All about Biological Warfare

[Constance]

ddddddddddddddddddddddddd

[DaveToo]

A recent exchange occurred in another thread between ThePythonicCow myself and Bill about bioweapons. Bill wisely asked us to 'get back to topic'.
And so I would like to continue our discussion here in a thread that is much more appropriate.

Below is the exchange that took place:

Posted by DaveToo (here)

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)

Posted by DaveToo (here)
For me it all comes down to whether we have:
- a virus
- no virus
- a bio-weapon

I make a distinction between virus and bio-weapon because I consider a virus as
something natural (if it exists) and a bio-weapon as something synthesized and
thus, unnatural.

As of today, I still cannot take a position between these three possibilities.
I have heard convincing arguments for each of them.

I'd describe a bio-weapon as a biological toxin that is intentionally harmful as used, whether or not it was found in nature or formulated in a lab...

.

Do you know of any bio-weapons that are found in nature that are transmissible?

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)

Posted by DaveToo (here)
Do you know of any bio-weapons that are found in nature that are transmissible?

No fair - who said "transmissable" ?

In any case, words have meaning, independent of whether anything exists that fits that meaning.

All that not withstanding, perhaps monkeypox, marburg, or ebola meets your criteria.

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by DaveToo (here)
Do you know of any bio-weapons that are found in nature that are transmissible?

Well, all viruses and bacteria are 'transmissable'. Or else they would just die out and cease to exist.

But it just depends how. Ebola and Marburg (in their 'natural' state) can be transmitted to others, but only through direct contact with bodily fluids, etc. They're not airborne, so that means they can be fairly easily contained through strict isolation, awful though they both are.

For a bioweapon to be effective (natural or enhanced), it really has to spread easily, and also spread quickly before it kills the host. So "ideally", a bioweapon has to be transmissable maybe even before the host knows they have it.

In my first post above I really should have said:

"Do you know of any bio-weapons that are found in nature that are highly transmissible by air?"

So perhaps we can continue the discussion here and see where it leads.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by DaveToo (here)

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
All that not withstanding, perhaps monkeypox, marburg, or ebola meets your criteria.

In my first post above I really should have said:

"Do you know of any bio-weapons that are found in nature that are highly transmissible by air?"

I don't know off hand whether monkeypox, marburg, or ebola meets your criteria.

Is there some reason I should look into that further?

Is there some explanation why the phrase "bio-weapon" has some implicit defining constraint of being "highly transmissible by air" if it's a virus?

The phrase "bio-weapon" to me means something that is biological and weaponized. Whether or not particular chemical, bacterial or viral examples, with particular properties of transmission, are known to exist does not change that meaning of that phrase.

[DaveToo]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)

Posted by DaveToo (here)

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
All that not withstanding, perhaps monkeypox, marburg, or ebola meets your criteria.

In my first post above I really should have said:

"Do you know of any bio-weapons that are found in nature that are highly transmissible by air?"

I don't know off hand whether monkeypox, marburg, or ebola meets your criteria.

Is there some reason I should look into that further?

Is there some explanation why the phrase "bio-weapon" has some implicit defining constraint of being "highly transmissible by air" if it's a virus?

The phrase "bio-weapon" to me means something that is biological and weaponized. Whether or not particular chemical, bacterial or viral examples, with particular properties of transmission, are known to exist does not change that meaning of that phrase.

I first heard about Dr. Li-Meng Yan more than a year ago when she first surfaced in the U.S.
I listened to her story but wasn't convinced entirely about all her claims.
She has recently done some more interviews that I watched and listened to.

I am open to her position as possibly being the closest we have to the truth (why not?).

But there are many conflicting ideologies that one has to contend with in order to take a firm position on this.

I will quote myself from above now:

"For me it all comes down to whether we have:
- a virus
- no virus
- a bio-weapon "

If one takes the position that we have a virus here (SAR-CoV2) how is it possible
to have a natural virus with such a mixed/complicated structure, spontaneously
appearing at a wet food market that quickly spreads around the entire world in a matter of weeks?

That really stretches credulity. I am not prepared to accept that.

Then you have the camp that says there is no virus. We are seeing exosomes. Nothing is spreading
around the world at all. It is possible, but no one has yet been able to explain to me how we see
people around the world otherwise healthy, in their 20's-60's suddenly become ill with severe
Covid-like symptoms and die within a couple of weeks with no comorbidities.
Until someone can explain these deaths I am not prepared to go all the way with the exosome/terrain theory.

And finally you have the bioweapon camp.
I mentioned above "highly transmissible by air" because I was thinking in terms of SARS-CoV2.
The crazy mixed configuration of the structure certainly lends itself nicely to a synthesized bioweapon.

BUT.... and this is the big but that I have.
1. How was China able to contain and virtually eliminate it within a month or so and the rest of the world
still struggles with it?
2. Why is this bioweapon so impotent? It was billed as a highly contagious and deadly virus. In reality
it's far from deadly.
The WHO likes to boast about the high death count of close to 5 million deaths.
But does the WHO tell us the death stats of TB, or the flu, or pneumonia etc. as cumulative over two years?
No. They give yearly death stats!

The true death stats for Covid-19 so far are:

World Covid deaths 2020 1,880,710
World Covid deaths 2021 3,001,379
and next year the death stats need to start at 0 once again, just as they do for all other diseases.

And of course we know that the 2020 and 2021 death stats are highly inflated due to the
mislabeling of many deaths a Covid-19 deaths when they had other causes.

Dr. Li-Meng Yan's position is that we have a bioweapon here, that was deliberately released by China
to inflict as much damage as possible to the rest of the world.
This goes counter to most people's bioweapon theory of the U.S. being the one mainly in charge.

I am trying to weigh her position and see if it makes sense.

[ThePythonicCow]

We are not on the same wave length, Dave Too. The miscommunications between us are overwhelming any potential usefulness of this discussion that I can discern.

Over and out.

[DaveToo]

"BUT.... and this is the big but that I have.
1. How was China able to contain and virtually eliminate it within a month or so and the rest of the world
still struggles with it?"

One thing I forgot to mention in my post above was Dr. Yan's statement that China used/uses HCQ to treat those infected. If that's true, it could certainly explain China's alleged success in defeating the disease.