It’s not an admission that Covid-19 was engineered. It’s an admission that the lab at the epicentre of the outbreak was engineering corona viruses to make them more dangerous.
We absolutely can study viruses without gain of function research. It just takes longer.
No. You cannot reliably study what a virus is capable of without it. All you can do is hope it mutates in a certain way.
If you’re arguing that intelligence agencies are unreliable,
I’m not, I’m arguing that they disagree and the ones who say it is a lab leak say so with low confidence.
why are you linking to a report from an intelligence agency?
I’m not, I’m linking to a New York Times article (hence nytimes.com) about how they disagree and the ones who say it is a lab leak say so with low confidence.
This is something you would have known if you had read the article.
That is not an admission that COVID was engineered. The overwhelming scientific evidence is that it had a natural origin.
https://www.science.org/content/article/evidence-suggests-pandemic-came-nature-not-lab-panel-says
It’s not an admission that Covid-19 was engineered. It’s an admission that the lab at the epicentre of the outbreak was engineering corona viruses to make them more dangerous.
Without data, which China has destroyed, any research such as the paper you cite is working blind. I’m sure natural origin does seem the likely theory given the precedent they cite. But our intelligence agencies are privy to more than guesses.
You cannot study viruses without gain-of-function research.
As for intelligence agencies, you’re incorrect in your assumption- https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/23/us/politics/covid-lab-leak-wuhan-report.html
We absolutely can study viruses without gain of function research. It just takes longer.
If you’re arguing that intelligence agencies are unreliable, why are you linking to a report from an intelligence agency?
No. You cannot reliably study what a virus is capable of without it. All you can do is hope it mutates in a certain way.
I’m not, I’m arguing that they disagree and the ones who say it is a lab leak say so with low confidence.
I’m not, I’m linking to a New York Times article (hence nytimes.com) about how they disagree and the ones who say it is a lab leak say so with low confidence.
This is something you would have known if you had read the article.