The Most Strident Denier of Lab Origin of Sars-CoV-2 Privately Believed the Coronavirus was Lab Engineered
July 20 | Posted by mrossol | CDC NIH, Disinformation, Losing Freedom, Pushing Back, Science
As soon as a mysterious pandemic of the novel coronavirus started in 2020, we were told to “trust the science.” Carefully selected representatives of “science” were given prominent platforms, while any dissent was censored.
The scientific establishment insisted, with the appearance of absolute certainty, that Sars-Cov-2 came from nature. Their most important act was publishing the “Proximal Origins” paper in Nature Medicine, written by prominent virologists, that denied any possibility that Sars-Cov-2 was lab-designed.
A recent Substack post sheds light on what went behind the scenes when the above correspondence was written and published. It is long and detailed but contains amazing tidbits.
The authors acquired emails and chats from an invitation-only Slack channel. It turns out that Kristian Andersen, the main author of the Nature Medicine article denying the lab origin of Covid-19, privately believed that Sars-CoV-2 was lab engineered.
Kristian Andersen wrote on Feb 1, 2020:
“I think 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.”
A few weeks before the publication, Andersen explained that Sars-Cov-2 is what the Wuhan lab was working on!
Kristian’s Nature Medicine article stated:
“The presence in pangolins of an RBD [receptor binding domain] very similar to that of SARS-CoV-2 means that we can infer this was also probably in the virus that jumped to humans” [emphasis added].
Two days after its publication, privately, Andersen exposed believing the opposite:
Clearly none of these pangolin sequences was the source though.” And then once again, on February 20, Andersen emphasized. “Unfortunately the pangolins don’t help clarify the story.”
Kristian Andersen misstated his scientific convictions to gain favors from the “higher ups”:
So, the so-called “science” that we were demanded to trust was done by people who privately held beliefs opposite to what they professed publicly. Even the biggest proponent of the natural origin of Sars-Cov-2 believed that it came from a lab.
For more details on how Sars-Cov-2 was developed intentionally and on the extensive preparations for its eventual release, read this:
To Prevent the Next Pandemic, Punish Those Who Started This Pandemic
This post is my attempt to add clarity to some questions surrounding Covid-19. While I hope you will agree with some points I make, I expect many of you will disagree with some of my thoughts. That’s fine! Feel free to share your opinions in the comments.
Other Branches of “Captured Science”?
The virologists in question clearly show that they represent “captured science,” where scientists lie and publish materials contrary to their beliefs to appease their political masters.
Are there other branches of “science” where you, my reader, feel that the writers and publishers may be dishonest?
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.