It Has Begun

Multiple news outlets that reviewed the diary entries report the same key passage:

• On January 26, 2020, Fauci wrote that the first known COVID‑19 infection “was not connected to the (wet) market” and that the market was “not the source, it was the amplifier.”
  

This means he believed the market helped spread the virus but was not where it originally jumped to humans.

 

Have you read the passage from the diary? Fauci said the wet market was not the source. Are you disputing what he wrote?

Or are you going to plead the Fifth?

 

It matters not how devilishly evil a man is. If he flies the liberal flag, the wagons will circle around him. I defy you to ever find a lib say anything remotely critical of a fellow lib…….. Cultish behavior much?

 

I believe I once heard Nancy Pelosi say that Hillary was a like a dried-up dead fish in bed. Pretty sure I heard that. Or not.

 

Yes, first known

In January of 2020

God forbid he didn't know everything about it a month after it started. What did anyone know in January 2020? To this day we actually still don't know (and never will) who the true patient zero was.

 

No, he was pretty damned sure of himself and the science when he noted in his daily typewritten notes that the first infection occurred in early December 2019 and was not connected to the market, writing: "It now appears using epi data and genomic data that the first infection was in early December [2019] and was not connected to the (wet) market" and "Now we know the market was not the source, it was the amplifier."

He uses the words "now we know..." Not "maybe know". Not "possibly know". Not "perhaps know". He says "now we know". The words are simple, yet quite profound in their meaning. Fauci himself said the he was "the science". Certainly he did his scientific research before making such a statement, right? Maybe you would like to say that he didn't study it long enough. If that's the case, he is not really "the science" after all, right?

Please don't tell me you're going to dispute his words in some sort of "it depends on the what the meaning of the word 'is' is..." verbal dodge.

Perhaps its past time you came to the realization that the wet market theory was an entire load of horse**** that politicians (and Fauci) fed to people like you in order to further a political agenda.

Do you still believe that wet market lie? Wake up, dude! Don't be such a marooooooooon!

 

He was speculating in his journal, a month after the first infection. Are you nuts?

 

Wow, you certainly drank the Kool-Aid, didn’t you? What could possibly make you think he was being speculative? “Speculative” doesn’t sound very scientific to me. It sounds like he pretty well nailed it down from scientific evaluation. Well, unless he wasn’t following the science, of course… but, you would never admit THAT is even a possibility, would you?

 

Based on the way you're talking, I'm not even sure you know what "science" is

 

The man was far to self consumed with his own fame to be objective enough to practice any real science….. And you thought Trump wrote the book on narcissism.

 

Ya know, Fauci proclaimed to the world that COVID began in the wet market. But, his own words in his personal diary confirmed that he was lying when he said it began in the wet market.

What do you believe?

If you're going to "trust the science", it seems that you would believe what is backed up by facts, not speculation and certainly not lies.

Listen, I get it that you don't want to change your belief at this late date simply because it doesn't fit the liberal narrative that was spewed for the past six years. You believe in the wet market theory as if were gospel. Science and truth, at this point, aren't going to change your mind. You're comfortable believing the lies that Fauci told you. Just like your dad, you go through life with blinders on.

 

​

 

No he didn't.

It's still the most likely option, but science doesn't tend to work in absolutes. It works in probabilities. That's why I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how science is conducted. We will never truly know where it came from (without some new future technology or time travel), but we can narrow down likelihoods.

What the likelihoods say is that the market origin is our best guess for where it jumped to humans. Could it have happened somewhere else and spread via the markets? Easily, but we don't have sufficient evidence of any particular place.

 

I thought it had to be narcissism Trump wrote about. Based on his disaster in Iran, I'm certainly inclined to think he didn't personally write The Art of the Deal.

 

Science does not work in probabilities. Science leans on probabilities because absolute answers require more experimentation than resources allow for. Absent absolute answers, the “science” is inconclusive.

 

It does though. When you publish anything, you're reporting "significant" findings. In short, you're saying if i repeat this experiment infinite times i statistically should get the same answer some percent of time. We set arbitrary levels that are "acceptable" rates of chance occurrence.

It's actually surprisingly low too, the bare minimum you can usually publish is a 1/20 shot of a finding being due to random chance.

To that end it's not inconclusive, it's just based on probabilities. If say we determine something has a 1/1000 chance of being random chance as opposed to answer A (a new virus has a natural origin), but a 50/50 shot of being answer B (that new virus being a lab leak, for example), we don't simply say "it's inconclusive, both options should be given equal merit"

 

The level of certainty inferred from such analyses varies based on statistical mathematics which the common man fails to grasp. This inherently makes it all too convenient to declare something as statistically significant when, in fact, biased design, biased sample selection, biased recognition of results (+ vs null) all have tremendous potential to convincingly misrepresent the facts.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1182327/

I've learned to view statistical analysis as much as a tool of deception as a tool of validation.

 

Yes. In fact he did:

‘Shut down those things right away’: Calls to close ‘wet markets’ ramp up pressure on China

Dr. Anthony Fauci, America’s top infectious disease expert, is the latest to urge countries to crack down on marketplaces like the one linked to the coronavirus outbreak.

April 3, 2020

A growing chorus of voices is urging China to shut down the country’s so-called wet markets, which have come under heightened scrutiny for their role as potent breeding grounds for devastating outbreaks such as the novel coronavirus pandemic.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was the latest voice to weigh in, saying Friday that the international community should help force a global closure of the markets, arguing that the current public health crisis is a “direct result” of such unsanitary shopping places.

“I think we should shut down those things right away,” Fauci told “Fox & Friends.”

“It boggles my mind how when we have so many diseases that emanate out of that unusual human-animal interface, that we don’t just shut it down,” he said. “I don’t know what else has to happen to get us to appreciate that.”

The remarks from America’s top infectious disease expert come as lawmakers and health officials urge Beijing, in particular, to crack down on the marketplaces — where street vendors sell seafood, livestock and other animal products in packed, sometimes open-air environments that are often linked to the transmission of zoonotic viral infections.

Some experts believe Covid-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, first began spreading in a wet market in Wuhan, the city in China’s central province of Hubei where the virus originally emerged.

On Friday, Fauci encouraged countries where wet markets are not a familiar facet of everyday life to press others — presumably China, though he did not name any nation in particular — to abandon the controversial form of commerce.

“I think there are certain countries in which this is very commonplace,” he said. “I would like to see the rest of the world really lean with a lot of pressure on those countries that have that, because what we’re going through right now is a direct result of that.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has also called for the shuttering of wet markets in China, sending a letter Thursday to Beijing’s ambassador to the U.S. demanding their “immediate closure ... for the safety of the world at large.”

In a series of tweets, Graham said he had discussed with Fauci “China’s decision to reopen their wet markets,” and reported that the doctor “emphatically stated this was a crazy decision by China which puts the world’s health at risk.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/03/anthony-fauci-foreign-wet-markets-shutdown-162975

@GeneWright, stop burying your head in the sand.

I honestly don't know how you can possibly challenge the fact that "Fauci proclaimed that COVID began in the wet market". You can read for yourself he proclaimed EXACTLY that!

But as we now know, in his private diary, he believed something entirely different based, one would presume, on science not on speculation.

So, he lied to the world in 2020 when he proclaimed the wet market was the source. That should be as obvious as the nose on your face.

 

Don't forget, @CoinOKC, progressives habitually look under their glasses and past their noses, and seldom look in the mirror.