Republican witnesses at House Govt Reform Coronavirus crisis subcommittee hearing: testimony by Steven Quay and Emeritus Professor Muller nail SARS-CoV-2 as having a lab origin. 19 minutes

The arguments by Quay and Muller are profound, yet easily understood, and brief: why this could only have a lab origin and why it was not investigated by virologists who knew better:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeW5sI-R1Qg&ab_channel=FoxNews

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Anonymous
1 year ago
Anonymous
Anonymous
1 year ago

I am concerned that the latest narrative — to describe this as an "accident" that began in China — is yet another attempt to misdirect attention from alternative facts and conclusions. So much of this global pandemic appears to have been pre-planned and highly coordinated. The architects of this plan would not leave human infection and world-wide spread to some random accident. Rather, they would be likely to plan the origin story to give cover and credibility, so they would start with the whole "wet market" charade, with a fallback to those dastardly Chinese at the Wuhan institute getting sloppy with their petri dishes. Consider though, that if you already had engineered this virus in a lab — in any part of the world — it would be relatively easy to make it look like it came from Wuhan. And to make sure you could get your entire agenda well and truly rolling, you would be sure to take your virus to other parts of the world as well, in a manner that might mimic spread by infected travelers. Obviously this sounds far-fetched tin-foil hat nut case conspiricy craziness, and I am not aware of any scientific research that explores such an alternative, and intentional, roll-out hypothesis. The main circumstantial argument in favor of it though, is just how *ready* the powers-that-be were to jump in, with such global reach, and in such prepared agreement.

Scroll to Top