It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Possible true source of covid 19

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2020 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: DoctorBluechip
a reply to: M5xaz

We re quite used to used to seeing unjustified speculation and aware of alleged attempts to politicise the situation from various quarters.

This is not here to play those games.

This thread regards a specific and real situation constituting the existence of a serious biohazard proximal to bourton on the water , a known Chinese tourist destination during the timescale of point source of c19 circa 1st December 19 .

As such the information contained is primarily for the world health organisation researchers or anyone with a serious interest in identifying the definitive source of c19. That must take place in despite of any attempted blockages . Given these facts and others not presently open sourced there are several good justifiable reasons to investigate and rule out this (ex) biohazard as the potential source : that is why it is here.


Excuse me, but YOU are the one pushing " unjustified speculation " blaming the UK for China-caused coronavirus
And you are pushing this drivel with ZERO references.

I provided a SCIENTIFIC reference wherein CHINESE researchers identified the source of the coronavirus as Wuhan, China where the bioweapons lab is located.


Google "Occam's razor"
Again, QED
edit on 23-2-2020 by M5xaz because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 23 2020 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz
No blame is assigned on a national basis ? Countries are working together through the who to defeat this problem.
It's commonly recognised as a serious and imminent threat and knowing the actual source might save the whole globe a lot of hassle.
Stop getting in the way of common sense.
Scientific studies , Caro, schultzer etc indicate research undertaken which justifies the evidence put here. Ncbi literature also available online comprise the best open sourced on topic facts in support of theory produced here. This is a serious op.
For other posters complaining of note form updates, a knowledge of the actual recipie for disaster is being demonstrated but without spelling it out just how too clearly. No one wants anything happening like this again .



posted on Feb, 23 2020 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: DoctorBluechip
a reply to: M5xaz
No blame is assigned on a national basis ? Countries are working together through the who to defeat this problem.
It's commonly recognised as a serious and imminent threat and knowing the actual source might save the whole globe a lot of hassle.
Stop getting in the way of common sense.
Scientific studies , Caro, schultzer etc indicate research undertaken which justifies the evidence put here. Ncbi literature also available online comprise the best open sourced on topic facts in support of theory produced here. This is a serious op.
For other posters complaining of note form updates, a knowledge of the actual recipie for disaster is being demonstrated but without spelling it out just how too clearly. No one wants anything happening like this again .


Countries are cooperating together on FACTS !

In that vein, the WHO is presently visiting CHINA, not the UK.

Sending off the WHO on a wild goose chase in the UK per your dingbat "theory" would be a waste of time and
resources and place lives at risk.

Glad health authorities are not following your imbecilic "theory"



posted on Feb, 23 2020 @ 09:24 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 03:20 AM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz

It was obvious on page 1 that you are heavily invested in

1. Blaming c19 on China.

And

2. Blaming c19 on china .

There is no blame to assign on a national basis and it's still looking like China is not the true source.

There is an expectation that similar biased attitudes and wild , desperate assertions like yours will sniffed for the suspect activities behind the attempted cover-up of this bourton biohazard incident .

Good luck with that.

On the other hand you could be looking for pre assurances on certain criteria .

1. This case involves 100 percent facts.
2. Investigating this case would be very simple and there's enough hard evidence for it to take only minutes to rule in or out re c19 true source for further investigation.

3. It would take few resources to look at given warrant from correct authorities, if they're taking a duly cautionary approach without mis or malfeasance . It shouldn't be automatically expected that the HPA or local authorities will necessarily respond correctly , or that there is not already local involvement of health and other agencies.

4. Ruling this bourton biohazard in or out may help save lives and mitigate potential disaster .

5. For clarity's sake in a two liner :

Theory :

I) the facts indicate that c19 may have been inadvertently but with questionable recklessness released from a vector animal being kept under conditions conducive to the culturing of multiple zoonotic pathogens after a long period -up to120 days.

II) with regard to part I above , the circumstantial evidence indicates there are strong correlation s between the presupposed source location and UK Chinese tourism including direct transmission links from source , high local morbidity rates during the period , and particularly the estimated start date of c19 infections.

Conclusion : this theory may be of value in determining reasons for WHO concern over transmission of c19 not linked with the Wuhan epicentre , indicating a remote source point.




edit on 24-2-2020 by DoctorBluechip because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-2-2020 by DoctorBluechip because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 05:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Noinden


Ok let's go with your offer please. What do you need to know?



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 06:15 AM
link   
a reply to: DoctorBluechip

Example ncbi www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">https...://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/24890710/

assessment of bioterrorism threats and motives have been described before. Biocrime implies the use of a biological agent to kill or make ill a single individual or small group of individuals, motivated by revenge or the desire for monetary gain by extortion, rather than by political, ideological, religious or other beliefs. The likelihood of a successful bioterrorist attack is not very large, given the technical difficulties and constraints. However, even if the number of casualties is likely to be limited, the impact of a bioterrorist attack can still be high. Measures aimed at enhancing diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities and capacities alongside training and education will improve the ability of society to combat 'regular' infectious diseases outbreaks, as well as mitigating the effects of bioterrorist attacks



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 08:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
What a grammatical mess that was - was it done for effect? Why not lay it out in normal language, like most posters here, without odd words and phrasing??


I'll sum it up for everyone!

Some Bad people in the UK had rabbits
Then some Chinese people either ate the rabbits sores or made bloodless love with it
Then there was some shaking and pneumonia
There was a zoo that had ringworm, but didn't get noticed because NHS is overworked.
Now we are all gonna die!



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: DoctorBluechip
a reply to: M5xaz

It was obvious on page 1 that you are heavily invested in

1. Blaming c19 on China.

And

2. Blaming c19 on china .

There is no blame to assign on a national basis and it's still looking like China is not the true source.

There is an expectation that similar biased attitudes and wild , desperate assertions like yours will sniffed for the suspect activities behind the attempted cover-up of this bourton biohazard incident .

Good luck with that.

On the other hand you could be looking for pre assurances on certain criteria .

1. This case involves 100 percent facts.
2. Investigating this case would be very simple and there's enough hard evidence for it to take only minutes to rule in or out re c19 true source for further investigation.

3. It would take few resources to look at given warrant from correct authorities, if they're taking a duly cautionary approach without mis or malfeasance . It shouldn't be automatically expected that the HPA or local authorities will necessarily respond correctly , or that there is not already local involvement of health and other agencies.

4. Ruling this bourton biohazard in or out may help save lives and mitigate potential disaster .

5. For clarity's sake in a two liner :

Theory :

I) the facts indicate that c19 may have been inadvertently but with questionable recklessness released from a vector animal being kept under conditions conducive to the culturing of multiple zoonotic pathogens after a long period -up to120 days.

II) with regard to part I above , the circumstantial evidence indicates there are strong correlation s between the presupposed source location and UK Chinese tourism including direct transmission links from source , high local morbidity rates during the period , and particularly the estimated start date of c19 infections.

Conclusion : this theory may be of value in determining reasons for WHO concern over transmission of c19 not linked with the Wuhan epicentre , indicating a remote source point.





It's not about blaming but about FACTS (and you provided exactly ZERO references for your word salad)
FACTS !!

Again, let me repeat : Chinese researchers published a paper identifying Chinese lab in Wuhan as the likely source of the coronavirus:
www.zerohedge.com...

And the FACTS above are it did originate in China - by the numbers- just look at the growth curve of cases, with 77000 of 80000 worldwide cases in CHINA.
If it had originated in the UK, the 77000 cases would be in the UK !!!

Basic logic seems to escape you.

Sending the WHO in China helps with FIXING this epidemic
Sending the WHO to the UK instead would do nothing except waste everyone's time
edit on 24-2-2020 by M5xaz because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join