
Unusual Features of SARS-CoV-2 Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification - milquetoastaf
https://zenodo.org/record/4028830#.X19xByXZglR
======
anonymousisme
This paper seems credible, and there is a lot of other evidence showing that
the CCP/PLA was doing genetic modification on coronaviri. So if we assume that
the paper is correct, we must next consider whether or not the SARS-Cov2 virus
was accidentally or deliberately released. If the release was accidental, the
PRC has taken extreme measures to create disinformation and hide the truth.
They didn't do that the last time they had a similar accident. If I go any
further with this line of reasoning, others will likely call me a conspiracy
theorist, so I will stop now.

------
hazbot
By my reading, the authors say this was done with subterfuge to try and hide
who did it.

It probably is possible to come to a solid conclusion about whether the virus
was engineered or not by looking at the genome (I certainly don't have the
technical skills to judge this article).

But assuming it was indeed engineered, determining intention (e.g. made to
look like it was not engineered, or obfuscating who engineered it) is another
level of extraordinary. There would be so many ways to misread the data as
evidence of subterfuge, when maybe what you're seeing is just how they routed
around technical problems.

------
mc32
Apparently some actors don’t like the publicity and zenodo was hacked after
publishing the preprint...

------
jdhn
Very interesting, I hope that this paper gets peer reviewed so we can
determine if the whole manmade hypothesis is real or not.

~~~
svrb
According to the abstract,

> The alternative theory that the virus may have come from a research
> laboratory is, however, strictly censored on peer-reviewed scientific
> journals.

Therefore it's unlikely that this paper will be peer-reviewed. And who would
be willing to risk their career to go against the consensus (or dogma?) which
has already emerged? Certainly if it were peer-reviewed, the only ones willing
to do so could only damage its credibility by their status.

~~~
biscottigelato
Maybe even more troubling than the potential that the virus is engineered.
It's that why are American institutions trying to limit distribution on a
scientific literature just because of the literature's implications?
Chilling...

~~~
37ruudueuej
I doubt the implications are a primary motivator considering the US has been
increasingly distancing itself from China anyway. Considering the makeup of
academics it seems a lot more likely that you simply don't get to support
republican affiliated talking points without having enough clout to survive a
credibility attack.

Even if your evidence and procedures are correct you'll still be accused of
something vague and indefensible like racism because your observations are
somehow at fault for contributing to racist attitudes. As long as Social
Justice, and by extension so social politics, focuses on belligerantly
attacking any potential for dissent the situation is only going to gravitate
more towards voluntary censorship.

------
ColanR
It's too bad this got flagged. I would have liked to see more discussion about
it.

------
JPLeRouzic
The authors wrote they work at:

 _" Rule of Law Society & Rule of Law Foundation, New York, NY, USA."_

~~~
Tehchops
The premise of being against the injustices present in China seems innocuous
enough, but it absolutely calls in to question the objectivity of this study.

That being said, if you're against injustice and corrupt government, and you
have Steven Bannon speak at one of your gatherings...

It calls _everything about your organization_ into question...

~~~
biscottigelato
Science was supposed to be about objectivity. Not who published it or how it
was funded... Had to question whether I'm living in the 1600s or 2020...

