hank you for accepting this debate challenge, and I sure have given myself a tough starting position. Unfortunately, none of your sources came through because of this silly forums formatting restrictions. I have all the sources, But this system won't let me post them.
Now that you accepted, I have to do some mad panic research. LOL.
For clarity and confirmation, I did say that the CoVID-19 in its current form was assembled by man. I am going to break my argument down into facts, Strong indicators, And circumstantial Let's establish some facts first.
Presumed Undisputed Facts:
- CoVID-19 was first reported in Wuhan China, Where epidemiologists traced it back to the Huanan Seafood Market in Wuhan China.
- CoVID-19 is a variant of the coronavirus, The same pathogen family that causes the SARS outbreak in 2002, And the MERS outbreak in 2012, And 2018.
- There is a BSL-4 lab in Wuhan China, At the Wuhan Institute of Virology, About 34km away from the market of the first report.
- A BSL-4 lab is the highest, And strictest lab setting. According to Scientific America magazine, There are only a few dozen of these labs around the world.
- The aforementioned lab had been working on a SARS vaccine
Strong Indicators
The CoVID-19 has been genotyped over 150 times from 19 different countries, In part to continue to understand any changes that may occur in it. When Viruses are genotyped, Signature chunks or sequences are identified. According to a paper on biorxiv journal, The CoVID-19 contains pShuttle-N sequences which point to no natural occurrences. The paper says they found 4 different insertions that are not found in other coronaviruses. These 4 inserts have an identity similar to HIV-1 viruses, Which the paper says "is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature. " (
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v1)
- James Lyons-Weiler, PhD, (author of 57 peer-reviewed journals), he claims the pShuttle-N provides irrefutable “open source” proof that the coronavirus now circulating in the wild was engineered in a laboratory. Every lab that has the gene sequence can see this for themselves. It’s right out in the open, Which is why we describe this revelation as “open source. ”. (http://ipaknowledge.org/2019-ncov-coronavirus-origins.php)
Both of these are very interesting pieces of evidence about the structure of the virus. In short, It appears as if there is a man-made signature on the RNA of the virus
Circumstantial Evidence
- The first known human case occurs in a market, In a city with one of the world's few BSL-4 labs.
- That lab was modifying and interacting with the coronavirus for SARS/MERS vaccines.
- The phylogenetic map of the virus, Supported by two groups, Shows strong connections to man-made components.
- The phylogenetic map of the virus shows a significant level of variance that makes traditional coronavirus categorization difficult.
- There has been no established mechanism for this virus to have occurred naturally, and while coronaviruses as a whole are categorized as zoonotic, all indications are that some of the unique genetic signatures could not have occurred naturally.
Therefore, Whilst we can speculate that CoVID-19 is naturally occurring, and still study its origins, The data clearly, Scientifically (thought two different studies that highlight genetic components that are manmade) and when combined with the circumstantial evidence, persuasively suggests otherwise.
Thanks for voting, fellows.
Nice job on your R1. There's a lot of debaters who would have just forfeited against that argument; you just happened to go against a damned good one.
Anyways, thanks for giving me something to ponder over a beer with friends.
R1 sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus_disease_2019
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndrome_coronavirus_2
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/man-made#English
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nature#Noun
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/origin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_%28philosophy%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoonosis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic#Epidemiology
http://english.whiov.cas.cn/
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v2
https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/03/retraction-faulty-coronavirus-paper-good-moment-for-science/
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/22221751.2020.1738279
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/james-lyons-weiler-coronavirus-conspiracy-vaccine/
"My first instigated debate on here and I get someone with a 57 - 0 record. What have I done??!!"
Sorry, that's not very welcoming of me but I love debunking conspiracy theories and I've been wanting to look into this very topic. Very interesting and timely subject, thanks for instigating.
and welcome to the site!
I don't use Windows, either, anymore. I've always had a Mac, but, with my familiarity with Windows, I prefer using Word for Mac, which functions much better than it does for Micronuts. I am broke on the pane of windows. Are you on Mac and Pages? Although I am friends with oromagi, I, too, am suspicious of the record. But since I agree with your position, I chose to not engage. However, since, I have done exactly that, taking a debate position with which I disagree, just to see if I could pull it off.
Thank you for your comments. I don't use Word. Microsoft and I had a fight and have decided to go separate ways. :)
My first instigated debate on here and I get someone with a 57 - 0 record. What have I done??!!
By the way, your argument is very well prepared. Great beginning. I had not heard about your reference to the apparent human signature in the virus RNA. Wow!
Hope you're not offended by my previous comment on sources. I see you are, like me, new on the site. I wondered, too, how to deal with sourcing, and discovered what I already knew in Word about reference notes, and found the sequence works. There may be a better way...
The origin of your issue with posting sources is closer to home than the site. It functions perfectly well in accepting text with embedded source notes.
1. prepare your document in Word
2. As you compose, when needing to reference a source, click on <insert>, <footnote>
3. In the pop-up box, under <location>, select <endnotes> which will collect all source references at the end of the document. [The other selection, <footnotes> will collect them at the foot of each page.] The notes are automatically assigned numeric sequence, and enters the number both within the text, and at the end of the document. Enter your reference in each end note as you compile them.
4. Copy/paste your text, not including the endnotes into the argument entry box as usual, and make a note in the text that your sources are listed in the comments section.
5. Enter the comments section, copy/paste your endnotes into the comment box. Done.