Gruinard Island, Sverdlovsk, Vozrozdeniya Island, Reston, fuckin' Rajneesh

Those are military leak during cold war! They were trying to make Weapons, not searching for cure. I suppose the Geneva convention is against that. No wonder they tried to cover up.

There are ton of virus lab around the world, I never heard of any leak, or even abnormal death rate around them.

I mean, There is one lab in the center of Paris, the Pasteur Institute, I drink my coffee in a bar right in front of it, should I be worried!

If they found a single example of a furin cleavage site that matches this one, I'd be more skeptical of the lab leak. And if they could find it in an animal that has any reasonable connection to the Wuhan area, I'd be even less skeptical.

Key word being "less skeptical".. meaning you will still need other evidences. You made up your mind already! And you blame it on Occam's razzor, and the dude dont deserve that.

On the my end, just bring me a secretary working in that lab saying I have a memo proving we fuck up , and I sign on the lab leak theory. Ok even if she just has an email saying they try to cover up something, I sign on the lab-leak. No doubt the US secret service want and can bring that girl here already

Ok , even just a few neutral biologist saying "ok I looked on what they were working on, and it is basically covid, they fucked up", and I'm team leak

I dont even know what "furin cleavage site" are and the 1st answer from search engine is a study that it is a natural occurence

Or someone bribed them!

You miss the point. I dont say this is not a lab-leak (and i dont care if it is, because it wont solve anything).

I say, the occam razor is : it is not a lab-leak.

Basic origin of virus is nature. Occam razor: this one too.

If you want to prove otherwise , you have to bring enough evidence.

And your statement bring nothing.

Because you use association (there is a lab near) to imply causation (the lab did it). Which is a logical fallacy.

And your list is false: you dont know which lab was close to zika. And I can bet the china lab is not the only one working on sars, there is one of the US.

And you overstate the behavior of covid compared to other sars. It is not 'tens of thousand" more special.

But we both know, that you come here with your mind make up, and not to know the truth. Because nothing you can learn will make you think it is not a lab leak

And I said, look, all you need to know about capes and masks in American superhero comics can be learned by a close viewing of D. W. Griffith's 'Birth of a Nation'. Because I genuinely believe that, that that is where it all comes from. We don't have a tradition of masked heroes really anywhere else in the world apart from America. I mean, Guy Fawkes, who the 'V for Vendetta' mask is based upon, that wasn't a mask, that was his face. It's like, Robin Hood. That was his name. He wasn't wearing a mask. But I think that there is something that possibly dates back to those… the Ku Klux Klan intervention in 'Birth of a Nation', the idea of dressing up in a mask, so that what you do doesn't get back to you.

Comparing the superheros to the clansman, is a very clever statement that nobody will take at face value. I dont think Moore even believe it to be true, he just like the idea that the origin of superheroes are anonymous antiheroes.

Superheroes exist in all culture, not just in America. I believe it to be as old as writing. The 1st occurrence to me, is the Calif changing appearance to solve problem in Bagdad, in the Arabians nights.

More close to me is in 1786, the "Nocturnal Spectator" where Retif de la Bretonne (the eternal enemy of the Marquis de Sade... both pervert in their own right ), where Retif walk though Paris with a mask, want to be called "the Owl" or the titular "nocturnal spectator", and relate what it sees, and prevent crime.

For me it is the 1st true superheroes book. And a surprisingly easy/fun read for a book from that time period

Anyway, I loved all of Moore comics books ("From Hell" being my favorite), while I usually dont like comics books. I think I read 1 or 2 real books from him , and was utterly disappointed. I wish, he still wrote for comics

Most consider that the natural explanation, is the Occam razor one.

We have had zika, ebola, I dont know what other virus in the past few year. Nobody even try to link them to anything. Nature make virus, virus evolve fast that's what they do.

Suddenly we try to find someone to blame? I guess it's because this time, it didnt stay in Africa, the white men dont like to be the butt of the joke

Counter argument, in the middle

By that definition, stocks too are ponzis.

No. Stocks have an external source of revenue, namely the profit that the company makes by selling its products and services to customers (not investors)

1% of BTC owner think the same. 99% just want to make money on a new fad, you know that already

I'm not angry.. the mere existence of exploiting-worldwide-user's google anger me, losing money doesnt: I'm used to it.

Crypto is just so absurd and damaging.. at least NTF pretend to be art, and defining art is just another can of worms.

But "Satoshi Nakamoto" has been sitting on 1.1m BTC since like 2009

Dont we all agree, that Satoshi is that french engineer turned mobster who is in jail since 2009? Or he would have cashed out long ago.

here's what a Ponzi scheme actually is:

2nd counter argument from the article :

That is not the definition of ponzi from source X. Indeed there are many variants of the definition, and they may include other spurious requirements (see below). But those requirements were incidental features of almost all ponzis before bitcoin, not essential features. They are not the reason why investing in a ponzi is a very bad idea, nor the reason why ponzis are frauds rather than just bad investments.

A definition of "TV" a few decades ago could be "a device that converts electrical signals into an image on a cathode ray tube (CRT) screen." But when flat screen TVs appeared, it would have been silly to say "those are not TVs,because they have no CRT." Instead, people would have seen that the mention of CRT in that definition was spurious, and that a useful definition should capture the effect of the device, regardless of the technology.

The point stay: the only value of BTC is from flux of new investor.... oh! and the service of anonymously buying drugs. THAT might be the thing that let crypto stay relevant for so long. Any business model based around some type of physical addiction, is always a good idea. Still a scam

For some reason, I must be stuck in the 80, when I discover something I like, it is always from that period:

Amsterdam - Cora ... the clip do them a diservice

I wish I could badge this article so bad. That is a question I always wondered, and unlike you, never bother to research.

The answer they find, and even just the list of mysteries are amazing. Thanks for the discovery, and for sharing