wiki - dictionary - home

Chinese Influence over Scientific Experts 2 - Peter Daszak (General)

by dulan drift, Tuesday, December 29, 2020, 09:04 (60 days ago)

(This thread has been split from Who's who in WHO.)

Peter Daszak is one of the WHO's 'Team of Ten' approved by China to investigate the origin of Covid.

Daszak is a close collaborator with Lipkin, an author of the notorious Proximal Origins paper that purported to 'prove' Covid had not leaked from a lab - it was pangolins that done it. They have co-authored several papers and articles and have been accused of "misinterpretation of data implicating dromedary camels in MERS" during a shady trip to Saudi Arabia in which "frozen samples accidentally were thawed en route to Columbia University."

With some small contribution from Formosahut, and a lot from a group called DRASTIC and Research Gate scientists, that paper has now been discredited as high-profile narrative writing on behalf of the CCP. The paper's 'pangolin findings' were headlines in all major media outlets around the world for several weeks, thereby achieving its purpose of quashing speculation about a lab leak.

The debunking of that paper received very little coverage, often reduced to a by-word, such as in this Dec 2020 story about the WHO investigation.

I'd have thought Top Scientists linked to CCP misinform world about Covid Origins would be a good headline - i'd read it. But it seems 'now is not the right time to talk about that'.

[image]

Peter Daszak - EcoHealth Alliance

by dulan drift, Tuesday, December 29, 2020, 09:06 (60 days ago) @ dulan drift

Daszak is the head of EcoHealth Alliance, Lipkin is also on the board. EcoHealth scientists, including Daszak, have been frequent collaborators with those from Wuhan Institute of Virology where GoF (Gain-of-Function) experiments on bat viruses are performed, ref ref ref.

Shi Zheng-li from WIV (Batwoman), was part of the team in 2008 that inserted a SARS sequence into an infectious bat virus backbone (SL-CoVs) to make it more infectious. They wrote such research was “invaluable in formulating control strategies for potential future outbreaks.”

In this article Daszak reportedly brags that EcoHealth Alliance has:

"...racked up quite a number of successes. The team and its collaborators at the Wuhan Institute of Virology have collected about 15,000 samples from bats. From these they have already identified ...about 50 (that) fall into a category that caused SARS and ... COVID-19."

15,000 bat viruses! That place was/is a weapons factory waiting to explode. With up to 50 that potentially caused Covid. So that's confirmation from the horses mouth (probably a blundering one) that WIV was holding bat viruses that could have caused Covid. "About 50 of them"!

"The researchers were also able to demonstrate that at least some of the new bat coronaviruses they have found are capable of infecting a human cell in a petri dish"

Great. Let's unpack that. Peter Daszak was doing GoF experiments with Batwoman at WIV.

WIV experiments involve collecting bat viruses, infecting human cells, and making viruses more contagious to human cells to "formulate control strategies for potential future outbreaks.” (Bear in mind this was 2008 - how did your control strategies go after 12 years of research?)

Ecohealth's $3 mil funding was withdrawn in May 2020 due to its ties to China. In July NIH restored the funding but with the following stipulations, including:
" -provide a sample of the pandemic coronavirus that WIV used to determine the viral genetic sequence
- arrange for an outside inspection of WIV and its records “with specific attention to addressing the question of whether WIV staff had SARS-CoV-2 in their possession prior to December 2019”
- explain “diminished cell-phone traffic in October 2019, and the evidence that there may have been roadblocks surrounding the facility from October 14-19, 2019"
- provide the NIH with WIV’s responses to the 2018 Department of State cables regarding safety concerns.”

EcoHealth has so far refused to comply with these requests from NIH

EcoHealth 'pioneered' the push for Remdesivir as a treatment, which was approved, (ke-ching! Big-time - for someone) but didn't seem to stop Covid that i noticed. Batwoman was also in on that deal.

Let's say you do think there's a possibility that the virus leaked from an Wuhan lab. It's then a reasonable deduction, that if it did, Peter Daszak worked on that virus.

The question then is: How is the appointment of Peter Daszak to this elite panel of expert investigators, not a conflict of interest? The guy is a massive 'person-of-interest' in any serious investigation.

What's the likelihood that Peter Daszak, already accused of "misinterpreting data" re MERS in a deal with the Saudi regime, will steer the investigation towards his own entanglement with WIV and another totalitarian regime, the CCP?

What's the likelihood that he will steer the investigation away from that?

[image]
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/01/09/20/37807636-9129749-The_prominent_scientist_who...

Peter Daszak - Guardian Article

by dulan drift, Tuesday, December 29, 2020, 09:06 (60 days ago) @ dulan drift

Doing research, occasionally you stumble across a gem. Usually it’s the subject talking. You don’t want to get waylaid following one tangent - but sometimes it’s too good to ignore. In that vein let’s take a look-see at this article:

Ignore the Conspiracy Theories: Scientists know Covid-19 wasn't Created in a Lab

By:

Dr. Peter Daszak (BSc, Bangor University, Wales, ranked 601-650 in the world)

Top-Ten Expert in the Known Universe. Commissioned by WHO to investigate the origins of Covid. Can he save the planet from certain doom?

Spread over 3 exciting episodes.

Proudly promoted and printed by:

The Guardian:

We believe everyone deserves to read quality, independent, factual news and
authoritative, calm analysis
.

(Please note: Any character depicted in this drama - is that person or Big-Media entity in real life)


[image]

Peter Daszak - Guardian Article - Part 1

by dulan drift, Tuesday, December 29, 2020, 09:07 (60 days ago) @ dulan drift

The Opening Salvo

"In a recent interview with the Telegraph, the former head of MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove cited an “important” scientific report that suggested that the novel coronavirus had not emerged naturally, but had been created by Chinese scientists. Dearlove said he believed the pandemic had “started as an accident” after the virus escaped the lab."

(Ok, Daszak has posited the argument against up front:

Any investigation into Covid's origins should include an examination of the possibility that it leaked from an Wuhan lab.

That’s standard academic format - put the headline argument of your opponents (Sir Richard Dearlove and Prof Birger Sørensen) out there then methodically take it apart. If you’re good enough…

This should be good - Daszak/Lipkin V Dearlove/Sørensen - a heavyweight clash of the experts!

"Suggestions that Covid-19 is a manmade virus are the latest chapter in a tale of blame, misinformation and finger-pointing.

(Hmm, emotive generalizations - i'd argue the misinformation is coming from you Pete, we'll get there soon, but two out of three i’d agree. Wait, technically ‘blame’ and ‘finger pointing’ is a tautology, so one out of two.)

"Cue the conspiracy theorists (name-calling), marching out their narrative about the high-security BSL-4 lab in Wuhan, (which there is) where mysterious experiments to design “frankenviruses” led to the tragic global pandemic."

(It’s not "mysterious" Pete. WIV scientists have published papers on engineering viruses to make them more contagious since 2008 - it’s what they do there - it’s what you do there - to protect us - in case something like Covid ever happens… )

"Cue the genetic analyses pointing to “unexpected” insertions in the code of A, G, T, and C that explain how this virus could not have evolved naturally."

(Is that not allowed now? Why? (‘Cue’ the scientist up to his eyeballs in China, about to say ‘cue’ again...))

"Cue political posturing against China, with calls for an inquiry, trade sanctions and even reparations."

(Calls for an inquiry! How dare they! The world is irreversibly altered by Covid and now they want to know why?)

Part 2: Plane Crash Interview

by dulan drift, Tuesday, December 29, 2020, 09:09 (60 days ago) @ dulan drift

By Peter Daszak

“Determining the origins and emergence of a pandemic is as messy and complex as studying a plane crash.”
(Not sure about that analogy - a plane crashes - an outbreak takes off? Is this one of those ‘out in the weeds’ things?)

"Just as an air crash investigator pieces together fragments at a crash site, pinpointing the origins of a new virus is painstakingly difficult (not so difficult as you're making out Pete - we’ll look at that later) ...and time-consuming (= public money-consuming; to pay for the time consuming) ...and requires logic and reason. (tautology, but agreed.

So using “logic and reason”, if the plane crashed in Wuhan - wouldn’t you investigate the site of the crash in Wuhan? Look for the black box? In this case: WIV’s internationally accessible database on which new viruses are meant to be logged?

That database has been offline since July 2020, with “at least 100 unpublished sequences of bat betacoronaviruses” as well as unpublished experimental data from RaTG13 and BtCoV/4991, collected from the Yunan mine outbreak in the spring of 2012.)

What’s the ‘logic and reason’ behind holding an investigation and not looking at that?

According to you, it will exonerate WIV and vindicate your “open and transparent” advocacy of China. So why not investigate it?

Part 2-a: Enhanced Surveillance

by dulan drift, Tuesday, December 29, 2020, 09:10 (60 days ago) @ dulan drift

By Peter Daszak

“I know (that origin investigation requires logic and reason), because this is exactly what our organisation, EcoHealth Alliance, does. We work around the world to identify the origins of pandemics, map them and analyse them, and use these results to predict where the next pandemic will likely emerge.

"We then target these “hotspots” for enhanced surveillance, capacity-building and risk-reduction programmes to prevent diseases emerging."

Rewind to 2017 BC, EcoAlliance produced their heatmap - lets see how they went with their “enhanced surveillance, capacity-building and risk-reduction programmes to prevent diseases emerging” Pic a

[image]

“Heat maps of predicted relative risk distribution of zoonotic EID (Emerging Infectious Diseases) events. Pic a shows the predicted distribution of new events being observed (weighted model output with current reporting effort)”

Most likely areas of new zoonotic crossover events were Europe, the US and Japan. China barely registers.

Here’s a close up of Asia:

[image]

We’ve got three hotspots in China - Hong Kong, Shanghai and Beijing. Wuhan was not on the radar. It should have been. Given WIV was/is housing “more than 16 000” bat viruses, it should be coloured blazing red.

Daszak's research partner, Shi Zheng-li (Batwoman) commented when first told of the outbreak:

“I wondered if [the municipal health authority] got it wrong. I had never expected this kind of thing to happen in Wuhan, in central China.”

Shi had pegged Guangdong, Guangxi and Yunnan to be China’s hotspots for a bat to human crossover event. Her first thoughts were: “Could they have come from our lab?”

The bottom-line is none of EcoHealth’s scientists (with all their millions in funding) predicted an outbreak in Wuhan. So either their research has been a waste of money - or - there’s another explanation for why it happened in Wuhan. So why is Daszak still insisting that WIV be excluded from any investigation?

Part 2-b: Unique Position

by dulan drift, Tuesday, December 29, 2020, 09:26 (60 days ago) @ dulan drift

“Our 15 years of work in China now puts us in a unique position to identify, with a remarkable degree of confidence, the likely origin of Covid-19." (Agreed - it does. It also puts you in a conflict of interest position - whereby one might be tempted to suppress incriminating evidence and spread disinformation in order to save one’s arse.)

"(W)e reported 781 genetic sequences of bat-origin coronaviruses previously unknown to scientists (including) the closest known relatives to Sars-CoV-2.”
(Good, again confirming that the “closest known relatives to SARS-Cov-2” were held at WIV prior to the Covid outbreak.)

“All are carried by horseshoe bats that are found across southern China (1000 kilometres away), and neighbouring countries.”
(But not Wuhan. That’s why Batwoman thought it had leaked from the lab.)

“Our report firmly concludes that Covid-19 originated in bats, in a hotspot of viral evolution along the border of Yunnan province in China, Myanmar, Laos and Vietnam.”

(Hang on Pete. That’s illogical and/or misleading. All it proves is that Covid is related to that strain of virus (RaTG13). Which we knew already. It doesn’t prove the geographical origin of the outbreak.

If anything, it casts suspicion on WIV. They were experimenting on it, when, against all your predictions, there was an outbreak in Wuhan. Now you want to rule out a leak from WIV? That’s not logical.

RatG13, the closest known relative to SARS-Cov-2, was collected from the same Yunnan cave where 6 miners contracted a suspected SARS-like illness in 2012 according to a Kun Ming Medical University paper at the time. Three of them died.

On one hand, WIV scientists (Shi Zhengli) dismissed that 2102 report as being “neither based on evidence nor logic, (b)ut used by conspiracy theorists to doubt me”, saying the miners merely had a fungal infection, not a coronavirus.

On the other hand they’re saying the same virus from that cave is super contagious and responsible for Covid. That is also illogical.)

Part 3: Dark Powers

by dulan drift, Thursday, December 31, 2020, 11:54 (58 days ago) @ dulan drift

Concluding Argument

"Unfortunately, this sort of logic (illogic logic) will not deter conspiracy theorists (such as former head of MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove, the guy you’re arguing with.)

“The dark power of the internet means that anyone, anywhere, can find evidence to echo even the most outlandish of claims.”

(That sounds an awful lot like what you’re doing Pete. Praising the CCP as “open and transparent” is a “most outlandish claim”. Do you mean ‘scientific experts on-the-take’ are the only “dark power” authorised to “find evidence to echo even the most outlandish of claims?”

Regardless, it’s not what Sir Richard, your opponent, an intelligence expert, did. He cited an academic paper (Sorensen, Dalgleish) raising concerns about the possibility of a lab leak origin.
Is this a strawman setup by any chance? Let’s see...)

“Theories that Sars originated from space or that HIV was manmade (or the CCP is “open and transparent”) are readily available, but it doesn’t make them true. Such conspiracies play to our most base instincts and paranoias – fears that dissolve logic and reason.”

(Haha! I don’t know what the World Record Strawman is, but that’d give it a shake. Let’s report how far you’ve moved the bar here, for posterity.

Sir Richard Dearlove argues:

The possibility Covid “started as an accident” should be considered in any investigation, and notes “attempts by the leadership to lock down any debate about the origins of the pandemic and the way that people have been arrested or silenced.” Apart from his own knowledge of how the CCP works, he provided the above paper as evidence.

You: feel threatened by that so resort to childish name-calling. You provide no evidence but instead equate Sir Richard’s concerns about CCP transparency to ‘theories that SARS originated from space’. You remain adamant that WIV should not be investigated because:

"I've worked with the WIV for a good decade or more. I know some of the people there pretty well and I have visited the labs frequently, I've met and had dinner with them over 15 years."

That's a valid reason for why you have a conflict of interest and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the investigation, but it's not a reason for quarantining WIV from the investigation.

This conflict of interest and name-calling response begs a couple of questions:

1. Is this the kind of logic and reason you’re going to be applying during the investigation?

2. What the fuck are you up to on behalf of the CCP?

Part 3: Dark Powers

by dan @, Thursday, December 31, 2020, 12:51 (58 days ago) @ dulan drift

I ran across a reference to your fried Daszak just today. He's been busy!

He's referenced in this NPR story titled Virus Researchers Cast Doubt On Theory Of Coronavirus Lab Accident. The story itself is entirely hearsay and fluff, with comments along the lines of, Well they're super careful in those labs so it couldn't have happened. And since everyone is super careful, and they interviewed experts, including Daszak, well, case closed.

But here's something that for me is more sinister and disturbing. I came across the above story via a link in this story: Even If It's 'Bonkers,' Poll Finds Many Believe QAnon And Other Conspiracy Theories. This is a type of embedded straw man on steroids. Essentially, they are equating the suspicion that COVID originated from a lab with QAnon set of beliefs. Most rational people would look at some of the core QAnon beliefs and judge them as, well, out there. (i.e., an evil cult of pedophiles is running the planet. These are the people who really believe that Hillary and her gang ran a kiddy porn ring out of a pizza joint.)

Look at how this story is crafted. It couldn't be any more manipulative:

Title: Even If It's 'Bonkers,' Poll Finds Many Believe QAnon And Other Conspiracy Theories

(These are the first two paragraphs word for word. The title emphasizes QAnon, while the first sentence emphasizes the origins of COVID)

A significant number of Americans believe misinformation about the origins of the coronavirus and the recent presidential election, as well as conspiracy theories like QAnon, according to a new NPR/Ipsos poll.

Forty percent of respondents said they believe the coronavirus was made in a lab in China even though there is no evidence for this. Scientists say the virus was transmitted to humans from another species.

This is pretty blatant manipulation IMO. If you visit those links, be sure to listen to the audio.

Part 3: Dark Powers

by dulan drift, Thursday, December 31, 2020, 15:03 (58 days ago) @ dan

Forty percent of respondents said they believe the coronavirus was made in a lab in China even though there is no evidence for this. Scientists say the virus was transmitted to humans from another species.[/color][/b]

That's remarkable! We've got the media, the experts, and all the king's men smothering big information outlets with 'no leak' from WIV, but still 40% don't believe them. At what point do you get nervous if you're part of the elite?

Maybe it has forced a shift in the way people take in information. It has with me. The day i realized my 'faith in science' was a 'faith', i stopped believing. Just give me the details - i'll decide for myself.

Here's the ironic thing: Normally, Occam's razor - the simplest explanation is usually true - is used to counter elaborate conspiracy theories.

In this case, the simplest explanation for why the virus originated in Wuhan, where none of the experts thought an outbreak would happen, is because there was an accident at a lab in Wuhan, which was experimenting on the closest known relative, RatG13.

There's nothing incredulous about that scenario - simple human error - lab accidents are relatively common. Why would you not include that possibility in any investigation?

I get why many scientists are trying to shut it down - they've become reliant on Chinese money and flattery - some of them are potentially complicit - but i don't properly understand why the media refuses to ask questions about the origin.

In Australia you can regularly find journalists concocting sensationalist beat-ups over an umpire's decision in a sport's contest - they love controversy - but here we have the story of the century and they don't want to know about it. In fact they abuse anyone who does. What's up with that?

Daszak's Scientific Expert Guardian Article: Grading

by dulan drift, Thursday, December 31, 2020, 15:52 (58 days ago) @ dulan drift

If this was written by an undergrad, Pete, you couldn't in all honesty give it a pass mark. There’s no evidence to support your contention that Richard Dearlove is a “crackpot conspiracy theorist”. Immature name-calling doesn't make it so. It's unscientific, i'm sure will agree.

However, if your goal was to create a fog of irrationality to cover up the origins of Covid and spread CCP disinformation, i'll give you A for effort. Though the Guardian deserves part of the credit as the mainstream mega-platform promoting you.

I have this home-spun (non-expert, i admit, but bear with me) theory:

‘When a person resorts to name-calling - they have an insecurity about that topic.’

For example a homophobe might be insecure about their own sexuality, or a racist about their personal value as a human. Often, the language used in emotive outbursts is revealing, as with your "fears that dissolve logic and reason tirade.

Logic is your insecurity. You see it as the enemy. Logically, the investigation would include what was going on at the labs. Logically, you would not be part of the investigation due to your conflict of interest.

Hence your fixation on labeling anyone who asks a logical question as a conspiracy theorist.

Using my theory, that irrational reaction tells me you're covering something up. Judging by the volume of your media output, i'd say Something Big.

Daszak's CCP Influence

by dulan drift, Sunday, January 03, 2021, 12:36 (55 days ago) @ dulan drift

Here's your track record:

You praised the CCP’s approach as “open and transparent” on multiple occasions and criticized anyone saying otherwise as “crackpots”.

You’re a WHO investigator who is also an activist agitating for NO Investigation of a Leak! (When do we want it?! NEVER!), describing calls by NIH for an investigation as “outrageous”, “heinous” and "absurd", and “a conspiracy theory” (your favourite term) and “pure baloney”.

You’re a fan of the China lockdown model which includes the jailing of anyone reporting non-CCP approved information.

An FOI request revealed you wrote the embarrassing political statement, known as the Lancet Petition, praising China’s transparency, despite massive evidence against that, then sought to cover that fact up saying you wanted it not be identifiable as coming from any one organization or person to “to avoid the appearance of a political statement.”.

You named your top heroes as Shi Zhengli (Batwoman), and WHO boss Mike Ryan (“my champion of champions”), who also praised China’s response and transparency - while telling the non-China world not to wear masks. He also gave you this highly-paid WHO investigator gig.)

You’re cool with the Hong Kong protest being suffocated by Covid restrictions, the Uyghur camps. (You say ‘I don’t get involved in politics’ - a lie coz your Twitter account is a live stream of political cheering for Biden and China.)

Your EcoHealth Alliance maps of China show Taiwan as a Province of China. It’s not - it’s an independent democratic country - that the Totalitarian CCP threatens to invade. You’re cool with that.

You’re leading the vilification of anyone who dares question any of the above, including Sir Richard Dearlove and several epidemiologists and viroligists.

So what's the common-denominator here? It's all lockstep with the CCP's propaganda machine.

Just for your reference, here's the law for Treason in the US:

Treason is defined as intentionally betraying one’s allegiance by levying war against the government or giving aid or comfort to its enemies. It’s the most serious offense one can commit against the government and is punishable by imprisonment and death.

Politics in Covid

by dulan drift, Tuesday, January 05, 2021, 06:50 (53 days ago) @ dulan drift

Most people (including former heads of intelligence agencies) aren’t trained in how to decipher genetic codes.” (Therefore, “using logic and reason”, Sir Richard Dearlove is a “crackpot conspiracy theorist!”)

Would it also be true to say ‘most Genetic code deciphers are not trained in applying International Intelligence logic to a problem? You for example?

Is it fair to say the Totalitarian Super Power, the CCP, your host, who vetted/approved your appointment, is a political entity?

So we can safely conclude politics is involved in the outcome of the Covid investigation. Whether we like it or not.

Therefore; input from a political intelligence expert is a good thing, right?

You argue ‘Oh i want to take the politics out of the process’ - that’s half true. You want to take out the politics that doesn’t agree with the CCP’s politics.

But that just leaves us with totalitarianism. And you.

Ruling out Lab Leak before it’s investigated

by dulan drift, Tuesday, January 05, 2021, 07:38 (53 days ago) @ dulan drift

After putting Sir Richard in his place, you also butted heads with NIH Director Francis Collins, who dared to say:

“Whether [the coronavirus] could have been in some way isolated and studied in this laboratory in Wuhan, we have no way of knowing.”

That sounds like a tepid statement of the bleeding obvious, but it still infuriated you. As a full-time Twitter anti-investigation activist you wrote (May 29, 2020):

“Disappointing! @NIHDirector clearly doesn't understand the weight of his words on this conspiracy-ladened issue. It's simply not enough to say that you cannot rule out a lab-origin. We need leadership at this point, not scientific hesitancy.”

(Luckily we have your leadership as a WHO investigator to shut down the possibility of a lab leak without investigating it.)

Conspiracy theories rely on the inability to prove a negative. We need the leader of our Nation's biomedical research agency to challenge conspiracy theorists & at the very least mention the TOTAL LACK OF EVIDENCE for it originating in a lab!"

First point, the statement that Covid may have "originated in a lab" - and should be investigated - is not a negative Pete - it’s a positive statement. Saying it didn’t escape from a lab is a negative. What the hell did they teach you there at Bangor University?

Secondly, the only reason we don’t have sufficient evidence to prove this positive is that you’re blocking any attempts to gather it with your ‘leadership’.

Thirdly, does the CCP pay you a bonus per sentence for saying ‘Conspiracy Theorist’? It’s name-calling - it draws attention to your insecurities.

(Daszak's shenanigans continue here.)

RSS Feed of thread
powered by my little forum