posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 11:47 AM
Any virus needs a biomass to form a reservoir. Hot viruses like Ebola by their nature deplete their reservoir quicker than it can grow, so ultimately,
they tend to 'burn out' fairly rapidly. Less hot viruses such as flu and the common cold, don't deplete their reservoir any where near as fast, so
the reservoir grows faster than the virus can eat through it. And this is with a fairly infectious agent like influenza which can be transmitted
through the aerosol effect from coughs and sneezes etc.
Your 'bat based' transmission theory, would likely be too ineffective to prove a serious threat.
When you're choosing a weapon, a key factor would be how effective it is. You'd choose a gun before a rock, because a bullet is more lethal than a
large rock. The same factors apply. Ebola in its current natural state, is like a very big rock that would kill you if it fell on you. However in
order for your plan to work, you'll need a crane to haul the rock up high enough and persuade your target to go stand underneath it.
Its probably easier to spend your time trying to build a briefcase nuke.
I'm aware of the claims about the Soviets trying to create an ebola-pox weaponised agent, but as yet there is only really one guy's testimony that
this was ever even attempted. And he has been extremely vague on the transmission agent that he said they used which preserved the virus in the open
air. And I'm not sure how much stock we can place in a former Russian bio weapons expert who defected to the west.