Thereby demonstrating, once more, that the
so-called "conspiracy theorists" are more reliable than the
mainstream media narrative. It will be interesting to learn why this paper is
now being permitted to see the light of day, in that we'd heard about these
unnatural "fingerprints" last year. Perhaps there is simply too much
evidence for it to be credibly denied, or perhaps the failure of the mass
mRNA-modification program needs a new narrative.
And the US government helped fund its development:
While analyzing COVID-19 samples last year in an attempt to create a vaccine, Dalgleish and Sørensen discovered 'unique fingerprints' in the virus that they say could only have arisen from manipulation in a laboratory. They said they tried to publish their findings but were rejected by major scientific journals which were at the time resolute that the virus jumped naturally from bats or other animals to humans.
Even when former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove spoke out publicly saying the scientists' theory should be investigated, the idea was dismissed as 'fake news.'
Over a year later, leading academics, politicians and the media finally flipped, and have begun to contemplate the possibility that COVID-19 escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China - a lab where experiments included manipulating viruses to increase their infectiousness in order to study their potential effects on humans.
This week, President Joe Biden ordered the intelligence community to re-examine how the virus originated, including the lab accident theory. The announcement followed the revelation that a previously undisclosed intelligence report had been made to the White House, claiming that several researchers at the Wuhan institute were hospitalized with illness in November 2019. The document was uncovered this week by the Wall Street Journal.
US health officials have also come under fire for allegedly funding researchers' controversial and risky experiments at the Wuhan lab.
Now, Dalgleish and Sørensen have authored a new study, which concludes that 'SARS-Coronavirus-2 has no credible natural ancestor' and that it is 'beyond reasonable doubt' that the virus was created through 'laboratory manipulation'.
In the 22-page paper which is set to be published in the scientific journal Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery, the scientists describe their months-long 'forensic analysis', looking back at experiments done at the Wuhan lab between 2002 and 2019.
Digging through archives of journals and databases, Dalgleish and Sørensen pieced together how Chinese scientists, some working in concert with American universities, allegedly built the tools to create the coronavirus. Much of the work was centered around controversial 'Gain of Function' research – temporarily outlawed in the US under the Obama administration.
Gain of Function involves tweaking naturally occurring viruses to make them more infectious, so that they can replicate in human cells in a lab, allowing the virus's potential effect on humans to be studied and better understood.
Dalgleish and Sørensen claim that scientists working on Gain of Function projects took a natural coronavirus 'backbone' found in Chinese cave bats and spliced onto it a new 'spike', turning it into the deadly and highly transmissible SARS-Cov-2.
One tell-tale sign of alleged manipulation the two men highlighted was a row of four amino acids they found on the SARS-Cov-2 spike.
In an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, Sørensen said the amino acids all have a positive charge, which cause the virus to tightly cling to the negatively charged parts of human cells like a magnet, and so become more infectious. But because, like magnets, the positively charged amino acids repel each other, it is rare to find even three in a row in naturally occurring organisms, while four in a row is 'extremely unlikely,' the scientist said.
'The laws of physics mean that you cannot have four positively charged amino acids in a row. The only way you can get this is if you artificially manufacture it,' Dalgleish told DailyMail.com.
Their new paper says these features of SARS-Cov-2 are 'unique fingerprints' which are 'indicative of purposive manipulation', and that 'the likelihood of it being the result of natural processes is very small.'
Thereby demonstrating, once more, that the so-called "conspiracy theorists" are more reliable than the mainstream media narrative. It will be interesting to learn why this paper is now being permitted to see the light of day, in that we'd heard about these unnatural "fingerprints" last year. Perhaps there is simply too much evidence for it to be credibly denied, or perhaps the failure of the mass mRNA-modification program needs a new narrative.
UPDATE: Karl Denninger has more than a few questions about this belated mainstream acknowledgement of what has long been obvious too:
Don't get me wrong -- China's involvement should certainly be investigated as proposed. But we cannot exclude US actors; Anthony Fauci, for example, who early on slammed Trump for suggesting that the virus had originated in the Wuhan lab, stating in public that was impossible when he, personally, knew damn well that the NIH had provided grant money to Peter Dazak's EcoHealth and they published results of laboratory work at Wuhan that, by any reasonable definition, was in fact gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses including enhancing their infectivity in humanized mice.
Peter gave a video interview where he described grafting spike protein enhancements onto bat coronaviruses for research purposes, and the work was being done at the Wuhan lab.
Not just Fauci either -- there are many people who were almost-certainly involved in this at the NIH including Fauci's wife who presumably had to sign off on the Bioethics aspects as she runs that department.
I look forward to Twitter and Facebook restoring all of those accounts they banned for prematurely mentioning the truth about Corona-chan... that seems likely, right? And they're totally going to ban all those mainstream accounts that perpetrated the Fake News, right?
http://voxday.blogspot.com/
