You could always ignore my post (like you did crushes) and it diesYou could always start an appropriate off-topic thread about the search warrant.
You could always ignore my post (like you did crushes) and it diesYou could always start an appropriate off-topic thread about the search warrant.
Trying to find excuses for your laziness?You could always ignore my post (like you did crushes) and it dies
You love me. We all know it. Hugs and kisses. You can’t give me up. I’m like candy.Trying to find excuses for your laziness?
Don't flatter yourself. Your ego makes you an easy target.You love me. We all know it. Hugs and kisses. You can’t give me up. I’m like candy.
Love you too! .Don't flatter yourself. Your ego makes you an easy target.
They have a search warrant issued by a Federal Judge. That means the FBI/DOJ swore an affidavit that there was probable cause of finding evidence of a crime.
Oh, look - another trumpy surfaces. I guess stressful times bring out people's true characters.Oh man
Did the the FBI pinky swear as well?
Did this reach the highest levels of the FBI and DOJ?
never heard this before
Oh, look - another trumpy surfaces. I guess stressful times bring out people's true characters.
So you admit you won't make an effort to save democracy.hey man , we can’t all be saving democracy like you
So you admit you won't make an effort to save democracy.
Why the Chair of the Lancet’s COVID-19 Commission Thinks The US Government Is Preventing a Real Investigation Into the Pandemic
Prof. Jeffrey Sachs says he is “pretty convinced [COVID-19] came out of US lab biotechnology” and warns that there is dangerous virus research taking place without public oversight.www.currentaffairs.org
Putting yourself on equal terms with crush isn’t a good look for you. But it might help martyr your cause with the trump brigade.You could always ignore my post (like you did crushes) and it dies
Brutal.Why the Chair of the Lancet’s COVID-19 Commission Thinks The US Government Is Preventing a Real Investigation Into the Pandemic
Prof. Jeffrey Sachs says he is “pretty convinced [COVID-19] came out of US lab biotechnology” and warns that there is dangerous virus research taking place without public oversight.www.currentaffairs.org
In the big picture of the path our country takes, the source of the virus is much, much less important than the public trust of all the scientists, reporters, agencies, and organizations involved in the process of determining what happened. One real conspiracy/coverup undermines trust immensely. One real event such as this spawns many more that are based on nothing and get their credibility simply due to the lack of trust in these experts and organizations.Sachs lays out his argument more completely here.
ttps://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2202769119
He is absolutely correct IMO in calling for openness in the funding history between American and Chinese coronavirus researchers. Completely reasonable. Although, if you've ever read through one of these funding applications, short of them saying "lets change the genome backbone we've been working with for 10 years to this new thing" I doubt it would produce anything definitive.
The problem with Sachs IMO is that, although he nuances it in academic speak, he basically accuses this guy, Daszak, along with his Chinese collaborators of engineering Cov2. It's really quite specific. Sachs initially appointed Daszak as head of his much heralded Lancet origins committee. Tensions within the committee have been well described. Some of Sachs' points-like the "what about the three deleted genome sequences" have turned out to be mostly duds (when you delete something from the internet it's never really gone). And the read he places on the FOIA material liberated by the Intercept-once you actually read it-doesn't really mesh well with what he takes it to mean. Sachs always comes back to is the furrin cleavage site as evidence of engineering, specifically Daszak/EcoAlliance engineering. Yet it is now clear that these cleavage sites (which potentiate activation of the spike protein for infection) are widespread in naturally occurring Cviruses. In the PNAS article I linked at the top in the sequence line up for his Figure 1 he only adds the SARS Cov2 FCS to make it appear that the FCS is completely unique. That's disingenuous and Sachs knows it, or should know it. So he loses some credibility for me.
Manmade construction of this virus is definitely possible. History is important so might as well keep looking for that evidence, since at this point nothing else will be dispositive. It will have to be a genome signature, document, or some IC evidence. Links are below. "h" cut off to kill annoying hyperlinks since most won't care but it's something i've been looking at for some time.
ttps://www.science.org/content/article/fights-over-confidentiality-pledge-and-conflicts-interest-tore-apart-covid-19-origin-probe
ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Daszak
ttps://theintercept.com/2021/09/06/new-details-emerge-about-coronavirus-research-at-chinese-lab/
ttps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/deleted-coronavirus-genome-sequences-trigger-scientific-intrigue/
ttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1873506120304165
Unless your last name is Clinton.Mishandling classified info is a serious federal crime.
Or ComeyUnless your last name is Clinton.
I take it you only own gas cars.No, its like Biden telling us to go buy electric cars. Maybe a great idea, but not practical or feasible.
It doesn't speak very highly of the scientific community if opinion can be shaped by the personal differences between scientists. It's very troubling in fact. Will Sachs be disciplined or censured for publicly stating certain falsehoods, or disingenuous opinion? It seems particularly critical in Sach'sSachs lays out his argument more completely here.
ttps://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2202769119
He is absolutely correct IMO in calling for openness in the funding history between American and Chinese coronavirus researchers. Completely reasonable. Although, if you've ever read through one of these funding applications, short of them saying "lets change the genome backbone we've been working with for 10 years to this new thing" I doubt it would produce anything definitive.
The problem with Sachs IMO is that, although he nuances it in academic speak, he basically accuses this guy, Daszak, along with his Chinese collaborators of engineering Cov2. It's really quite specific. Sachs initially appointed Daszak as head of his much heralded Lancet origins committee. Tensions within the committee have been well described. Some of Sachs' points-like the "what about the three deleted genome sequences" have turned out to be mostly duds (when you delete something from the internet it's never really gone). And the read he places on the FOIA material liberated by the Intercept-once you actually read it-doesn't really mesh well with what he takes it to mean. Sachs always comes back to is the furrin cleavage site as evidence of engineering, specifically Daszak/EcoAlliance engineering. Yet it is now clear that these cleavage sites (which potentiate activation of the spike protein for infection) are widespread in naturally occurring Cviruses. In the PNAS article I linked at the top in the sequence line up for his Figure 1 he only adds the SARS Cov2 FCS to make it appear that the FCS is completely unique. That's disingenuous and Sachs knows it, or should know it. So he loses some credibility for me.
Manmade construction of this virus is definitely possible. History is important so might as well keep looking for that evidence, since at this point nothing else will be dispositive. It will have to be a genome signature, document, or some IC evidence. Links are below. "h" cut off to kill annoying hyperlinks since most won't care but it's something i've been looking at for some time.
ttps://www.science.org/content/article/fights-over-confidentiality-pledge-and-conflicts-interest-tore-apart-covid-19-origin-probe
ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Daszak
ttps://theintercept.com/2021/09/06/new-details-emerge-about-coronavirus-research-at-chinese-lab/
ttps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/deleted-coronavirus-genome-sequences-trigger-scientific-intrigue/
ttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1873506120304165
They are certainly feasible for the bulk of SoCal short-commute driving. If you are planning a trip to Mammoth, the closest bet would be a hybrid that can charge its own batteries.No, its like Biden telling us to go buy electric cars. Maybe a great idea, but not practical or feasible.