“Scarless cloning” is a normal term in molecular biology. Similar methods are used across bacteria, yeast, plants, and viruses because researchers generally don't want extra undesired sequences introduced during assembly. This Baric paper shows coronavirus reverse genetic techniques existed before 2008. It does not prove SARS-CoV-2 was engineered, released, or intentionally modified. Technical capability is not evidence of causation.
SARS-CoV-2 genome lacks hallmarks associated with this or older engineering approaches.
The receptor-binding domain is compatible with natural selection.
Closely related viruses found in bats and other wildlife show that SARS-related coronaviruses naturally possess extensive diversity.
Now go search for more scary words for tomorrow's gift.
Tell us about your take on SARS, please. Adjacent engineering, sure.
If Jon is on a grounded, informative journey to the origins of DU tech that is packaged to sell a world on medically safe treatment for a ‘natural virus’, that has been developed using ‘related’ bioengineering, so be it.
You likely want to demean the truth because people dare not speak of those who weaponize life forms or infectious toxins, without medical detection.
Were you there in the CDC related quarantines for the first managed SARS1 exposures and containment (testing in humans). I interviewed treating physicians who said they can only follow official treatment guidelines and say nothing more.
At the time SARS1 was not called natural. Then after the COVID.gov site was switched up to give more credence to the WIV ‘theory” , Wikipedia contributors (you?) stepped up to reveal the logical fallacies of the bioweapon and engineering deniers. Wiki allowed fallacies to show as if fact: SARSCoV2 is now portrayed as being in the same general category as SARS1 (engineered), and variously through time, as if it is realistic to call SARS based material, a member of a family within the natural virus kingdom.
But read what Wiki really says, and look up the patents. There you can see how scientists are literally assuming they aren’t playing, but they are really (engineering) gods….for profit.
Patented tech is not natural so no real member of the natural kingdom, just the US war machine, and military empire referred to as Biodefense. Still, defense is a misnomer because aggressive human targeting to eradicate generic and theoretical enemies is not so well targeted when based on engineered predictive models reduced to broad and sweeping assumptions rather than real world metrics including human immune response.
But you seem to know better than anyone. So show us what is real and help us out: inform us, rather than name calling someone speaking about a science paper.
Your general statements are fine. But your comment really doesn’t give us a logical basis to deny what’s written about what you call a SARS-related technology,
"If Jon is on a grounded, informative journey to the origins ..."
His "journey" is to give "readers" what they want - for fun and profit - reality and reason be damned. I stop by to point out what you're getting. I certainly don't know "better than anyone," but in a room of clueless conspiracy-lovers ...
Correct. The "no see'm" technique works really well because no microscope, electron technique, nor nuclear detection device can "see" sub-nano sized particle fragments. It's *wondrous* how science can detect the invisible (pico-meter sized) stranding of mRNA by generating computerized bullshit.
Unresolved? You've resolved it for your morons.
“Scarless cloning” is a normal term in molecular biology. Similar methods are used across bacteria, yeast, plants, and viruses because researchers generally don't want extra undesired sequences introduced during assembly. This Baric paper shows coronavirus reverse genetic techniques existed before 2008. It does not prove SARS-CoV-2 was engineered, released, or intentionally modified. Technical capability is not evidence of causation.
SARS-CoV-2 genome lacks hallmarks associated with this or older engineering approaches.
The receptor-binding domain is compatible with natural selection.
Closely related viruses found in bats and other wildlife show that SARS-related coronaviruses naturally possess extensive diversity.
Now go search for more scary words for tomorrow's gift.
Tell us about your take on SARS, please. Adjacent engineering, sure.
If Jon is on a grounded, informative journey to the origins of DU tech that is packaged to sell a world on medically safe treatment for a ‘natural virus’, that has been developed using ‘related’ bioengineering, so be it.
You likely want to demean the truth because people dare not speak of those who weaponize life forms or infectious toxins, without medical detection.
Were you there in the CDC related quarantines for the first managed SARS1 exposures and containment (testing in humans). I interviewed treating physicians who said they can only follow official treatment guidelines and say nothing more.
At the time SARS1 was not called natural. Then after the COVID.gov site was switched up to give more credence to the WIV ‘theory” , Wikipedia contributors (you?) stepped up to reveal the logical fallacies of the bioweapon and engineering deniers. Wiki allowed fallacies to show as if fact: SARSCoV2 is now portrayed as being in the same general category as SARS1 (engineered), and variously through time, as if it is realistic to call SARS based material, a member of a family within the natural virus kingdom.
But read what Wiki really says, and look up the patents. There you can see how scientists are literally assuming they aren’t playing, but they are really (engineering) gods….for profit.
Patented tech is not natural so no real member of the natural kingdom, just the US war machine, and military empire referred to as Biodefense. Still, defense is a misnomer because aggressive human targeting to eradicate generic and theoretical enemies is not so well targeted when based on engineered predictive models reduced to broad and sweeping assumptions rather than real world metrics including human immune response.
But you seem to know better than anyone. So show us what is real and help us out: inform us, rather than name calling someone speaking about a science paper.
Your general statements are fine. But your comment really doesn’t give us a logical basis to deny what’s written about what you call a SARS-related technology,
"If Jon is on a grounded, informative journey to the origins ..."
His "journey" is to give "readers" what they want - for fun and profit - reality and reason be damned. I stop by to point out what you're getting. I certainly don't know "better than anyone," but in a room of clueless conspiracy-lovers ...
I've seen your comments. You and "Paula" can go jerk each other off - https://substack.com/@lesliehmsc/reads
It also does not disprove that SARS-2 was engineered turdy.
Nothing ever will.
"Fierce advocate for Scientific Truth" -
As if - https://substack.com/@paulachandler216943/reads
That’s the “beauty” of the no see um magic trick.
Now what about the furin cleavage site?
What about it?
I hear you Wellness Hacks: you have no info to add. You write comments to kick up dirt and throw crap.
So you’ve checked out what I and another reader here have read.
Your profile shows you read two stacks, but not Jon Fleetwood’s substack.
Hilarious? Here you are demeaning comments with nothing to add other than telling readers what to do.
You speak for yourself. No matter.
Computer designed corona viruses...all 100% fake.
Correct. The "no see'm" technique works really well because no microscope, electron technique, nor nuclear detection device can "see" sub-nano sized particle fragments. It's *wondrous* how science can detect the invisible (pico-meter sized) stranding of mRNA by generating computerized bullshit.
Thank you for covering this technique. Gee, wonder why he came up with this fun game?