China not happy with US Energy Dept. report on Covid-19 origin

Three years removed from the start of a pandemic that is still disrupting daily life, an assessment from the US Energy Department is only adding to the confusion about what really happened in Wuhan, China, in late 2019. CNN's David Culver reports. #CNN #News


    1. 1. Recent (30 November 2020) NIH report: after tested blood collected after Jan 7th 2020, 5 states had COVID-19 in Dec 2019 (outbreak same time with China, or at least same month), including Pennsylvania (see how close Fort Detrick to Penn).
      2. Another NIH report “During the first six months of the pandemic, 16.8 million coronavirus cases went undiagnosed in the US.”, mostly in Mid-Atlantic! (very surprising since West Coast has a lot of Chinese)!
      3.Fort Detrick leaked in the middle of 2019! Now NIH data points to Mid-Atlantic – Fort Detrick.

    2. Did grandma Lovell “Cookie” Brown ever travel to China? Or even travel to Wuhan before infected COVID-19 in 0219?

    3. ​@ronthorn3 I find it hilarious that the people who happily injected themselves with a vaccine that has no longitudinal data on it are now asking for “evidence”… And btw, the evidence has been out there for 3 years, just look… You’ve been lied to repeatedly. You shouldn’t be upset at the people who were right, you should be upset at the people who lied to you over and over….

    4. @Stephen Delwiche asian Hate crime went up 2000 percent since 2020. Good one. And here’s the kicker… that’s just the reported cases 🖕. But let me guess, you’re crying in your pathetic corner complaining about BLM. Sounds about right

    1. ​@VilkatisJanis you are truly a fucking sheep buddy. The evidence was all there on day 1. Wow I can not believe you are a real person. Put your mask back on and go back to your basement you moron please.

    2. @VilkatisJanis if I don’t know what evidence was then I’d be sitting here right now shocked to find out COVID may have come from a lab like you idiots…

    3. @no body why woukd i be shocked?
      Its not a new theory. It was out there, considered by not only fringe people, but by people with some knowledge too.
      But other theories, like, that it came from nature, had better evidence at the time, so it was assumed to be more believable.

      If one of the inteligence agnecies now say that this conckusion should be looked at again, well they probably have new evidence.

      I am not like you, i can change my opinion if evidance stacks up. 😀
      If more agencies will look kat this, and aggree with this, than probably this will be most believabke theory. Mby kater new evidance will come, than the most probable theory will change too.

      I believe that is what investigations is..

    1. “We lied because the government told us too. And now we are telling you the truth because the government told us too”.

  1. If the Energy Department has ‘low confidence’ in their report, why even put it into a report? It’s just bizarre.

    1. Because we have to get Americans angry with China so we can start another proxy war. Biden has the full backing of the military industrial complex. They couldn’t buy Trump.

  2. When they told us all about the wet market we all thought that could be possible. When they released the fact there was a Biological lab just around the corner….hmmm.

    1. exactly… until we didn’t know the lab for corona viruses was just few “meters” far away, we could believe in “bat lunch” theory… but after this information that in Wuhan is this kind of lab, who could stay to be sure about the origin of this virus ? Hard to understand, really. It looks like an accident (because if someone would like to start with pandemic, then that “someone” would release the virus far away from Wuhan. Or – it was just a goal – to release it in Wuhan (to hurt that one who owns Wuhan labs. But whatever, I am almost sure, it’s not from the nature. So many red-flags that nobody can believe in the “origin in the nature” anymore.

  3. All I need to see is “low confidence” to know this report is not really to be taken seriously. In no other area is a report that is listed as “low confidence” taken as truth. It needs to be looked into, but for now can’t really be considered true.

  4. Low confidence generally means questionable or implausible information was used, the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or significant concerns or problems with sources existed

  5. Why would the U.S. Dept of Energy put out a “Low Confidence” Report at all? I don’t get it? You don’t make the accusation without hard evidence. For me “Low Confidence” is akin to “a lot people are saying”.

  6. That was the lamest defense of WHO I’ve ever heard. So it seems the “crazy” right wasn’t so crazy after all. Dems aren’t going to like that (I vote Dem so hold those excuses). The lesson is to beware how strongly one states a thought as fact.

  7. ” In the aftermath of the SARS outbreak in 2003, the Ralph Baric team collaborated
    with the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease
    (USAMRIID) and developed a novel reverse genetic system for synthesis of
    a full-length cDNA of the SARS-CoV, which was published in a paper in 2003. “

  8. ” December 2008, Dr. Ralph Baric co-authored another paper on the successful reconstitution of a chimeric virus with the genome backbone from a bat SARS-like coronavirus and the receptor binding domain (RBD) from SARS-CoV using similar synthetic biology techniques, arguing that the design and synthesis of various SARS-related coronaviruses are important steps to prevent similar outbreaks in the future. “

  9. “first the deadly flu and the new and alarming numbers coming in from the CDC tonigh
    among the worst flu season in a decade and it hasnt peaked yet, 39 states now reporting high fly acitivity ,seven more children lost last week alone, 37 children dying so far this season ” – ABC News 2017

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.