A letter from Rhino Times reader Austin Morris
For those of us who could think for ourselves it was always preposterous.
A Chinese street market that had existed for over a century suddenly and spontaneously produced a novel and virulent virus that had never been seen before. This venerable and unremarkable open market was a quarter mile from China’s primary biological research and warfare laboratory, the Wuhan Institute of Virology. And we were expected to believe that this was a coincidence. It didn’t even pass the straight face test.
Those of us who rejected the propaganda of our media who peddled the lie that COVID 19 was a zoonotic disease arising naturally from bats were ridiculed and stigmatized as conspiracy theorists, nutters, and “Far Right”. I know, I was one of them.
But in an interview with New York Times journalist Ross Douthat, the current Director of the NIH Jay Bhattacharya now confirms that the Lab Leak Theory is almost certainly correct. The National Institute of Health boss states that it’s “pretty close to certain” that the pandemic originated with a leak from the Wuhan lab.
So all us right wing nut jobs and conspiracy theorists were right, the media engaged in wholesale deception, and the lily livered, gullible liberals swallowed it hook, line and sinker.
“What’s the difference between a conspiracy theory and reality? Around a couple of years.”
Dare to think for yourself.
– Austin Morris
Thank you Austin. I couldn’t have said it better by the way doesn’t it seem odd that the little rat faced turd Fauci hasn’t been seen or heard from in quite a while
———–
Rand Paul wants to have him charged for lying to Congress, and I agree.
It’s called retirement. He is 85 years old.
So that means he was 80-81 at the time Covid was released. He should have already been retired. He was a puppet for the administration and was trying to cover his butt as well Obama’s administration
You do know he served under Trump right? And technically he was 79 when covid first popped up I think which is Trump’s current age. You do see the contradiction there yeah?
But you be you.
Contradiction What contradiction
You state Fauci was too old to lead at 80 and yet that is Trump’s age. Is Drowsy Donny too old to lead?
Not shocked given that many in this administration are anti-science propogandists that openly deny science in support of things like anti-vax, anti-climate change, anti-green energy, false statements about food and nutrition, etc….. So clearly not shocked that they are now giving a bigger voice to the unproven lab leak theory….which is certainly viable but not proven and ignores all the evidence that points to the open markets as the more probable source (but also not definitive).
As for Austin claiming critical thinkers would not believe that covid arose from open air markets clearly ignore history as there are numerous similar examples. SARS-CoV outbreak that is very similar example as it arose from live animal markets in Guangdon Province, China. Another similar example is MERS that arose from camel markets and racing circuits in the Middle East. Also, there are the Avian Influenzas from the poultry markets in Southeast Asia.
The truth, which Austin doesn’t point out is that there is no evidence firmly supporting either theory. NIH’s official stance remains that evidence leans toward a natural zoonotic origin although that evidence is not sufficient to be definitive. Time will tells if jay is able to change this mindset within the agency.
Jay supporting the lab leak theory is not new, it’s just now that we have a conspiracy minded administration that ignores science to promote anti-science conspiracy theories his voice has been promoted by a group that has no concern for lying to the American people. Reminder, Trump’s own words…..”smart people don’t like me”.
Best wishes.
The difference between past flu outbreaks and Covid is that Anthony Fauci knew the open air markets were not the cause of Covid from the beginning, as did others. We will never know the truth behind this world changing event. Hopefully one possible outcome is that people around the world will no longer trust governments and will use their own discernment before falling for lies meant to control. One question that I have wondered about but have found no answer is the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill’s involvement in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Chapel Hill is much closer than Wuhan China.
————
And they were in it… deep.
Another conspiracy theory to feed the hate to provide a target for all the awfulness of the pandemic. Here is my conspiracy theory…..yes I am guilty of having my own…. Conservative leaders want you to distrust government, so they feed you lies and propaganda. That way they can convince you to falsely believe that turning government services over to their ‘wealthy friends so they can profit off government contracts with little to no concern if they actually improve services for the better. Because we all know that the only priority for business is profit, which is fine but not ideal for public services.
But go ahead and chase your windmill. I will chase mine. I get it.
As for Chapel Hill, a lot of research centers around the world partnered with Wuhan Labs as it was long recognized as one of the most significant institutions in global virology, particularly regarding the study of emerging infectious diseases and coronaviruses. But once the MAGA crowd targeted it as the cause of their suffering they didn’t care about facts for the complexity of the science involved. They just wanted a bad guy. Facts and evidence be damned. It made them (you) feel better, I get it. Toss in the chaos of watching the science evolve live as data was gathered and evolved and knowledge of virus evolved and the advice changed accordingly was just too much for the MAGA mind to handle. Next thing you know they a taking dewormer, talking about bleach and using UV lights etc….. Was crazy to watch.
Real question though….so what if the origin came from a lab leak. Are you claiming (without proof) that that was intentional and Fauci was behind it or a fault? What basis do you have for that belief?
Best wishes.
For the purposes of this after-the-leak discussion, it does not matter if the leak was intentional or not. What matters is how it was handled worldwide by governments. There had been past flue epidemics, (Hong Kong Flue in 1968) yet people went to work, went to church, shopped, and went on with their daily lives. At the time, our government made pronouncements about washing hands, covering a cough, and other helpful ideas to curb the spread. But no one complained about the name being racist, schools were not shutdown, life went on as normal; to do otherwise would be considered absurd. The number of American deaths attributed to the Hong Flu was around 35,000, and unlike Covid the number of deaths reported was the direct result of the 1968 flu. Covid numbers were inflated and misrepresented for the purposes of control and money. God only knows how the number of death certificates reporting Covid as the cause will be interpreted in the future. The handling of Covid by governments, including lies told, will remain a black spot in history.
What is fascinating to me is the approach Americans took regarding the Hong Kong Flue. It was viewed as part of life, something to be dealt with, and deal with it, they did. Our society has changed since 1968, and not for the better. But that is a discussion for a later date.
Interesting claim. Hong Kong flu was before my time and frankly had never heard of it so had to look up the figures. I don’t think you are making a fair comparison….but first you claim that covid deaths were inflated…
I have heard the claim that covid deaths was inflated but no evidence of this at all except that it had a much higher death rate of older people. The claim that people with heart disease for example, shouldn’t be counted as ‘covid death’ is even though they died while infected with covid is absurd. It is as easy to just acknowledge that if a person didn’t have Covid they would have lived longer than if they hadn’t had covid so YES, covid was the cause of death. You will have to make a stronger case that most conspiracy theorist tend to try to make on this subject.
To add facts to your claim that shows it isn’t an honest comparison: The Hong Kong Flu was considered a ‘mild’ pandemic by experts (often called the ‘wimpy pandemic’. Its death rate was only slightly higher than a severe seasonal flu. In contracts, COVID-19’s early variants were estimated to 3x to 10x more lethal than the 1968 virus depending of which variant was being measured. Kinda makes sense we don’t hear of the Hong Kong Flu pandemic often and why COVID was most commonly compared to the Spanish Flu epidemic.
Best wishes
Bro, Anti-Climate Change is because it’s exaggerated by the popular media; man-made effects are only a small percentage of the actual effects of climate change.
Science strongly disagrees with. If interested I can provide plenty of example of peer reviewed studies or at a minimum well written articles regarding the studies.
Do you have any peer reviewed studies to back up your point of view? It is indeed often stated by non-climate scientists (known collectively as climate deniers). Many have large followings on YouTube. But that doesn’t make the valid sources. It just makes this propogandists of misinformation. Most do it just for the attention. Seem like you have been suckered in by them. Too bad.
Best wishes.
p.s. Let me know if you would like to solid materials to prove your statement inaccurate.
One of my more interesting jobs as an officer in the US Army Reserve was an assignment to the US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine (USARIEM) at Natick Labs in MA. I don’t know how long before I was there in the ’80s it was known that the Wuhan Labs were doing “gain of function” research and development, but we sure knew of it then. Historically, at the end of WW2, the Chinese Communist government took over the facilities and materials of Japanese Unit 731 that had operated in China doing bioweapon research that would have made Dr. Mengele blush. Look it up. We knew decades ago that the Chicoms were light years ahead of both the US and then Soviet Union in bioweapon research.
———
Thanks for that insight, and I believe you. The Chinese are among the more intelligent races and they readily see the advantages of biological weapons over conventional weapons.
Years ago there was talk about the advantages of an enhanced radiation nuclear bomb, or Neutron Bomb. It would kill all the people while leaving infrastructure intact. The Chinese were well ahead of us with their research into biological warfare, which does the same thing without the residual radiation.
More of the racist belief from Austin that different races have different intelligence (guess which race he doesn’t believe is one of the more intelligent races). Amazing that he spews the actual foundation of racism as if it were fact and then gets upset, he is labeled a racist.
Thank you for yet another example of your racist point of view.
Racist = a person who believes that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.
————-
Everyone know the Chinese and Japanese are smart. Suck it up, buttercup.
And spare us the smears, asshole.
Just here to point out racism behind your comments as a public service. Happy to help.
But at add facts since you rarely do…..
China has a lower literacy rate than the US although it has recently greatly narrowed. Their rural communities still very much struggle with education. Literacy is particularly challenging in the elderly rural population of China. China has invested heavily in public education as they view literacy a primary pillar of its “national rejuvenation” and military/industrial competitiveness. Their literacy rate was below 60% as recently as the 80s.
Note, none of that has to do with race or genetics. All THAT is related to cultural and governmental policy differences. As is true with all differences in education and overall intelligence indicators between countries. Only racists think it has to do with race and genetics. THAT is proven by actual science, data and peer evaluated studies if you care to read them. Which you made clear you don’t given it doesn’t fit your racist narrative.
Happy to point out the errors in your racist logic. It is my public service.
—————
Oh My God…. “Professor Chris” believes he’s performing a public service by coming here and setting us all straight.
What jaw dropping smugness.
Austin again ducks any statement of fact that counters his racist view. Not shocked.
.
Japan’s Population Average IQ = 106
Somalia’s Population Average IQ = 68
FACT.
Different races DO have different intelligence – even when idiot Pollyanna liberals can’t accept this reality.
PS Does this mean that reality is racist? If so, then racism must be true. Elementary logic.
Again, different cultures have different IQs due to a range of environmental factors such as access to healthy diet, medical care, etc…. But the difference isn’t race or genetics. Any statement of such is just blatant racism by actual definition of racism.
Hint: Japan isn’t a race. Neither is Somalia. Those are countries. Countries that have very different environments with regard to access to healthy diets, education, healthcare, and overall living standards that directly impact the populations IQ and overall mental health and development.
But thank you for sharing your racist ignorance. Happy to correct your racist ignorance any time.
.
No, you are just wrong, as you try to shoehorn reality into your beliefs, instead of drawing your beliefs from reality. Liberals all have a reality perception problem because they see the World as they wish it to be, rather than how it is.
Vastly different IQs of different races is clear proof that some races are more intelligent, and some races are less intelligent. This is obvious.
The odds of all the World’s peoples having evolved to EXACTLY the same level of intelligence is infinitesimal. The suggestion is absurd – like you.
.
Just so we are clear, you are arguing for the justification of racism. Got it.
There are numerous facts to prove you wrong. I will just provide a few of them at this point in time as I am sure you will continue your racist BS and give me ample opportunities to share all the other set of facts that prove your racist view ignorant and pig headed.
The first fact is the ‘Recent African Origin” of Humans Evolutionary speaking, humas are incredibly young and remarkably similar. Most of human history was spent in Africa, and the migration out of Africa occurred relatively recently (roughly 60k to 100k years ago).
In addition, you have the ‘Genetic Bottleneck’ because humans went through a ‘bottleneck’ period where the population was very small so we have less genetic variation than almost any other primate species. Our genetics are 99.9% identical. The Traits we associate with ‘race’ such as skin color, hair texture, eye shape) are ‘surface traits’. They evolved quickly because they were adaptations to local climates (like UV radiation). However, complex systems like the brain involve thousands of genes that are essentially the same across all human populations.
This is all verified by genetic science and well documented and long accepted. Happy to share many other facts but will keep it limited as it has been said her that long responses make conservatives not want to read. LOL
Thanks again for sharing your racism for all to read so i have an opportunity to use real facts versus your ‘I thunk it so it mus be troo’ approach.
.
You have proven nothing with your rambling assertions other than demonstrating your eagerness to smear people who disagree with you.
Your a nasty little fellow, aren’t you?
I actually have. But you be you
I think regional intelligence can be measured by the edifices, real and metaphorical, that are built and left behind by people. Democracy, government, and freedom are examples of metaphorical edifices. Of course, the beautiful buildings found in Western Europe, Greece, the Middle East, China, and Japan are physical edifices. There are others. Using these as examples of intelligence, the examples can be used to determine individual achievements, problem solving ability, motivation to overcome an obstacle, and behavior. All people who exhibited these traits did not remain stagnant but built on past achievements. Chris, you can use these achievements to determine if Austin’s point of view is racist or is rooted in undeniable facts, but facts that you had rather not hear articulated.
Average Intelligence is certainly different across different regions and different regions developed at different paces in early history. Average intelligence continues to be different by region to this day. The lie that Austin is promoting is that this is a result of how genetics evolved differently between races. THIS is the racist lie (hence it is called racism) that is the foundation of all racist views.
The actual reason for differences for how regions developed is due to a range of environmental and geographic issues. The most important was diversity (yup that right…diversity) ….how easy one region had access to trade of goods and knowledge with other evolving civilizations. Europe was famous for its diversity and trade across a wide range of cultures. The other major factor was the environment. Did early cultures have access to large game to raise as domestic food sources versus regions that only had small game that was harder to raise in quantities to feed communities in winters etc…plus diversity of soil for farming etc….
As for differences today, it has more to do with government stability, economic levels etc…that provide for easy accessibility to food, balanced diet, education and time for balance of work life and rest.
Science has long ago proven that there is no statistical difference of IQ by race. Frankly race is NOT a biological characteristic to begin with from a genetic perspective, but I understand that may be too complex for someone like Austin to understand.
Happy to recommend some good sources on this topic that Austin openly refused to read because ‘he thunk it so it mus be too’ is all he needs to support his racism.
Best wishes.
.
No, you’re just a pompous ass who peddles his faux erudition here to impress himself. But you’re just spreading BS in purple prose.
I am just sharing facts and all you do you repeat your ignorance of you personal disbelief that humans evolved similar genetics for intelligence around the world because ‘you thunk it so it must be troo’ approach versus actually researching and learning.
You have anything else other than your personal ignorance to share in defense of racism?
.
But they’re not facts. Professor Chris thinks that if he asserts something a priori then it must be a “fact”. This issue is not settled and is often termed “nature vs nurture”. Pompous Chris takes the side of nurture, which is fair enough, but his claim to present his side as “the facts” is specious, unfounded, and arrogant.
In brief, the nurture crowd are liberals who cannot emotionally accept that people of different races possess different levels of intelligence (despite all the evidence).
But then, that’s the defining characteristic of liberals. They have a profound reality perception problem.
Chris, I love that you mix in intentional misspellings to make conservatives seem dumb, while your same post is rife with your own unintentional typos. So dumb.
Typos don’t change the fact that Austin and Al have been claiming is classic Racist BS and that they have no response to the clear facts that prove them wrong other than….Na Uh,
LOL
Austin,
Thank you for pointing those things out. Pay no attention to those that appear to be crying conspiracy theorist. The ignorant tend to intentionally ignore that which challenges their beliefs.
And to those, don’t waste your time posting all those internet links. For every one out there there is another to counter it. Half of them are BS.
.
Thanks Patrick. You’re right that anyone on either side can conjure up “studies” to prove that the Moon is made of green cheese, or whatever.
No they can’t. For a study to be accepted it has to be peer reviewed. This is the typical lie conspiracy theorists tell you when data and analysis within an accepted study doesn’t say what they want it say.
Key is that conspiracies are not always wrong. It’s that they are accepted as fact before there is any valid evidence proving it as fact. Of course, people supporting conspiracies also tend to ignore or claim false any data or evidence that doesn’t fit their narrative.
Real critical thinkers actually DO pay attention to claims of conspiracy, so they don’t get sucked into a world such as the anti-vax community that ignores valid scientific studies and chooses to listen to non-scientific explanations that point only to correlation without any valid linkage to causation for example.
Or you could just go full flat earth stupid. It is only a step away from folks like anti-vaxers.
But you be you.
Hold on Chris. First off, Austin is clearly using hyperbole, which you never seem to understand. Secondly, you cannot have it both ways. You specifically pointed to a non-peer reviewed study to try to prove your point about racist hiring practices based on names. I called you out on that and magically you never replied. What a hypocrite!
Here’s the Rhino Article: https://www.rhinotimes.com/news/city-launches-its-newest-effort-to-reduce-violence/
Here is the Forbes article you linked to “siting” your study in the comments section of that Rhino article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2024/04/17/new-research-reveals-resumes-with-black-names-experience-bias-in-the-hiring-process/
Here is the actual “study” which is just a working paper, not a peer reviewed article: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w32313/w32313.pdf
And here is their quote on their very first page, which you apparently never actually bothered to read: “NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications”.
You are hypocritical and a joke, but please continue to post and then run and hide. It’s a pleasure to call you out every time.
LOL are we now claiming Austin doesn’t mean what he says? Like MAGA claims Trump isn’t a moron for claiming to have reduced drug prices by 1500%. LOL. Sorry but both these guys believe their BS.
That aside……Did I claim it was a completed peer review study. Nope.
Do you know what a working paper is? It is a paper that is currently being peer reviewed which can take over a year or two to complete as the feedback loops can be slow at times. I am supportive of any study that the authors are mature enought to submit for peer review and will support it until someone gives a valid reason not to accept the findings. Are you still claiming that racism doesn’t continue to impact minorities in the US today?
How many studies do you want me to send you….here a few more.
Healthcare: https://www.ama-assn.org/public-health/health-equity/reducing-disparities-health-care
Housing Discrimination: https://nlihc.org/resource/large-national-study-finds-widespread-housing-discrimination
Wages: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2024-04/Labor_Market_Policies_for_Racial_Equity.pdf
Crime and Justice: https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2022/02/examining-systemic-racism-advancing-racial-equity
If you have a study (or working paper lol) that has statistically valid data showing that racism doesn’t exist, please share it here…..I would be interested to give it a read.
—————
ZING… !
Thanks, Don.
Yes, I am pretty sure he was not literally arguing for papers espousing the moon’s cheese content.
If you bothered to read and respond to my comment on the name/racism topic in the article where you tried to argue that point, you would have already seen and had a chance to respond to my arguments. Feel free to go find it. Also feel free to actually read the working paper, which you have not done and I have.
I do in fact know what a working paper is, dummy. It is almost any research paper that is not yet peer reviewed or approved….AS THEY STATED IN THEIR OWN PAPER. So, it is literally almost any paper being circulated for discussion or review. They have no merit on their face, which is why they get reviewed. That is all it means. (See their own quote that I included in my comment above. And here it is again for you: “They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors…”) And that was an early 2024 paper, and here we are in 2026 and it’s still not approved. It’s a trash paper.
And you appear to be moving the goal posts yet again, instead of just admitting you are wrong. Chris on 2/4/26: “For a study to be accepted it has to be peer reviewed.” Chris on 2/6/26, paraphrasing, a working paper is also fine because I need it to be, so I don’t have to admit I was wrong. (No, you did not say it was peer reviewed, but you tried to use it as a study that we should accept, which is the opposite of what you just said on 2/4.)
Hypocrisy and Idiocy in one.
Working papers absolutely have merit. They are actively being peer reviewed versus say climate deniers writing a paper and NOT submitting for peer review because they know they lack the data, method and analysis to support their anti-science view. The paper I provide has indeed been peer reviewed just not fully completed by all that the journal requested review from when the paper was submitted.
I had hoped you were above the standard conservative bs that twists around itself to try and discredit actual science. You also don’t provide any counter evidence to support your premise that racism doesn’t still impact minorities. Yet another sign you are full of it.
Wil continue waiting for you to provide any analysis that proves racism doesn’t exist and still impact minority communities. But don’t worry I am not holding my breath.
Just because a paper is being submitted for review does not give it any merit whatsoever. Austin’s Green Cheese in the Moon paper could be nonsensical, but he could still submit it for peer review. Doesn’t make it a good paper. Doesn’t mean it has substantive content, nor does the act of being reviewed mean it has such content. It is only after the review is complete and the paper has received general approval that you can start to refer to it as having scientific merit. Go back to school and stop relying on AI, bro.
Instead of trying to prove racism at every turn and being a perpetual victim, how about you just live your life. We’ve had black president for gosh sakes. Most of city government is black, the city manager is black, the county manager is black. Countless successful businesses are run by black men and women. Yeah, there is racism in the world, more so than in America, but we have it here too. But if there were a system in place to keep the black man down, there would not be so many successful black people. I might even be one of them. You just never know. Anyway Dummy, you cannot have it both ways.
A paper submitted for peer review absolutely does give it merit as a credible source pending unless the peer review warrants a retraction.
But fine, you want to discount it fine, I have you several links to studies showing proof of how racism continues to negatively impact minorities communities in the US today.
I also, noticed that YOU have NOT shared any valid studies that show that racism isn’t impacting minority communities. Easy to be a critic….go ahead make your case using valid sources over than your own personal opinion that lacks any data, studies, analysis, peer reviewed sources, etc….
So what evidence do you have that racism isn’t impacting minorities to this day?
Chris,
“For a study to be accepted it has to be peer reviewed.”
Peer: a person of the same rank or class as another (Mirriam-Webster dictionary)
…a person who is equal to another in age, social status, rank, or profession. They are essentially individuals who share similar backgrounds, experiences, or abilities, often acting as colleagues, associates, or companions. (AI Overview)
Who decides who is their “peer”? (I already know you believe you have none, but I digress) I can go out and find any number of ‘peers’ to substantiate what I spout off about.
I’ve been in a few situations where my ‘peers’ said it couldn’t/wouldn’t happen or work and then proved them wrong.
Note Chris, I said “a few””, not all, which you will attempt to argue accusing me of being unrealistic. But then how can I argue with one who has such a litany of All Encompassing Knowledge as you. (Believe anyway)
Yes. If you won’t submit a paper to be peer reviewed it isn’t a study. It’s just opinion. Working papers ARE peered reviewed. The process just isn’t completed.
Here is a simple article on how peer review works. https://undsci.berkeley.edu/understanding-science-101/how-science-works/scrutinizing-science-peer-review/
Comparing the scientific peer review process to your friends is interesting. For example, if you friends are professional carpenters and they advise that the way you are building your deck won’t work, or isn’t to code, etc… You should listen to them….that is close comparison to peer review.
BUT, if your friends are just some guys who know what a deck typically looks like, take their advice with a grain of salt. Maybe use it to double check your work at most.
In the case of climate science for example, there are a number of people who have become famous / popular critics of climate science even though they themselves are NOT climate scientists. Take their opinion with a grain of salt. They might well be asking good questions of the science, but more times than not, their / challenges questions have answers, but the climate denier is ignoring them because they are pushing an agenda that gets them attention.
At the same time….remember that 9 out of 10 doctors recommend florid toothpaste. There are always outliers. Hence peer review requires a group of specialists to review and endorse for a study to be consider valid science. If a qualified peer says it won’t work, it is only to encourage you to check and defend your work. This happens in scientific peers reviews all the time. It’s why it is the gold standard for validating scientific findings.
The process isn’t perfect as some scientists have bene caught faking data, etc…. It’s also why for something to become considered scientific fact, the study has to be replicated as well as validated by peer review – or tested in real word observations which is often the ideal standard in things like astrophysics.
It is a very high standard. Sad that so many conservatives ignore it…. because some guy on YouTube made a compelling (and incomplete) argument because it gets them attention even though obviously lack any qualifications on the subject.
Happy to discuss more. It is a fun and important topic in today’s world where the internet is full of opinions. Not all of them are valid though popular.
Best wishes.
There are only two things wrong with Chris’s comments.
1. They are too long.
2. They aren’t worth reading.
————
Ain’t that the truth, Wayne. What a bore – and as if that isn’t enough he lies so chronically that you can’t believe anything he says.
Only a conservative would find facts boring. I get it. It doesn’t fit your narrative of a quick finger pointing exercise as the truth is always more complicated than the propaganda. It explains a lot. It really does.
Best wishes.
.
Nope.
The truth is that the obviously man-made virus leaked from the Wuhan lab. Simple.
The propaganda twisted itself into pretzels with fabrications like bats from 600 miles away, sinister “wet markets”, and pulp fiction fantasies of some new devastating animal disease that hopped to humans. Laughable !
Both theories remain unproven. It is fine to ‘believe’ in one of the theories more than the other but to claim it as fact with either theory having definitive evidence is classic conspiracy theorist move.
The other trick of a propagandist like Al is to create a strawman that is clearly inaccurate or excludes the more nuanced truth. They do this as a mean to deflect from potential validity of a counter point of view in hopes of suckering you in to believing their theory as fact.
The theory is not about bats 600 miles away. Al is skipping (or doesn’t take the time to understand) that these types of cases involve intermediaries that bats typically infect such as pangolins, raccoon dogs, and civets. It is from those animals that the virus is transferred to humans. There are numerous validated examples of this happening with other viruses. Another key fact Al hopes you will ignore as he incorrectly promotes his belief as fact.
Ignore the conspiracy theorist pushing their narrative as fact. Look for people who use words like ‘most likely’, ‘I believe’, or ‘potentially’ they are acknowledging at a minimum that their belief lacks definitive proof and that there are potentially other viable alternatives to their belief. THOSE are the people you should listen and learn from before going down the rabbit hole of conspiracy theorists.
But you be you.
Yet this is what has happened a number of times in the recent past with other viruses. Why do you discount that fact?
Notice how they ignore you Bob. That is the trick with conspiracy theorists. They ignore any counter argument or they claim fake news, or just saying ‘Na Uh’ and repeat their narrow biased and incomplete view.
But keep pushing back with facts. More people need to step up and challenge those that push misinformation.
.
Okay, I’ll address the minor issue of the likelihood of animal diseases transferring to humans, which was only one example of the complexity of the peddled propaganda.
Yes, this can happen, but it’s very rare.
Happy now, Bobby & Chrissy? Do you both think you scored a point? You’re both pathetic.
Do you even try to research a topic before posting a comment?
Virus transfer from animals to humans, known as zoonotic spillover, is actually very common and represents over 60% of all known human infectious diseases. Approximately 75% of new or emerging infectious diseases in humans originate from animals.
Try Again but your ‘I thunk it so it mus be troo’ approach is really awful.
A few other facts on the topic I found interesting:
– High Prevalence: More than 6 out of 10 known infectious diseases in people can be spread from animals.
– Emerging Threats: Three out of four new or emerging infectious diseases in people come from animals, such as SARS-CoV-2, Ebola, and avian flu.
– Frequency: While the existence of zoonotic diseases is high, the specific moment a virus jumps from a wild animal to a human is a complex event that requires close interaction, often due to urbanization, habitat loss, or wildlife trade.
– Two-Way Traffic: Contrary to popular belief, a 2024 study found that humans actually pass twice as many viruses to animals (anthroponosis) as animals pass to humans.
– Dead-End Hosts: Frequently, when a virus jumps to a human, the human becomes a “dead-end host,” meaning the virus cannot easily spread to other humans and the infection dies out.
When you present ALL the facts we wouldn’t find it boring. Until then, yes, I do find you boring.
Oh Alan. Am glad you are back posting. Missed you.
Are just making another hollow claim in a weak form of an opinion or do you have other facts to include to the conversation?
What?
From the from Oxford Languages dictionary: “a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.”
What makes an opinion “weak” aside from disagreeing with you? You make no sense with that babbling statement aside from trying to further inflate your already overinflated ego and feeling of intelligence.
But hey, you be you.
Two signs of a weak opinion:
1) It is stated with no facts, data, or valid sources to support or back up the idea being presented. Many times a weak opinion is stated with no supporting justification.
2) The person giving refuses to address any challenges being asked or counter alternatives and just attacks the person questioning the opinion with personal attacks and childish name calling. (This is Austin’s go to strategy)
So, for example, you statement in reply to my comment you say “When you present ALL the facts we wouldn’t find it boring.” You have presented no fact about what facts I have excluded so your opinion is weak and specifically hollow. Which is your typical go to strategy for criticizing democrats.
So yes Alan, an opinion doesn’t require facts to be an opinion, as a weak opinion is still an opinion. Follow? Really, it’s not complicated but good on your for trying.
Best wishes.
LOL, classic sign of willful ignorance. Too much to read. LMAO
Fauci was protecting his turf, and his pocketbook, but one main culprit who seems to have skated judicial scrutiny was UNC’s Ralph Baric.
How was he profiting from the discussion of Lab Leak versus Organically Created virus?
Some real information on the two theories:
– The Case for the Lab leak:
The Lack of Close Relatives: Covid belongs to a group of viruses called Sarbecorviruses. none of the other hundreds of known viruses in the specific group a what is called a furin cleavage site (a feature of a virus that allows it to jump from animals to humans). Some argue it’s highly unlikely the virus developed this unique feature naturally right as it emerged in a city with a major virology lab
The ‘DEFUSE’ Proposal: 2018 grant proposal (called DEFUSE) was uncovered showing that US and Wuhan had planned to insert novel furin cleavage sites into bat coronaviruses to study their pandemic potential. While the grant was officially rejected, la-leak proponents argue the work may have proceeded anyway.
Condon Usage: The genetic “code” used to create the Furin uses a specific sequence that is rare in coronaviruses but common in lab-engineered sequences.
– The Case for Natural Origin:
Common in Otther Coronaviruses: While not found in Sarbecoviruses, furin cleavage sites are very common in other coronavirus families (like MERS and the common cold). This proves that nature “knows” how to create these sites on its own
The “Messy” Sequence: May virologist argue that if a scientist had engineered the site, they would have made it “perfect.” The Furin in Covid is actually quite “clunky” and suboptimal, which is often a hallmark of messy natural evolution rather than precision engineering.
New Discoveries: Recent studies (2023-2025) have identified other bat coronaviruses in the wild that possesss similar, though not identical, cleavage-like features, suggesting that the ‘jump’ to having a full Furin isn’t as biologically impossible as once thoughts.
Summary:
Lab Leak Supporters say “what are the odds that a virus with a unique feature scientists ‘planned’ to insert just happens to appear in that exact city?”
Natural Origin Supporters say “Viruses evolve new features all the time, and we’ve found evidence that the virus was circulating int he market filled with susceptible animals”
Both make a good case. So anyone who tells you they KNOW are just biased and very selective in what the believe to be true versus speculation. Critical thinking sometimes leads you to the answer of “we don’t KNOW”.
Hope this helps.
Great summary of the differing points of view. Thanks for sharing.
Funny how none of the conspiracy theorists want to discuss the idea that both theories have valid points of view, yet both are unproven. There is always an agenda behind conspiracy theorist’s bias. In this case they want to have someone to blame for all they had to go through with covid. So the Chinese and Fauci are their targets regardless of facts.
Sad really.
Maybe the “agenda” is getting at the truth. Funny how high the number percentage of conspiracy theories turn out to be correct. I prefer to call them spoiler alerts.
Which conspiracy theory came out as fact? Flat Earth? Mass voter fraud? Ivermectin cures covid but access was blocked? Moon landing isn’t real? Immigrants eating pets? Lizard people controlling big government? Pedo ring in the basement of a pizza joint that doesn’t have a basement? 9/11 was an inside job? Trump poops his diapers on live TV? Great replacement theory? School shooting false flags? Boston bombing false flag? “The Great Reset” & Diet Control? Kitty Litter boxes in schools for ‘furries’? Jewish space lazers? 5G Towers killing you? Tracking chips in covid vaccine?
Nope, none of those have been proven true. Which theories are you thinking about?
Funny you don’t give an actual percentage. Is that maybe because you know what percentage of conspiracy theories turn out to be true? Just making up a statement because ‘you thunk it so it mus be troo”?
Supporting any conspiracy as fact without proof is still pure folly, especially when you ignore valid evidence that counters your theory. You can state you believe it but understand you can’t prove it as fact. Big difference versus you are seeing posted her about the Wuhan conspiracy theory, which could potentially be true.
Trump appointed a podcast conspiracy theorist to Head NIL. So why the “breaking news” that he claims to be right?
“Updated at 12:29 p.m. on December 17, 2025”
“When Donald Trump nominated Jay Bhattacharya to be the director of the National Institutes of Health, a shake-up seemed inevitable. Typically, the agency—a $48 billion grant-making institution and the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research—has been led by a medical researcher with extensive administrative experience. Bhattacharya was a health economist without specialized training in infectious disease, who’d come to prominence for his heterodox views on COVID policies and who has criticized the NIH for stifling dissent.“
The Atlantic
Nailed it!! Just another unqualified Trump appointment that would rather promote conspiracy theories than follow the scientific method of data, facts and peer review. Seems like personal loyalty to Trump over truth is all that matters to conservatives.
Another reminder that Trump said “Smart people don’t like me.” Just another great example.
————
He means that college professors on $75,000 a year despise him as he makes $10 Million on a property deal.
Who’s the genius here?
Where is this mentioned and who are you commenting about? I don’t think Ray was mentioning what you think he was commenting about. Weird.
———-
The comment is replying to you, not Ray. Do I have to explain to you how the commenting format at The Rhino works, Einstein?
You have been using it for years, and still don’t understand it.
My God, you’re thick.
No, you just weren’t very clear in your comment. Still have no idea what you are try to say with any clarity. Don’t really care anyway. But I will bite:
Is this about Fauci getting a $5 million dollar book deal? You really don’t offer much insight. But I get some conservatives have noted they don’t like to read lots of words.
Want some grammar to advice from me? When you reply to ‘me’ and you open with ‘he’ why would I think you are address me? Proper linkage to the pronoun in that case, you should have used ‘you’.
Also you don’t establish the identity of ‘him; in your comment. In writing, this is called ‘Ambiguous Pronoun Reference’. In your case, this is referred to as The Ghost Reference given that the pronoun refers to a noun that isn’t included in your comment but is only implied in your head when you wrote the comment.
Funny me having give you grammar advise as it is clearly not a strength of mine. You have to be really daft. LMAO. Next I will have to correct your spelling. Then we will KNOW you have lost it. LMAO
Thanks for the chuckle.
Hilarious
———–
The relative positions of the comments indicate to whom the reply is addressed.
I’m amazed that you’re too stupid to understand this after years of being a tiresome blowhard here.
Don is right – your lack of comprehension is hilarious! You’re a joke.
Shall I type more slowly for you..?
Lol … Austin, nope. I understand you were reply to me but you used the pronoun He so it read as if you referring to the original comment I was committing under.
How about your use of the pronoun that was a ‘Ghost Reference’? Happy to help with more grammar as needed. LMAO
———-
Ray, I would quote The Atlantic if I wanted to preserve my credibility. It’s an unashamedly partisan Leftist organ.
Sorry, that should read that I would NOT quote The Atlantic.
What in that statement was inaccurate? All of it is easily verifiable. Oh right….you don’t actually want people to think for themselves, you want them to think just like you otherwise, you call them names.
Got it.
The absence of a response from Austin says a lot…..he will claim he doesn’t think my question worth responding to as a defense for his inability to point to any error of fact in the Atlantic article quote. That is what conservatives do when the facts don’t fit their narrative, they attack the person or the institution presenting the facts.
Not shocked.
—————
No you’re wrong again.
I’m ignoring you.
Of course.you are…..you hate being proven wrong again and again. Got it.
————
Oh yeah? What have you proven – other than that you’re a petty, anal, argumentative little wanker?
Well, technically, YOU have proven you are a racist. I have just pointed out the facts that make that clear. Happy to help.
———–
I’m not scared of your bogeyman word, buddy. It’s the first resort of intellectually challenged Leftists to resort to the racism trope. It only serves to confirm that they can’t actually debate the issue at hand, and that they prefer to smear people with ad hominem attacks.
You are a good example of the type.
Nope. I use the word racist very carefully but your case you are literally working hard to justify the actual definition of racist by claiming that different races have genetically different level of intelligence in spite of science long ago having debunked such claims.
Would you like more facts that prove your premise wrong and your point of view as nothing but stubborn ignorance. I have several. You have ignored them all of course and just keep repeating your personal inability to understand how humans evolved to have 99.9% of common genetics, specially including intellectual ability.
I can also offer more insight into how your premise is the foundation all of racists points of view and is the actual definition of racism if you like.
Happy to help in your personal growth and development on the subject so you can shake the current accurate label of being a racist.
What I enjoy is the fact that 99.9% of the time, us right wingers are right about the theories that we come to. 0.1% of the time, Democrats may come close to the truth but it’s very rare. We are called every ugly name in the book when we dispute something they want us to believe. But in the end, we are justified for our beliefs. Anybody with any common sense, knew that covid did not come from a market or from bats. We knew that fauci and Obama was funding this research in China. The only possible place that virus could have come from was that lab and I believe that fauci and Obama had it released on purpose. They did it to take control of everybody. It worked for about a year and then it started slapping them in the faces when the truth started coming out. They should take fauci and lock that man up for the rest of his life with Obama for making this happen to the citizens of the USA. They jeopardized our life and every life that was killed because of it is on their shoulders. All the people that died, those two are responsible for their deaths and should have to pay for it.
————-
You’r right, Pat. Your instincts are right on.
Were wrong about mass fraud in 2020 election
Were wrong about immigrants eating people pets in 2024
Will always be wrong about anti-vax conspiracy theories
Will always be wrong about climate change
Easy to ‘believe’ you are right 99.99% of the time if you refuse to ‘believe’ facts, data, and science that don’t support your biased point of view. It’s called willful ignorance. Seems like Pat has a really bad case of it.
Pat showing the classic “I thunk it so it mus be troo” attitude that doesn’t require evidence and openly ignores any evidence that doesn’t support their view. The key phrase of this kind of narrow thinking is “anybody with common sense…” used in the context of a complex scientific problem says all you need to know about this type of thinking.
Sad
.
“Professor Chris” seems to believe that him asserting something makes it true!
What a smug prick.
A quick set of Haikus for you”
Truth stands, firm and cold,
Words twist against what is known,
A lie fights the facts
Facts are hard and cold,
You call them “fake” with a grin,
Creative writing!
Numbers don’t have hearts,
Facts don’t care for your feelings
Truth is a cold fish.
Best wishes
* * *
Chris Rice knows it all,
He expounds all the time.
The guy’s on the ball,
And his mind is “just fine”.
Well that’s what he thinks,
If he says so himself.
But his brain is just mush,
And his intellect stinks.
* * *
Best Wishes.
More childish insults from Austin. Yawn.
————
At least mine rhymes, is original work, and isn’t lifted from the internet.
Tosser.
Off topic but, does this apply to “a man becoming a woman and a woman becoming a man” as well?
Haikus aren’t supposed to rhyme Austin. I would have thought you knew that.
———-
Why do you suppose I was unaware of that? You really do have a reading comprehension problem, don’t you?
I wrote haikus and you get all excited because you wrote a limerick that rhymed as if that was ‘better’. Kinda weird really. But you be you.
you can be critical of me for using a classic haiku if you want…. I am certainly no poet. But weird to critical because they don’t rhyme and your limerick does.
But you be you
Al. He’s a true wanker
————-
So true, Reb !
In fact, as they say in Yorkshire, “He’s right wanker”.
Happy to provide definitive and peer review and accepted studies that prove any of those topics listed above. Bet you can’t do the same for the alternative points of view.
Oh my God……
Typical, no real response but to attack the messenger. Classic move of people who love to spread misinformation.
Chinese citizens operating a mini biological warfare lab in Las Vegas. Reported today.
More misinformation from Al. Not shocked.
While the nature of these labs is highly concerning, current evidence and official investigations suggest they were not “biological weapon labs” in the sense of creating weapons for mass harm. Instead, they appear to have been part of a massive, illegal medical diagnostic fraud scheme.
Can’t wait for the twisting lies AL tries to use to ignore the truth to feed his false narrative so he can fear monger more abkut Chinese labs as if that proves his other lies the the lab leak theory for covid is a prove fact.
Will be fun proving wrong again.
* DEAR READER,
No misinformation, just the truth. Go to Google News and enter “Chinese Bio Lab in Las Vegas”. You’ll see many factual news reports of this discovery.
I don’t deceive. I don’t perpetrate “twisting lies”. I don’t peddle “misinformation”. I don’t try to use others’ comments as an excuse to call them racists, or slander them in any way. And I don’t accuse others of doing any of this – except for Chris, because that’s what he does, all the time.
He’s a odious, unpleasant little man with too much time on his hands. And he lies, just to put other people down.
Chris, one fact about the Chinese bio lab you and Al forgot to mention. The Chinese citizen IS an illegal immigrant that entered the country illegally under the O’ Biden regime. That’s a FACT.
.
Yes Iceman, I’ve since learned that he also owns the house in California that was discovered to be a bio lab in 2023. He was operating under a fake name (“David He”) and part of their work was bioengineering mice to be carriers of pathogens.
And to Chris : I never said that the Covid lab leak was a proven fact, but I understand it’s your M.O. to mis-state what others say, so it’s easier for you to attack them (even if it’s fraudulent).
My God, you are a nasty little creep. Dishonest and sly, too.
I don’t understand the claim….there are over 3 million Chinese immigrants in the US. Which one are you talking about? Clearly not that an illegal immigrant brought covid in the US as a result of Biden’s poorly managed immigration policies given that Covid was first found in the US during Trump’s 1st term.
Need to give a little more info Iceman.
It’s not a bat virus, it’s from snake venom. That’s why monoclonal antibodies cure it 100% of the time. The bat thing was a diversion.