evidence for either of these conclusions, and the email and Slack messages among the authors show that they knew at the time that this was the case.” Harrison.

A petition is circulating to force a retraction of the paper.

Even if what SR says is true, that new information supersedes the findings in the paper, then retraction would be called for. But alas.

And even if all that is true, it would expose how fraught it is that social media fascists like Facebook would censor contrary views based on what is now known to be wrong. Yet as Foxy has shown elsewhere, the global warming cult is trying to censor contrary views in those same social pages based on uncertain data.

Fascism is the collaboration between government and big business to run the nation. We are closer to that than is comfortable.

Dear mhaze,

Wrong again. What Foxy is trying to show on another
discussion is that misinformation about climate change
continues to try to influence decision makers and
members of the public, including misinformation
disseminated on social media platforms.

Facts be damned eh?