News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by brendoelfrendo on Friday September 24, 2021 @08:41PM (#28649342)
I've never heard of peakprosperity.com, but it seems to be a site geared towards preppers/libertarians/those who are already predisposed to a lack of institutional trust. You can claim he's data driven and level headed, but the context that he's operating in--and the audience that he's speaking to--tells me that he's probably not being unbiased in his analysis.
Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by sjwalter on Friday September 24, 2021 @09:06PM (#28649453)
Eh, regardless of what you think of the source, it's backed by hard, verifiable evidence.

Peak Prosperity was not about prepping much at all until Covid, as far as I know. Dr. Martenson started pushing home gardening and stocking up when covid hit--in fact, he started saying such things in like February 2020--pretty prescient.

Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by theduder99 on Friday September 24, 2021 @08:57PM (#28649419)
please send me some good sites which produce unbiased analysis, thanks.
Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by brendoelfrendo on Friday September 24, 2021 @09:02PM (#28649440)
That's not my job, sorry.
Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by abnry on Friday September 24, 2021 @09:28PM (#28649597)
It's easy to be a critic.
Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by dylan604 on Friday September 24, 2021 @10:00PM (#28649777)
Sometimes, an issue needs to be called out even if you don't have the solution.
Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by teh_klev on Friday September 24, 2021 @09:42PM (#28649670)
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You can't hide behind the "go and look it up" response as is often uttered by science deniers.
Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by brendoelfrendo on Friday September 24, 2021 @09:43PM (#28649684)
The extraordinary claim is that the virus was man-made.

Edit to say: I don't think saying the virus came from nature requires any additional proof. The claim that requires extraordinary, indisputable proof is the claim that it was man-made. And I have yet to see it, from this or any source. Just a big compilation of weak, circumstantial evidence.

Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by willupowers on Friday September 24, 2021 @11:53PM (#28650358)
It's no longer an extraordinary circumstantial claim. It might never have been because this kind of research that very well could cause a COVID pandemic was being concealed by the very people that decided very early that there was no question the origin was natural. They were performing risky and highly similar research and they made huge contradictory statements that conflict with this leaked evidence, and they are very well connected to each other. You are going to need extraordinary reasons why these people don't deserve an investigation into what they had been doing and what they did know that wasn't being shared.
[dead]
Re:Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research by avionicsguy on Saturday September 25, 2021 @02:39AM (#28651011)
Well while this is not indisputable proof there is a very relevant discussion on virological.org related to both Furin cleavage sites and orgins of SARS-COV-2. The damning part of the leaked research proposal is that they ALREADY had partner researchers located near caves in three different parts of Yunnan Province.

For a more detailed discussion of the origins of SARS-COV-2 while not directly addressing the leaked DARPA proposal please see: https://virological.org/t/tackling-rumors-of-a-suspicious-or...

They also discuss that the base virus was mostly likely linked to bats in Yunnan province. How it got from Yunnan to Wuhan is a matter of question.

However, if the research was being conducted in the US and accidentally leaked into the population it may have been in circulation for sometime (months) before causing serious illness or disease (mutations).