Individuals within the US bioweapon / bioweapon countermeasure / military/industrial / pharma complex from Duke just miles from gain of function Baric at UNC, Texas and the Los Alamos National Laboratory obviously knew, with some specificity, the lab origins of sars-cov-2. This is shown when they "Posted March 22, 2020" "Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 through Recombination and Strong Purifying Selection" at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.20.000885v1.full (fast work). Then shortly thereafter removed, from the paper's supplemental data, a Chinese spread sheet, written in English, showing on the 3,533 vertical lines individual samples taken from 18? sick pangolins and on each line horizontally, over the space denoted by an alphabet and a half. the various virus types found in each sample. Out of these 10's of 1,000's of viral identifications the Chinese found sars-cov in, both. some of the samples taken from pangolin number 7 and in more of the samples taken from pangolin number 8. ("the guilty parties").
It is obvious the ccp/pla chinese went on to study these sars-cov in detail and found a spike protein with particular binding abilities to human ACE2 within the receptor binding motif of RBD (the receptor binding domain). And thus the ccp/pla chinese stocked the shelves of their bioweapons lab with a "useful" sar-cov RBD as they had stocked a sars-cov, collected from a mining cave, which showed a 50% death rate when transfected to humans within aerosolized bat feces. A "useful" sars-cov backbone, along with others, for lab recombination and serial passage gain of function (gain of effect) purposes all of which were on the ccp/pla bioweapon lab shelf before 2018.
"Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 through Recombination and Strong Purifying Selection" details the the ccp/pla bioweapon lab recombination of one of the ccp/pla stock sars-cov backbones with the "useful" pangolin RBD into which the ccp/pla chinese had inserted a furin cleavage site using US bioweapon / bioweapon countermeasure / military/industrial / pharma complex technology developed by Ralph Baric at UNC Chapel Hill. This technology had been transferred to China. This furin cleavage site conferred the pandemic level of human to human transmission bioweapon capability to sars-cov thus sars-cov-2. The bioweapon furin cleavage put the pandemic "2" in sars-cov-2.
The authors were very careful, in a studied manner, in consideration of future plausible deniability to "Hide in Plain Sight"* to tell some of the truth they knew, not all of the truth and to not tell a outright lie. And so with some of the truth they described the recombination / selection assembly of sars-cov-2 from a backbone very close to to a sars-cov RaTG13 backbone known to have be on the ccp/pla bioweapon lab shelves from 2013 with its spike RBD removed and the "useful" pangolin RBD, now with furin cleavage site addition, recombined in its place. Not all of the truth included not discussing that recombination takes place both in labs as well as nature and not ever mentioning the US / Baric developed furin cleavage insert technology. Ever careful not tell a outright lie, with all of their talk of natural recombination throughout "their" paper, placed there to infer natural origin , they do not say that any of the recombination and selection events leading to sars-cov-2 was a natural occurrence. Thus another propaganda paper to support the natural origin / zoonotic transmission narrative being used to provide "cover" for the US bioweapon / bioweapon countermeasure / military/industrial / pharma complex. Cover for "people"? who developed the bioweapon furin cleavage technology under the guise of bioweapon countermeasure/pandemic "vaccine" research which was then used by the ccp/pla to develop and release various sars-cov-2 variants, killing millions, with more suffering and death to come.
*From the Clandestine Services Standard Practice 101 Handbook (CSSP101)
Standard Practice A, when your involvement in events may be revealed: 1) Hide in Plain Sight by posting propaganda studies as an uninvolved party. Write some of the truth but Not ALL THE TRUTH "Do not openly, or in any manner direct attention to foundational US research used to create cov2, do not include Ralph S Baric as an author or refer to his or others work. Carefully infer, but do not outright claim natural recombination and limit reference to the existence of lab recombination. Do not become subject under Admonitions 1 and 2 below. Worship always at the feet of the controller of your funding fauci. Remember his words "It is a shiny object that will go away in times." (tongue in cheek yet close?)
Hi James, Thanks for linking to this preprint, which has a second version and then a highly cited final version Li et al. 2020-07-01 "Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 through recombination and strong purifying selection" https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.abb9153 . Thanks too for outlining some of the skullduggery which likely is entwined in this article and the whole debate.
Can you provide some references, including to discussion forums, preprints or whatever, about the now deleted spreadsheet you refer to?
Do you think that there is anything of note in the pre-prints or it is it sufficient to read the published version of the article?
Questions of Chinese or other researchers inventing false observations or hiding true ones as part of covering up the actual lab origins of SARS-CoV-2 lead to a warren of rabbit holes which I am keen to explore - but without spending days and days in there.
I have never found any reference anywhere about the spreadsheet that was deleted from the, then, 3 item supplementary data. There were a couple of preprint studies, in that time period, with reference to pangolin "lung 8" in relation to the origin of sars-cov-2. The spreadsheet listed sars-cov as having been found in 2 of the sick pangolins. Pangolin #8 had the most tissue samples showing sars-cov. I had found the relevant preprint servers early in the "pandemic"and was checking them daily. The preprint must have been removed soon after I downloaded it. As, I understand, it was too much the "fine exemplar" of ccp/pla bioweapon research. All that work, years before, to find and identify in a sick pangolin, a sars-cov receptor binding motif, with human ace2 binding capability, within a sars-cov spike receptor binding domain to cut out and use to replace the RBM in the RBD of best bioweapon candidate bat sars-cov on the shelf that had a RBM lacking human ace2 binding.
(Dr. Zev Zelenko's March 23, 2020 letter "To all medical professionals around the world:" is another covid times "fine exemplar" reveiling the Depraved-heart Mass Murder of Millions)
"they" were tracking so called "covid disinformation" using "their" giant computer at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. To help insure "It is a shiny object that will go away in times."
I sent 2 emails to an intelligent friend, In the first email was the first time I referenced the spreadsheet to anyone. The second email, short time later, with the continuation of a thought in the first email. She received the second email first and replied with puzzlement because, without receiving the first I sent, it made no sense. Later she received the first and replied as to receiving the second email first. The first was obviously held up in delivery "somewhere". Then my computer started to slow to a stop. I managed the clicks to send my downloads folder to a flash drive before it froze solid. I had to wipe then reinstall my operating system. She asked me to send her a copy of the spreadsheet. I said I would when there was no more covid and I could go to the library and use one of their computers - if the file survived.
~from the first email ".. and I found a study which openly spells it out, between the lines, how this all happened. I finally got a supplementary data file for that study opened with the calc program of libra office. I went over 3533 lines of viral sample data, which the Chinese took for research purposes, that came out of a small group of confiscated sick Malayan Pangolins. They found SARS-CoV in lung tissue samples in Malayan pangolin number 7 and more in number 8. to be, from all available data at this time, the source of the receptor binding motif or RBM which gave SARS-CoV2 a part of its terrible infectiousness. They put the pangolin SARS-CoV RBM in bat CoV type RaTG13 or its minor evolution or modification. and there was an odd? "HIV" printed at the bottom left corner of the spread sheet referring to the virus? or H? Institute of Virology?
A snip - snip snip - snip - Move a piece from here to there - Gain of function DEATH"
I looked over the parts of the preprint and final study written in readily understandable "english". I noted no differences. The supplementary file of the paper includes more work.
ps. Walter M. Chestnut referenced a US government agency I had never heard of. I highlighted the sentence and clicked "search duckduckduckgo for ...." That located the agency site which I opened and used their search box to try and locate more about what Walter had referenced. To no avail or ability to search further because my computer lost all keyboard function. A simple operating system reset did not fix it. opening device manager and going into keyboards and either disabling or uninstalling then restarting or reinstalling the keyboard code got it working again. There are places "they" do not want you to look, "they" tell you "don't look here".
At a minimum, we have numerous questions about the SARS-COV-2 virus, the answers to which might indicate or even prove a lab origin.
The questions need to be asked. And we need to know the answers.
Please read my post now just above yours.
Yours Truly,
James Kringlee
Individuals within the US bioweapon / bioweapon countermeasure / military/industrial / pharma complex from Duke just miles from gain of function Baric at UNC, Texas and the Los Alamos National Laboratory obviously knew, with some specificity, the lab origins of sars-cov-2. This is shown when they "Posted March 22, 2020" "Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 through Recombination and Strong Purifying Selection" at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.20.000885v1.full (fast work). Then shortly thereafter removed, from the paper's supplemental data, a Chinese spread sheet, written in English, showing on the 3,533 vertical lines individual samples taken from 18? sick pangolins and on each line horizontally, over the space denoted by an alphabet and a half. the various virus types found in each sample. Out of these 10's of 1,000's of viral identifications the Chinese found sars-cov in, both. some of the samples taken from pangolin number 7 and in more of the samples taken from pangolin number 8. ("the guilty parties").
It is obvious the ccp/pla chinese went on to study these sars-cov in detail and found a spike protein with particular binding abilities to human ACE2 within the receptor binding motif of RBD (the receptor binding domain). And thus the ccp/pla chinese stocked the shelves of their bioweapons lab with a "useful" sar-cov RBD as they had stocked a sars-cov, collected from a mining cave, which showed a 50% death rate when transfected to humans within aerosolized bat feces. A "useful" sars-cov backbone, along with others, for lab recombination and serial passage gain of function (gain of effect) purposes all of which were on the ccp/pla bioweapon lab shelf before 2018.
"Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 through Recombination and Strong Purifying Selection" details the the ccp/pla bioweapon lab recombination of one of the ccp/pla stock sars-cov backbones with the "useful" pangolin RBD into which the ccp/pla chinese had inserted a furin cleavage site using US bioweapon / bioweapon countermeasure / military/industrial / pharma complex technology developed by Ralph Baric at UNC Chapel Hill. This technology had been transferred to China. This furin cleavage site conferred the pandemic level of human to human transmission bioweapon capability to sars-cov thus sars-cov-2. The bioweapon furin cleavage put the pandemic "2" in sars-cov-2.
The authors were very careful, in a studied manner, in consideration of future plausible deniability to "Hide in Plain Sight"* to tell some of the truth they knew, not all of the truth and to not tell a outright lie. And so with some of the truth they described the recombination / selection assembly of sars-cov-2 from a backbone very close to to a sars-cov RaTG13 backbone known to have be on the ccp/pla bioweapon lab shelves from 2013 with its spike RBD removed and the "useful" pangolin RBD, now with furin cleavage site addition, recombined in its place. Not all of the truth included not discussing that recombination takes place both in labs as well as nature and not ever mentioning the US / Baric developed furin cleavage insert technology. Ever careful not tell a outright lie, with all of their talk of natural recombination throughout "their" paper, placed there to infer natural origin , they do not say that any of the recombination and selection events leading to sars-cov-2 was a natural occurrence. Thus another propaganda paper to support the natural origin / zoonotic transmission narrative being used to provide "cover" for the US bioweapon / bioweapon countermeasure / military/industrial / pharma complex. Cover for "people"? who developed the bioweapon furin cleavage technology under the guise of bioweapon countermeasure/pandemic "vaccine" research which was then used by the ccp/pla to develop and release various sars-cov-2 variants, killing millions, with more suffering and death to come.
*From the Clandestine Services Standard Practice 101 Handbook (CSSP101)
Standard Practice A, when your involvement in events may be revealed: 1) Hide in Plain Sight by posting propaganda studies as an uninvolved party. Write some of the truth but Not ALL THE TRUTH "Do not openly, or in any manner direct attention to foundational US research used to create cov2, do not include Ralph S Baric as an author or refer to his or others work. Carefully infer, but do not outright claim natural recombination and limit reference to the existence of lab recombination. Do not become subject under Admonitions 1 and 2 below. Worship always at the feet of the controller of your funding fauci. Remember his words "It is a shiny object that will go away in times." (tongue in cheek yet close?)
Hi James, Thanks for linking to this preprint, which has a second version and then a highly cited final version Li et al. 2020-07-01 "Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 through recombination and strong purifying selection" https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.abb9153 . Thanks too for outlining some of the skullduggery which likely is entwined in this article and the whole debate.
Can you provide some references, including to discussion forums, preprints or whatever, about the now deleted spreadsheet you refer to?
Do you think that there is anything of note in the pre-prints or it is it sufficient to read the published version of the article?
Questions of Chinese or other researchers inventing false observations or hiding true ones as part of covering up the actual lab origins of SARS-CoV-2 lead to a warren of rabbit holes which I am keen to explore - but without spending days and days in there.
I have never found any reference anywhere about the spreadsheet that was deleted from the, then, 3 item supplementary data. There were a couple of preprint studies, in that time period, with reference to pangolin "lung 8" in relation to the origin of sars-cov-2. The spreadsheet listed sars-cov as having been found in 2 of the sick pangolins. Pangolin #8 had the most tissue samples showing sars-cov. I had found the relevant preprint servers early in the "pandemic"and was checking them daily. The preprint must have been removed soon after I downloaded it. As, I understand, it was too much the "fine exemplar" of ccp/pla bioweapon research. All that work, years before, to find and identify in a sick pangolin, a sars-cov receptor binding motif, with human ace2 binding capability, within a sars-cov spike receptor binding domain to cut out and use to replace the RBM in the RBD of best bioweapon candidate bat sars-cov on the shelf that had a RBM lacking human ace2 binding.
(Dr. Zev Zelenko's March 23, 2020 letter "To all medical professionals around the world:" is another covid times "fine exemplar" reveiling the Depraved-heart Mass Murder of Millions)
"they" were tracking so called "covid disinformation" using "their" giant computer at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. To help insure "It is a shiny object that will go away in times."
I sent 2 emails to an intelligent friend, In the first email was the first time I referenced the spreadsheet to anyone. The second email, short time later, with the continuation of a thought in the first email. She received the second email first and replied with puzzlement because, without receiving the first I sent, it made no sense. Later she received the first and replied as to receiving the second email first. The first was obviously held up in delivery "somewhere". Then my computer started to slow to a stop. I managed the clicks to send my downloads folder to a flash drive before it froze solid. I had to wipe then reinstall my operating system. She asked me to send her a copy of the spreadsheet. I said I would when there was no more covid and I could go to the library and use one of their computers - if the file survived.
~from the first email ".. and I found a study which openly spells it out, between the lines, how this all happened. I finally got a supplementary data file for that study opened with the calc program of libra office. I went over 3533 lines of viral sample data, which the Chinese took for research purposes, that came out of a small group of confiscated sick Malayan Pangolins. They found SARS-CoV in lung tissue samples in Malayan pangolin number 7 and more in number 8. to be, from all available data at this time, the source of the receptor binding motif or RBM which gave SARS-CoV2 a part of its terrible infectiousness. They put the pangolin SARS-CoV RBM in bat CoV type RaTG13 or its minor evolution or modification. and there was an odd? "HIV" printed at the bottom left corner of the spread sheet referring to the virus? or H? Institute of Virology?
A snip - snip snip - snip - Move a piece from here to there - Gain of function DEATH"
I looked over the parts of the preprint and final study written in readily understandable "english". I noted no differences. The supplementary file of the paper includes more work.
ps. Walter M. Chestnut referenced a US government agency I had never heard of. I highlighted the sentence and clicked "search duckduckduckgo for ...." That located the agency site which I opened and used their search box to try and locate more about what Walter had referenced. To no avail or ability to search further because my computer lost all keyboard function. A simple operating system reset did not fix it. opening device manager and going into keyboards and either disabling or uninstalling then restarting or reinstalling the keyboard code got it working again. There are places "they" do not want you to look, "they" tell you "don't look here".