There are two Nobel Prize winners in virology-related subjects who say this was bioengineered.
Luc Montaigner, who co-discovered HIV.
And David Baltimore who discovered reverse transcriptase.
The smoking gun is that the spike protein on the coof virus, has an insert of a furin cleavage site (it is ready, willing and able to be cut, by a receptor on human cells).
This opens up the spike protein, allowing the interior of the virus, the RNA, to get into the human cell.
1) It is an insert, extra nucleotides added, not "single nucleo tide substitution" or "oopsie" when the cell replicates the RNA.
2) The nucleic acids used, are using the code for those amino acids, most often used by humans but not bats.
3) IIRC, bats don't have a furin cleavage site. Neither do the most closely related natural viruses known.
4) The bats which supposedly carried the natural virus, live hundreds of miles away from Wuhan.
5) When the coof broke, out, those bats would've been *hibernating*.
6) The spike protein of the coof is pretty lousy and binding to bat cell receptors anymore.
There is some question as to whether the insert was designed and spliced in, or whether they used successive cell cultures, to breed a better and better spike, in the lab.
One of the authors of the gain of function research openly used the words chimeric virus to describe what they were doing in a published paper IIRC with Ralph Baric.
BTTT!!!
I’m curious. What part of my post constitutes “propaganda”?
I certainly didn’t claim that this was not a lab escape, only that the CCP is culpable regardless of how it entered the population in Wuhan.
That much is observable from the undisputed facts that are in the public record.
Is it propaganda to assert that the CCP is responsible, and used this as a biological attack against the rest of the world in general and the west in particular? Or does it only count if it can be shown that the WIV engineered and deliberately released the virus? Why do you think that’s a stronger case?
Seriously, I would like to understand your point.