Has SARS-CoV-2 been isolated?

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
Well, you will continue your troll ways regardless.
The bottom line is the specificity of the virus cannot be duplicated in a lab because of the near uncountable variations that have to be gone through to get to the ones that show the ability to penetrate human and other cells.

But of course you will deny that since your Phd thesis on this subject has proven otherwise. Can you show us your Phd thesis?

@Metal-Brain
Ah, because someone who wins the NP prize means he is infallible.
Got it.

So the bottom line is thousands of people who got the C19 vaccine will die of cancer, is that your stance?

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
Ah, because someone who wins the NP prize means he is infallible.
Got it.

So the bottom line is thousands of people who got the C19 vaccine will die of cancer, is that your stance?

@metal-brain said
Predictably, you think you know better than a Nobel Prize winner for Medicine. His credentials are better than yours, wildgrass and the other dork that doesn't want to accept reality.

The bottom line is the specificity of the virus is determine by virus genetic engineers that know much more about how viruses work than anybody else that claims to. These are biowarfare a ...[text shortened]... h far less expertise is a leap of faith on your part. You don't know. You are just repeating gossip.

Lack of the definite origin of 2019-nCoV has led to speculation that 2019-nCoV might be derived from genetic manipulation or even for the purpose of use as a bioweapon.... A recent informally presented report showed that 2019-nCoV had four insertions in the spike glycoprotein gene that is critical for the virus to enter the target cells when compared to other coronaviruses... This study implies that 2019-nCoV might be generated by gaining gene fragments from the HIV-1 genome..... Our results demonstrated no evidence that the sequences of these four inserts are HIV-1 specific or the 2019-nCoV viruses obtain these insertions from HIV-1.... Blast against viral sequence database also showed these insertion sequences widely exist in all kinds of viruses from bacteriophage, influenza, to giant eukaryotic viruses (Table 1).... Sequences that completely match the insertion 3 and 4 sequences were not found in any HIV-1 sequences. This clearly shows that these insertion sequences are widely present in living organisms including viruses, but not HIV-1 specific... Biased, partial and incorrect analysis can dangerously lead to conclusions that fuel conspiracies and harm the process of true scientific discoveries and the effort to control the damage to public health.

@wildgrass said
Let's debunk this once and for all shall we? These guys aren't (yet) Nobel winners, but they seem to know what they're talking about. Unlike Dr. Montagnier, they have data to support their thesis.

Lack of the definite origin of 2019-nCoV has led to speculation that 2019-nCoV might be derived from genetic manipulation or even for the purpose of use as a bioweapon.... ...[text shortened]... control the damage to public health.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7033698/

Bill Gates' good friend Fauci funded scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other institutions for work on gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.
Many scientists have criticized gain of function research, which involves manipulating viruses in the lab to explore their potential for infecting humans, because it creates a risk of starting a pandemic from accidental release.

https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741

In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million.

Did we get our money's worth?

@metal-brain said
Here is an excerpt from the link below:

"#4 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: CDC Admitted They Made a Digital Virus of 30,000 Base Pairs Using 37 Actual Sample Base Pairs

As covered in my previous article SARS-CoV-2: The Stitched Together, Frankenstein Virus, the CDC has already admitted that SARS-CoV-2 is a computer-generated digital virus, not a real living virus ...[text shortened]... it here."

https://www.globalresearch.ca/10-reasons-sars-cov-2-imaginary-theoretical-virus/5735833

@metal-brain said
Here is an excerpt from the link below:

"#4 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: CDC Admitted They Made a Digital Virus of 30,000 Base Pairs Using 37 Actual Sample Base Pairs

As covered in my previous article SARS-CoV-2: The Stitched Together, Frankenstein Virus, the CDC has already admitted that SARS-CoV-2 is a computer-generated digital virus, not a real living virus ...[text shortened]... it here."

https://www.globalresearch.ca/10-reasons-sars-cov-2-imaginary-theoretical-virus/5735833

“In silico” is pseudo-Latin for “theoretical”; in plain English, synonyms for theoretical are “imaginary” and “make-believe.”

@metal-brain said
What sequence?
Where did they obtain that sequence?

You seem to be willfully ignoring the allegation that most of the sequencing is fraudulent. Where did they get the data from? You need to establish the data is legit and not fraudulent.

https://nerdhaspower.weebly.com/ratg13-is-fake.html

@soothfast said
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/novel-coronavirus-sarscov2-images

@wildgrass said
All the relevant information is in the article and publically available. To address your questions, sequences are deposited in genbank from several labs with all relevant contact info. The scientists are public figures. I think if you are questioning the validity you can email the authors directly to ask for the raw chromatograms. Their contact info is in the article. They respond.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sars-cov-2/

@metal-brain said
Why don't you do that?
Don't you want to know?

The original Corman-Drosten paper admits they used a theoretical virus sequence for all their work and calculations. They, like the CDC and every government and agency, claim this is only because no isolate was ever available. I wonder if any of these scientists every asked WHY the isolate has never been available?

Why don't you ask them?

@wildgrass said
I do know. I have read the paper and seen the sequence.

I was only suggesting that you reach out to the researchers if you think the info is fraudulent. It's pretty simple. Just ask them. Their correspondence email is in the paper and they are quite accessible.

Please post back here with their reply.

@Metal-Brain

Are you so stupid you can't email them yourself? I guess that kind of thing is against your MO as a pro level troll.

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain

Are you so stupid you can't email them yourself? I guess that kind of thing is against your MO as a pro level troll.