The spamming goes on and on.

VOTE BLUE AND VOTE GAVIN

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

In 2026, it is ridiculous to think that covid was not engineered from gain of function research. The only dispute is from the medical research establishment in a basic conflict of interest situation where they won't bit the hand that feeds them or undermine their research activities.

---

As I said, this is an article of faith for you folks. Any scientific study that contradicts the claim (including all these years later when Fauci is out of office) is from the "medical research establishment" that can't be trusted.

Obama banned gain of function research which is why Tony Fauci went overseas to do gain of function research. I really don't understand liberals complete blind spot here and will defend Fauci to the death and you gain nothing for doing it. Everybody saw how dangerous that research was and guess what... it was proven to be dangerous and our nations paid for it. Btw Fauci continued to do GoF research in the USA while it was banned. You should be calling for him to be arrested. Him doing this created the virus.

I hope the Fauci Affair results in an appellate ruling that holds Presidential pardons have more holes than a Swiss cheese.

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

Well, there is enough circumstantial evidence of the lab leak theory, as detailed extensively already, to indicate that it was leaked from the Wuhan Lab. Unfortunately, the people in power have hidden the details of what actually went on at the Wuhan Lab. What we do know, which has been public for a long time, is that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) conducted extensive research on bats and bat-borne coronaviruses for over a decade. We also know that COVID 19 is a coronavirus that likely came from a bat and spread 7 miles from the Wuhan Lab at a wet market with lots of bats.

Some folks, blind to the truth, won't even admit that some proof exists that COVID 19 was leaked from the Wuhan Lab. Most folks are willing to connect the dots. This is elementary level stuff.

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

DiabloWags said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I think Rodgers is doing a good enough job of acting the fool on his own.

---

Roger's reminds me of the NFL version of "flat-earther" Kyrie Irving. Both immensely talented athletes.
Only one title.

---

Kyrie was also right about the vaccine and took tons of heat for it. Stephen A apologized recently.

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

I mean, there is plenty of evidence that the virus came from Wuhan, the place. Did it leak directly from the lab or is the lab there because it's studying viruses that are likely to come from bats and other animals in that region? (HINT: That last part is true.)

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

I mean, there is plenty of evidence that the virus came from Wuhan, the place. Did it leak directly from the lab or is the lab there because it's studying viruses that are likely to come from bats and other animals in that region? (HINT: That last part is true.)

---

The wet market is roughly 520 miles from the Guangdong Province, where coronavirus SARS originated. The Wet market is roughly 4100 miles from Saudi Arabia, where coronavirus MERS originated. The wet market is only 7 miles from the Wuhan Lab, where coronavirus Covid 19 appears to have originated.

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

You are using the word proof incorrectly. There is evidence, not proof.

Try this sentence on for size:
"There is some proof Trump colluded with Russia". I believe that is true. There is plenty of evidence to support it. But I would not make the statement in quotes. I would use the word evidence, not proof.

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

You are using the word proof incorrectly. There is evidence, not proof.

Try this sentence on for size:
"There is some proof Trump colluded with Russia". I believe that is true. There is plenty of evidence to support it. But I would not make the statement in quotes. I would use the word evidence, not proof.

---

I would never say that there is no proof that Trump colluded with Russia. It is certainly unproven though. Thanks.

oski003 said:

---

Some folks, blind to the truth, won't even admit that some proof exists that COVID 19 was leaked from the Wuhan Lab. Most folks are willing to connect the dots. This is elementary level stuff.

---

And yet your posts here have offered no scientific evidence or proof that the virus was leaked.
Just lots of speculation on your part.

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Some folks, blind to the truth, won't even admit that some proof exists that COVID 19 was leaked from the Wuhan Lab. Most folks are willing to connect the dots. This is elementary level stuff.

---

And yet your posts here have offered no scientific evidence or proof that the virus was leaked.
Just lots of speculation on your part.

---

This post is full of speculation on your part. You may want to actually read all of his posts on the matter.

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Some folks, blind to the truth, won't even admit that some proof exists that COVID 19 was leaked from the Wuhan Lab. Most folks are willing to connect the dots. This is elementary level stuff.

---

And yet your posts here have offered no scientific evidence or proof that the virus was leaked.
Just lots of speculation on your part.

---

Yeah, okay. Lol.

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Some folks, blind to the truth, won't even admit that some proof exists that COVID 19 was leaked from the Wuhan Lab. Most folks are willing to connect the dots. This is elementary level stuff.

---

And yet your posts here have offered no scientific evidence or proof that the virus was leaked.
Just lots of speculation on your part.

---

This post is full of speculation on your part. You may want to actually read all of his posts on the matter.

---

You are terribly mistaken.

And even though I only got 1000 on my SAT and I did not attend a Top 20 law school like many here, there has been nothing presented here other than circumstantial "evidence" and speculation when it comes to the origin of Covid-19.

The fact that someone actually posted a link from the White House as to "The True Origins of COVID-19" is downright comical. - - - As if this White House and Donald Trump have any credibility when it comes to the sciences.

Please recall that we are talking about a President of the United States who once pontificated on injecting a disinfectant to cleanse oneself of the Covid virus.

Your idea of "credibility" must be vastly different than mine.
Never mind the fact that I've made millions investing in life science companies.



Lab Leak: The True Origins of Covid-19 The White House

Cool story. Once again, I encourage you to actually read all of his posts on the subject because you clearly haven't.

BearlySane88 said:

---

Cool story. Once again, I encourage you to actually read all of his posts on the subject because you clearly haven't.

---

Asked and answered.
But feel free to provide a post here that provided scientific evidence that Covid-19 was leaked from a lab in Wuhan China.

There is none.

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Cool story. Once again, I encourage you to actually read all of his posts on the subject because you clearly haven't.

---

Asked and answered.
But feel free to provide a post here that provided scientific evidence that Covid-19 was leaked from a lab in Wuhan China.

There is none.

---

Asked and answered.

There are plenty which is why it's clear you didn't read them.

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Cool story. Once again, I encourage you to actually read all of his posts on the subject because you clearly haven't.

---

Asked and answered.
But feel free to provide a post here that provided scientific evidence that Covid-19 was leaked from a lab in Wuhan China.

There is none.

---

There are plenty which is why it's clear you didn't read them.

---

I am asking you to cite one specific example of scientific evidence.
But you are clearly unable to do so because they don't exist.
Take care.

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Cool story. Once again, I encourage you to actually read all of his posts on the subject because you clearly haven't.

---

Asked and answered.
But feel free to provide a post here that provided scientific evidence that Covid-19 was leaked from a lab in Wuhan China.

There is none.

---

There are plenty which is why it's clear you didn't read them.

---

I am asking you to cite one specific example.
But you are clearly unable to do so because they don't exist.
Take care.

---

Because you're popping into a convo that's been going on for days. Read it, you'll learn things.

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

You are using the word proof incorrectly. There is evidence, not proof.

Try this sentence on for size:
"There is some proof Trump colluded with Russia". I believe that is true. There is plenty of evidence to support it. But I would not make the statement in quotes. I would use the word evidence, not proof.

---

I would never say that there is no proof that Trump colluded with Russia. It is certainly unproven though. Thanks.

---

You are using the word proof wrong

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Cool story. Once again, I encourage you to actually read all of his posts on the subject because you clearly haven't.

---

Asked and answered.
But feel free to provide a post here that provided scientific evidence that Covid-19 was leaked from a lab in Wuhan China.

There is none.

---

There are plenty which is why it's clear you didn't read them.

---

I am asking you to cite one specific example.
But you are clearly unable to do so because they don't exist.
Take care.

---

Because you're popping into a convo that's been going on for days. Read it, you'll learn things.

---

No, you're wrong about that.
I've read it before and there is nothing to learn here except for people conflating speculation with scientific proof.

Thanks.

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

You are using the word proof incorrectly. There is evidence, not proof.

Try this sentence on for size:
"There is some proof Trump colluded with Russia". I believe that is true. There is plenty of evidence to support it. But I would not make the statement in quotes. I would use the word evidence, not proof.

---

I would never say that there is no proof that Trump colluded with Russia. It is certainly unproven though. Thanks.

---

You are using the word proof wrong

---

Doesn't look like it

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

Cool story. Once again, I encourage you to actually read all of his posts on the subject because you clearly haven't.

---

Asked and answered.
But feel free to provide a post here that provided scientific evidence that Covid-19 was leaked from a lab in Wuhan China.

There is none.

---

There are plenty which is why it's clear you didn't read them.

---

I am asking you to cite one specific example.
But you are clearly unable to do so because they don't exist.
Take care.

---

Because you're popping into a convo that's been going on for days. Read it, you'll learn things.

---

No, you're wrong about that.
I've read it before and there is nothing to learn here except for people conflating speculation with scientific proof.

Thanks.

---

Okie dokie!

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

You are using the word proof incorrectly. There is evidence, not proof.

Try this sentence on for size:
"There is some proof Trump colluded with Russia". I believe that is true. There is plenty of evidence to support it. But I would not make the statement in quotes. I would use the word evidence, not proof.

---

I would never say that there is no proof that Trump colluded with Russia. It is certainly unproven though. Thanks.

---

You are using the word proof wrong

---

Doesn't look like it

---

"to establish a fact"

The evidence is just evidence. It does not establish a fact and become proof.

dajo9 said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

You are using the word proof incorrectly. There is evidence, not proof.

Try this sentence on for size:
"There is some proof Trump colluded with Russia". I believe that is true. There is plenty of evidence to support it. But I would not make the statement in quotes. I would use the word evidence, not proof.

---

I would never say that there is no proof that Trump colluded with Russia. It is certainly unproven though. Thanks.

---

You are using the word proof wrong

---

Doesn't look like it

---

"to establish a fact"

The evidence is just evidence. It does not establish a fact.

---

Funny how the two words are listed as synonyms.

"CIA assesses with low confidence that a research-related origin of the COVID-19 pandemic is more likely than a natural origin based on the available body of reporting," a CIA spokesperson said in a statement. "CIA continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the COVID-19 pandemic remain plausible."

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

You are using the word proof incorrectly. There is evidence, not proof.

Try this sentence on for size:
"There is some proof Trump colluded with Russia". I believe that is true. There is plenty of evidence to support it. But I would not make the statement in quotes. I would use the word evidence, not proof.

---

I would never say that there is no proof that Trump colluded with Russia. It is certainly unproven though. Thanks.

---

You are using the word proof wrong

---

Doesn't look like it

---

"to establish a fact"

The evidence is just evidence. It does not establish a fact.

---

Funny how the two words are listed as synonyms.

---

But not a definition. All proof is evidence but not all evidence is proof.

Are you willing to agree with the statement "there is some proof Trump colluded with Russia"? Oski003 believes there is some proof Trump colluded with Russia. I disagree.

dajo9 said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

I said that there was no proof that COVID came from a lab and that is, in fact, a true statement. There is some circumstantial evidence, which is not proof. Friendly reminder that this was the statement from Rodgers that I was mocking:

"Now, you can't talk about the COVID stuff because obviously it was made in a lab in China. That's like not even questionable anymore."

Some people complained that Fauci and other people treated the natural-origin theory like it was conclusively proven and that the lab-leak theory was impossible. That's true. I agree with you that this was wrong. Aaron Rodgers is now doing the same thing from the other side and I am mocking him for that as well, just as you like to mock Fauci. I don't think that's out of bounds at all, but apparently you do. The lab-leak theory is now an article of faith for some of you folks.

---

There is a crap ton of circumstantial evidence that the lab leak theory is true. There is even evidence that the stuff going on at the Wuhan Lab has been purposely kept hidden from the public. You said "There is no proof." Let's just pretend that you simply said the lab leak theory has not been proven and move on.

---

But "there is no proof" is a correct statement

---

In that case, this is also a correct statement:

There is NO PROOF that Fauci is a good person and not a child molester.

---

I agree there's no proof he's a good person. That's a hard thing to prove.

For a serious accusation like "child molester" I would say the burden of proof is on the person making the claim that he is, rather than that he isn't. You know, sort of like people who claim COVID was leaked from a lab.

---

There is no proof that you are even a human being.

---

Another extraordinary claim for which the burden of proof would be on you.

---

You apparently get to say who has the burden of proof on what as a way of deflecting that you really meant to say that the lab leak theory is unproven (just like the natural origin theory).

---

The various lab leak theories also seem to include some kind of nefarious business on the part of some group of people, so yes . . . I think you have a higher burden of proof when claiming that as definitely true. I have always acknowledged that it is possible and can't be ruled out. I call out people like Aaron Rodgers and some folks on this board who claim that it is definitively true.

---

Yeah, there is definitely some proof that the leak came from Wuhan. Obviously, there isn't enough evidence to conclude 100% that COVID leaked from Wuhan but there is certainly a ton of circumstantial evidence. A lot of stuff is being hidden from the public.

---

You are using the word proof incorrectly. There is evidence, not proof.

Try this sentence on for size:
"There is some proof Trump colluded with Russia". I believe that is true. There is plenty of evidence to support it. But I would not make the statement in quotes. I would use the word evidence, not proof.

---

I would never say that there is no proof that Trump colluded with Russia. It is certainly unproven though. Thanks.

---

You are using the word proof wrong

---

Doesn't look like it

---

"to establish a fact"

The evidence is just evidence. It does not establish a fact.

---

Funny how the two words are listed as synonyms.

---

But not a definition. All proof is evidence but not all evidence is proof.

Are you willing to agree with the statement "there is some proof Trump colluded with Russia"? Oski003 believes there is some proof Trump colluded with Russia. I disagree.

---

Yes, depending on how you view it.

bearister said:

---

In 1976 my buddy saw a player on the Cal hoop team turn in his blue book 15 minutes into a 3 hour exam. Ah, the good old days.

---

I was sitting in an upper division math class, waiting for the instructor to arrive for the first day of class when Charles Johnson walked in. (Still one of my all time Cal hoop favorites.). When the instructor started talking about the curriculum and he realized he was in the wrong room, he left about as quickly as moved on the court.

I'm still waiting for this answer.

Vote Blue and Free Fauci

SBGold said:

---

I'm still waiting for this answer.

Vote Blue and Free Fauci

---

Same advice I gave Wags, all you have to do is read

SBGold said:

---

The spamming goes on and on.

VOTE BLUE AND VOTE GAVIN

---

posted while spamming on and on