Is Blablamab Right for You? Ask Your Journalist
Jan 19, 2022 14:20:47 GMT
c2crusher and lookingforatenbagger like this
Post by icemandios on Jan 19, 2022 14:20:47 GMT
COVID Lab-Leak Whitewash Has Been 'The Death Of Science' Says Professor Who Found 'Unique Fingerprints'
Tyler Durden's Photo
BY TYLER DURDEN
TUESDAY, JAN 18, 2022 - 11:10 PM
University of London professor Angus Dalgleish, who co-authored a paper in summer 2020 after spotting "unique fingerprints" in Covid-19 samples that point to genetic manipulation, says that he's been the victim of a "disgusting whitewash," and that anyone suggesting a non-natural origin for Covid-19 has been silenced by peers.
"This goes back to the days of Copernicus and Galileo - it is the death of science," said the oncologist - who in 1984 discovered how HIV enters and kills cells.
Dalgleish's work was roundly rejected by a string of journalists before it was eventually published in a 'watered-down form,' according to the Express.
In February 2020, the Lancet had published a letter that âstrongly condemned conspiracy theoriesâ suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin. This highly influential letter â subsequently cited in thousands of scientific publications â was signed by 27 experts including Wellcome Trust head and former Sage member Sir Jeremy Farrar.
However, it has since emerged that two weeks before the letter was published, Sir Jeremy stated in private emails that some senior scientists believed a âlikely explanationâ was that the virus was man-made. -Express
Indeed, Farrar led a February 1, 2020 teleconference (one day after Farrar emailed Anthony Fauci about a Zero Hedge article suggesting Covid may have come from the Wuhan Institute of Virology) - in which one virologist was "80 percent sure this thing had come out of a lab," with others sharing his view.
Jeremy Farrar
Dalgleish is the author of a book on Covid which claims the virus has "no credible natural ancestor." He says his team found amino acids within the Covid-19 spike protein with a positive charge - allowing the virus to cling to negative parts of the body.
But it was highly unusual to find so many positive charges in a row because they also repel each other, he said.
âWe realised when they released the sequence of the virus it broke the laws of physics for a natural virus meaning it was genetically modified.
âAt the time my position was supported by Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6 who now chairs the University of London board of trustees.â
However, when they tried to publish their work they were turned down by numerous papers, including the Lancet.
âMy paper was rejected within five hoursâ, he said. âNormally it takes three weeks before it is even peer reviewed.â -Express
According to Dalgleish, "It was a political decision for this to be suppressed," adding that after the paper was released, "I was ostracised. I was fearful - really frightened at the way I was being treated."
"I was told I was not an expert on coronavirusâ and should just shut up. People tried to push us away. We were told our theory had no rationale and it was a conspiracy theory. I am so angry about this. I have more virus papers cited than most virology experts and they tried to push me aside.
"They did not even look at the science. It was obvious it was a gain of function escape from a lab and I say escape, but that is generous. We had this data in late February after the sequences were released.
"This has been a whitewash. This whole thing has killed science. Science is meant to look at evidence. It is truly unbelievable."
According to Jacques van Helden, a bioinformatics professor at Aix-Marseille University in France, Peter Daszak's February 2020 Lancet letter effectively shut down debate over the origins of Covid-19.
"By labelling anyone with different views a conspiracy theorist, the Lancet letter was the worst form of bullying in full contravention of the scientific method," said van Helden," adding "To say that something has leaked from a lab does not make it a conspiracy theory."
"Why was that letter signed by so many people? Why canât we discuss this issue in a scientific journal? I do not want to have to resort to an open exchange on Twitter."
A Look at the Wellcome Trust
Tyler Durden's Photo
BY TYLER DURDEN
TUESDAY, JAN 18, 2022 - 11:10 PM
University of London professor Angus Dalgleish, who co-authored a paper in summer 2020 after spotting "unique fingerprints" in Covid-19 samples that point to genetic manipulation, says that he's been the victim of a "disgusting whitewash," and that anyone suggesting a non-natural origin for Covid-19 has been silenced by peers.
"This goes back to the days of Copernicus and Galileo - it is the death of science," said the oncologist - who in 1984 discovered how HIV enters and kills cells.
Dalgleish's work was roundly rejected by a string of journalists before it was eventually published in a 'watered-down form,' according to the Express.
In February 2020, the Lancet had published a letter that âstrongly condemned conspiracy theoriesâ suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin. This highly influential letter â subsequently cited in thousands of scientific publications â was signed by 27 experts including Wellcome Trust head and former Sage member Sir Jeremy Farrar.
However, it has since emerged that two weeks before the letter was published, Sir Jeremy stated in private emails that some senior scientists believed a âlikely explanationâ was that the virus was man-made. -Express
Indeed, Farrar led a February 1, 2020 teleconference (one day after Farrar emailed Anthony Fauci about a Zero Hedge article suggesting Covid may have come from the Wuhan Institute of Virology) - in which one virologist was "80 percent sure this thing had come out of a lab," with others sharing his view.
Jeremy Farrar
Dalgleish is the author of a book on Covid which claims the virus has "no credible natural ancestor." He says his team found amino acids within the Covid-19 spike protein with a positive charge - allowing the virus to cling to negative parts of the body.
But it was highly unusual to find so many positive charges in a row because they also repel each other, he said.
âWe realised when they released the sequence of the virus it broke the laws of physics for a natural virus meaning it was genetically modified.
âAt the time my position was supported by Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6 who now chairs the University of London board of trustees.â
However, when they tried to publish their work they were turned down by numerous papers, including the Lancet.
âMy paper was rejected within five hoursâ, he said. âNormally it takes three weeks before it is even peer reviewed.â -Express
According to Dalgleish, "It was a political decision for this to be suppressed," adding that after the paper was released, "I was ostracised. I was fearful - really frightened at the way I was being treated."
"I was told I was not an expert on coronavirusâ and should just shut up. People tried to push us away. We were told our theory had no rationale and it was a conspiracy theory. I am so angry about this. I have more virus papers cited than most virology experts and they tried to push me aside.
"They did not even look at the science. It was obvious it was a gain of function escape from a lab and I say escape, but that is generous. We had this data in late February after the sequences were released.
"This has been a whitewash. This whole thing has killed science. Science is meant to look at evidence. It is truly unbelievable."
According to Jacques van Helden, a bioinformatics professor at Aix-Marseille University in France, Peter Daszak's February 2020 Lancet letter effectively shut down debate over the origins of Covid-19.
"By labelling anyone with different views a conspiracy theorist, the Lancet letter was the worst form of bullying in full contravention of the scientific method," said van Helden," adding "To say that something has leaked from a lab does not make it a conspiracy theory."
"Why was that letter signed by so many people? Why canât we discuss this issue in a scientific journal? I do not want to have to resort to an open exchange on Twitter."
A Look at the Wellcome Trust