Events
Publications
Latest imagesDa remiziramo...
Page 42 of 50
Page 42 of 50 • 
1 ... 22 ... 41, 42, 43 ... 46 ... 50
Re: Da remiziramo...
by veber 17/12/2020, 23:17
bivša mi maznula kolač dok sam starog vozio na terapiju.Ra wrote:Nije. Nije ni tvoja bivša.veber wrote:kaj ti je svetoje maznul acc?Ra wrote:veber wrote:nisu orasi?T. wrote:Je*i se ti i mjere...
Vidiš da pišemo o maslinama...
Je li ga tebi možda mazno Edo majka?
veber- Posts : 53509
2014-12-30
Re: Da remiziramo...
by Guest 18/12/2020, 00:35
Scientists outraged by Peter Daszak leading enquiry into possible Covid lab leak
Expressions of outrage and incredulity have greeted the announcement that Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, has been chosen to lead a Task Force that will examine the possibility that Covid-19 could have emerged from a lab, as part of an investigation into the origins of the virus.
Daszak has promised to undertake the investigation “with an open mind”. But this is hard to imagine, given his previous dismissals of suggestions that SARS-CoV-2 could have leaked from a lab as “preposterous”, “baseless”, “crackpot”, “conspiracy theories” and “pure baloney”.
Misinformation super-spreader
Daszak’s investigation forms part of the work of the Lancet Covid-19 Commission – a body launched in July to look at the handling of the pandemic and “offer practical solutions”. In a statement, the Commission said it was “extremely important that the research into the origins of SARS-CoV-2 should proceed … in a scientific and objective way that is unhindered by geopolitical agendas and misinformation”.
But Daszak himself is considered a misinformation super-spreader by critics like Rutgers University microbiologist Richard Ebright, who has accused him of lying “on a Trumpian scale”, and the evolutionary theorist Bret Weinstein who has labelled him “Patient Zero for misinformation” on the origins of Covid-19.
A 100-million-dollar-plus conflict of interest
There is also the issue of conflicts of interest. Although Daszak declared in The Lancet that he has “no competing interests” on Covid-19, and likewise told the Washington Post he has “no conflicts of interest”, Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute, points out that he is a “long-time friend, collaborator and funder of the Shi lab” – the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) lab led by Shi Zhengli that is most often identified as the probable source of any lab leak.
In fact, Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance has helped finance both the WIV’s bat coronavirus surveillance and its bat coronavirus gain-of-function research (research aimed at making a virus more infective), with the help of multi-million dollar grants from the US government. This, of course, means Daszak’s own activities are material to the subject he is investigating: the origins of a bat-derived coronavirus pandemic that broke out in the very city to which he helped lab workers bring bat coronaviruses for storage, analysis and experimentation.
As Richard Ebright has noted, “For persons who were directly involved in funding, promoting, and/or performing bat coronavirus research and bat coronavirus gain-of-function research at WIV, avoiding a possible finding of culpability for triggering a pandemic is a powerful motivator.” And Daszak would be at the very top of the list of those involved in funding, promoting and collaborating in that research.
More broadly, as Ebright also notes, Daszak's EcoHealth Alliance has received over $100 million in funding from US government agencies for a variety of virus surveillance and virus gain of function work – the kind of work that could be brought into serious question if Daszak found any evidence it contributed to causing the pandemic.
How did The Lancet manage to overlook such an enormous conflict of interest, Ebright wonders, while Dr Filippa Lentzos, an expert on biological threats at King’s College London, tweeted, “Goodness. I can't imagine a lead investigator with more vested interests!”
More misinformation
The Broad Institute’s Alina Chan drily suggests the Lancet Commission “could have also just asked the WIV to investigate themselves directly”, saving the Lancet time, money and effort. After all, Chan points out, if they thought that Daszak’s longstanding Wuhan connections – he has collaborated with Shi Zhengli’s team on coronaviruses for 15 years – meant he would be well placed to reveal what had been going on there, then they were clearly mistaken.
Chan’s comments relate to the publication by the Sunday Times of an Insight investigation into RaTG13 – the bat coronavirus said to be most closely related to SARS-COV-2. Because the Sunday Times’ journalists couldn’t get the WIV to answer any of their questions about RaTG13’s history or the lack of transparency surrounding it, they turned to Peter Daszak for answers.
They wanted to know why if RaTG13 had, as now appears, been collected in 2013 by the WIV from a mine where miners had died from an illness remarkably similar to Covid-19, it took Daszak’s long-time collaborator Shi Zhengli and her team until 2020 to publish a description of the virus. In other words, if they had known about it for 7 years, why was it suddenly produced like a rabbit out of a hat only after the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak was starting to develop into a global pandemic?
Daszak told the Sunday Times that RaTG13 had just been sitting in a WIV freezer for seven years with nobody taking any interest in it before the pandemic broke out. But Alina Chan has shown there’s evidence from an online database that RaTG13 was accessed at WIV repeatedly in 2017 and 2018, even though Daszak had told the Sunday Times that nobody at the WIV “went back to that sample” from 2013 until 2020, or maybe the end of 2019, when they “tried to get full genome sequencing”. It was that sequence that was then published in the journal Nature, showing it to be 96.2% identical to SARS-COV-2.
In fact, after the evidence emerged that RaTG13 was being accessed at the WIV in 2017 and 2018, Shi Zhengli admitted in a Q&A with Science magazine that her WIV team had fully sequenced the most closely related virus genome to SARS-COV-2 back in 2018, i.e. well before the start of the pandemic and not after it had begun, as Daszak had claimed. Such sequencing can, of course, lead on to experimentation.
Gaslighting the media and the public
At the very least, this shows Daszak to be, as Chan tactfully puts it, “misinformed” about a critical issue on which he has made definitive public statements. But some will inevitably suspect him of worse, given his record of gaslighting the media and the public with claims that can easily be shown to be untrue. To take two straightforward instances, he has claimed that “lab accidents are extremely rare”, when all the evidence shows they’re common, and that they “have never led to largescale [disease] outbreaks”, even though a lab leak is widely accepted to have caused a previous pandemic (H1N1 influenza).
In fact, Daszak’s claim has been exposed as a lie once again in the past few days, with news of a leak at a vaccine lab in China causing a brucellosis outbreak that has infected thousands.
Daszak’s appointment “ridiculous”, says Kristian Andersen
In the light of all this, the news of Daszak’s appointment attracted some scornful responses.
The biotech entrepreneur Yuri Deigin tweeted laughter emojis and commented, “No, that’s not The Onion [a satirical news site]. Truly, a case of ‘we investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing’.”
Richard Ebright responded, “One could not possibly choose a less appropriate, more conflicted, person to lead the investigation. Unless one chose Zhengli Shi herself.”
Dan Sirotkin, co-author of the first peer-reviewed paper to suggest a possible lab origin for Covid-19, put it more colourfully: “Having Peter Daszak lead this is like having Goebbels chase war criminals.”
Even the Scripps Research Institute biologist Kristian Andersen, one of the most prominent rebutters of a possible lab origin, expressed dismay. “Not the right person for the job... That's ridiculous”, he tweeted.
https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/19538-scientists-outraged-by-peter-daszak-leading-enquiry-into-possible-covid-lab-leak
Expressions of outrage and incredulity have greeted the announcement that Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, has been chosen to lead a Task Force that will examine the possibility that Covid-19 could have emerged from a lab, as part of an investigation into the origins of the virus.
Daszak has promised to undertake the investigation “with an open mind”. But this is hard to imagine, given his previous dismissals of suggestions that SARS-CoV-2 could have leaked from a lab as “preposterous”, “baseless”, “crackpot”, “conspiracy theories” and “pure baloney”.
Misinformation super-spreader
Daszak’s investigation forms part of the work of the Lancet Covid-19 Commission – a body launched in July to look at the handling of the pandemic and “offer practical solutions”. In a statement, the Commission said it was “extremely important that the research into the origins of SARS-CoV-2 should proceed … in a scientific and objective way that is unhindered by geopolitical agendas and misinformation”.
But Daszak himself is considered a misinformation super-spreader by critics like Rutgers University microbiologist Richard Ebright, who has accused him of lying “on a Trumpian scale”, and the evolutionary theorist Bret Weinstein who has labelled him “Patient Zero for misinformation” on the origins of Covid-19.
A 100-million-dollar-plus conflict of interest
There is also the issue of conflicts of interest. Although Daszak declared in The Lancet that he has “no competing interests” on Covid-19, and likewise told the Washington Post he has “no conflicts of interest”, Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute, points out that he is a “long-time friend, collaborator and funder of the Shi lab” – the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) lab led by Shi Zhengli that is most often identified as the probable source of any lab leak.
In fact, Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance has helped finance both the WIV’s bat coronavirus surveillance and its bat coronavirus gain-of-function research (research aimed at making a virus more infective), with the help of multi-million dollar grants from the US government. This, of course, means Daszak’s own activities are material to the subject he is investigating: the origins of a bat-derived coronavirus pandemic that broke out in the very city to which he helped lab workers bring bat coronaviruses for storage, analysis and experimentation.
As Richard Ebright has noted, “For persons who were directly involved in funding, promoting, and/or performing bat coronavirus research and bat coronavirus gain-of-function research at WIV, avoiding a possible finding of culpability for triggering a pandemic is a powerful motivator.” And Daszak would be at the very top of the list of those involved in funding, promoting and collaborating in that research.
More broadly, as Ebright also notes, Daszak's EcoHealth Alliance has received over $100 million in funding from US government agencies for a variety of virus surveillance and virus gain of function work – the kind of work that could be brought into serious question if Daszak found any evidence it contributed to causing the pandemic.
How did The Lancet manage to overlook such an enormous conflict of interest, Ebright wonders, while Dr Filippa Lentzos, an expert on biological threats at King’s College London, tweeted, “Goodness. I can't imagine a lead investigator with more vested interests!”
More misinformation
The Broad Institute’s Alina Chan drily suggests the Lancet Commission “could have also just asked the WIV to investigate themselves directly”, saving the Lancet time, money and effort. After all, Chan points out, if they thought that Daszak’s longstanding Wuhan connections – he has collaborated with Shi Zhengli’s team on coronaviruses for 15 years – meant he would be well placed to reveal what had been going on there, then they were clearly mistaken.
Chan’s comments relate to the publication by the Sunday Times of an Insight investigation into RaTG13 – the bat coronavirus said to be most closely related to SARS-COV-2. Because the Sunday Times’ journalists couldn’t get the WIV to answer any of their questions about RaTG13’s history or the lack of transparency surrounding it, they turned to Peter Daszak for answers.
They wanted to know why if RaTG13 had, as now appears, been collected in 2013 by the WIV from a mine where miners had died from an illness remarkably similar to Covid-19, it took Daszak’s long-time collaborator Shi Zhengli and her team until 2020 to publish a description of the virus. In other words, if they had known about it for 7 years, why was it suddenly produced like a rabbit out of a hat only after the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak was starting to develop into a global pandemic?
Daszak told the Sunday Times that RaTG13 had just been sitting in a WIV freezer for seven years with nobody taking any interest in it before the pandemic broke out. But Alina Chan has shown there’s evidence from an online database that RaTG13 was accessed at WIV repeatedly in 2017 and 2018, even though Daszak had told the Sunday Times that nobody at the WIV “went back to that sample” from 2013 until 2020, or maybe the end of 2019, when they “tried to get full genome sequencing”. It was that sequence that was then published in the journal Nature, showing it to be 96.2% identical to SARS-COV-2.
In fact, after the evidence emerged that RaTG13 was being accessed at the WIV in 2017 and 2018, Shi Zhengli admitted in a Q&A with Science magazine that her WIV team had fully sequenced the most closely related virus genome to SARS-COV-2 back in 2018, i.e. well before the start of the pandemic and not after it had begun, as Daszak had claimed. Such sequencing can, of course, lead on to experimentation.
Gaslighting the media and the public
At the very least, this shows Daszak to be, as Chan tactfully puts it, “misinformed” about a critical issue on which he has made definitive public statements. But some will inevitably suspect him of worse, given his record of gaslighting the media and the public with claims that can easily be shown to be untrue. To take two straightforward instances, he has claimed that “lab accidents are extremely rare”, when all the evidence shows they’re common, and that they “have never led to largescale [disease] outbreaks”, even though a lab leak is widely accepted to have caused a previous pandemic (H1N1 influenza).
In fact, Daszak’s claim has been exposed as a lie once again in the past few days, with news of a leak at a vaccine lab in China causing a brucellosis outbreak that has infected thousands.
Daszak’s appointment “ridiculous”, says Kristian Andersen
In the light of all this, the news of Daszak’s appointment attracted some scornful responses.
The biotech entrepreneur Yuri Deigin tweeted laughter emojis and commented, “No, that’s not The Onion [a satirical news site]. Truly, a case of ‘we investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing’.”
Richard Ebright responded, “One could not possibly choose a less appropriate, more conflicted, person to lead the investigation. Unless one chose Zhengli Shi herself.”
Dan Sirotkin, co-author of the first peer-reviewed paper to suggest a possible lab origin for Covid-19, put it more colourfully: “Having Peter Daszak lead this is like having Goebbels chase war criminals.”
Even the Scripps Research Institute biologist Kristian Andersen, one of the most prominent rebutters of a possible lab origin, expressed dismay. “Not the right person for the job... That's ridiculous”, he tweeted.
https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/19538-scientists-outraged-by-peter-daszak-leading-enquiry-into-possible-covid-lab-leak
Guest- Guest
Re: Da remiziramo...
by Guest 18/12/2020, 00:42
Why Daszak?
So why on earth did the Lancet Covid-19 Commission put in charge of an “objective” investigation into the origins of the pandemic someone who:
1. has a $100-million-plus conflict of interest
2. is a long-term friend, collaborator and funder of those he will be investigating
3. has previously dismissed the possibility of a lab leak as “crackpot”
4. and has a track record of seriously inaccurate and misleading statements about the issues in question?
Two things stand out. One is that the chair of the wider Lancet Covid-19 Commission, the American economist Jeffery Sachs, appears to share Daszak’s viewpoint. Sachs is on record as saying that the idea of a WIV lab leak is “illogical”, arguing that “neither the biology nor chronology support the laboratory-release story”.
The other point, given that this is a Lancet Commission, is that while Daszak is viewed by his critics as one of the most conflicted and unreliable voices on this issue, that is not the view promoted by most of the mainstream media, let alone by the science media, of which the Lancet is part. Nor is it the view of the science establishment.
Science or censorship?
Every one of the scathing criticisms of Daszak quoted in this article, most of which come from well credentialed scientists, have been taken from social media.
By contrast, the Telegraph, in breaking the news of his appointment, did not print a single word of concern from anybody, and neither did followup press reports.
Why not?
A recent article by Rowan Jacobsen in the Boston Review, profiling Alina Chan, asked if the way the scientific community was responding to the lab leak hypothesis was “science or censorship”. Jacobsen noted how quickly after the start of the pandemic this hypothesis had been ruled out, with Peter Daszak very much to the fore in rubbishing it. Jacobsen says an “unhealthy absolutism set in”, but praises Alina Chan for bucking the trend and probing the issue in an open-minded fashion, and openly and fearlessly communicating her conclusions.
But no one should think that has been an easy path for Chan to follow. She told Jacobsen, “It is very difficult to do research when one hypothesis has been negatively cast as a conspiracy theory.” And researchers like Chan, who have explored the lab leak hypothesis, report experiencing serious difficulties in getting their evidence published in journals.
Even the journal Nature’s Twitter account has become notorious for blocking those who suggest a lab origin.
And Chan thinks some social media sites are flagging Jacobsen’s Boston Review article as “misinformation” if readers posting links to it suggest SARS-CoV-2 was most likely engineered in a lab. If so, that’s pretty ironic, given that the article is about censorship.
And certainly, those less cautious than Chan in expressing their views have had their social media accounts deleted.
So why would internet giants that have dragged their feet over taking down racist and other viciously inflammatory material, or combating rampant climate change disinformation, be so anxious to suppress material about a lab-origin for Covid-19?
The virologist Jonathan Latham, who even had a comment expressing polite disagreement with Daszak removed from the Guardian website, says, “The scientific community has made it very clear that they don’t want to hear about a lab origin. You can see that in the coverage of the pandemic. There was a letter in (the) Lancet calling the lab origin a ‘conspiracy,’ and what you gather from that is that the bigwigs of virology who signed the letter have set up the dynamic that anyone who comes up with reasonable theories is necessarily a conspiracist. Every scientist in the world knows what way the wind is blowing. We want to say that this is outrageous.”
Needless to say, Daszak was one of the bigwig signatories of that Lancet letter. And if more scientists fail to speak out against his appointment as the Lancet Commission’s lead investigator, it will reflect the success of a censorship strategy that has not just allowed Daszak to evade serious scrutiny but to be put in charge of investigating himself and his associates.
So why on earth did the Lancet Covid-19 Commission put in charge of an “objective” investigation into the origins of the pandemic someone who:
1. has a $100-million-plus conflict of interest
2. is a long-term friend, collaborator and funder of those he will be investigating
3. has previously dismissed the possibility of a lab leak as “crackpot”
4. and has a track record of seriously inaccurate and misleading statements about the issues in question?
Two things stand out. One is that the chair of the wider Lancet Covid-19 Commission, the American economist Jeffery Sachs, appears to share Daszak’s viewpoint. Sachs is on record as saying that the idea of a WIV lab leak is “illogical”, arguing that “neither the biology nor chronology support the laboratory-release story”.
The other point, given that this is a Lancet Commission, is that while Daszak is viewed by his critics as one of the most conflicted and unreliable voices on this issue, that is not the view promoted by most of the mainstream media, let alone by the science media, of which the Lancet is part. Nor is it the view of the science establishment.
Science or censorship?
Every one of the scathing criticisms of Daszak quoted in this article, most of which come from well credentialed scientists, have been taken from social media.
By contrast, the Telegraph, in breaking the news of his appointment, did not print a single word of concern from anybody, and neither did followup press reports.
Why not?
A recent article by Rowan Jacobsen in the Boston Review, profiling Alina Chan, asked if the way the scientific community was responding to the lab leak hypothesis was “science or censorship”. Jacobsen noted how quickly after the start of the pandemic this hypothesis had been ruled out, with Peter Daszak very much to the fore in rubbishing it. Jacobsen says an “unhealthy absolutism set in”, but praises Alina Chan for bucking the trend and probing the issue in an open-minded fashion, and openly and fearlessly communicating her conclusions.
But no one should think that has been an easy path for Chan to follow. She told Jacobsen, “It is very difficult to do research when one hypothesis has been negatively cast as a conspiracy theory.” And researchers like Chan, who have explored the lab leak hypothesis, report experiencing serious difficulties in getting their evidence published in journals.
Even the journal Nature’s Twitter account has become notorious for blocking those who suggest a lab origin.
And Chan thinks some social media sites are flagging Jacobsen’s Boston Review article as “misinformation” if readers posting links to it suggest SARS-CoV-2 was most likely engineered in a lab. If so, that’s pretty ironic, given that the article is about censorship.
And certainly, those less cautious than Chan in expressing their views have had their social media accounts deleted.
So why would internet giants that have dragged their feet over taking down racist and other viciously inflammatory material, or combating rampant climate change disinformation, be so anxious to suppress material about a lab-origin for Covid-19?
The virologist Jonathan Latham, who even had a comment expressing polite disagreement with Daszak removed from the Guardian website, says, “The scientific community has made it very clear that they don’t want to hear about a lab origin. You can see that in the coverage of the pandemic. There was a letter in (the) Lancet calling the lab origin a ‘conspiracy,’ and what you gather from that is that the bigwigs of virology who signed the letter have set up the dynamic that anyone who comes up with reasonable theories is necessarily a conspiracist. Every scientist in the world knows what way the wind is blowing. We want to say that this is outrageous.”
Needless to say, Daszak was one of the bigwig signatories of that Lancet letter. And if more scientists fail to speak out against his appointment as the Lancet Commission’s lead investigator, it will reflect the success of a censorship strategy that has not just allowed Daszak to evade serious scrutiny but to be put in charge of investigating himself and his associates.
Guest- Guest
Re: Da remiziramo...
by Guest 18/12/2020, 01:00
ako ne znate o čemu se radi ili vas uopće ne zanima, samo pogledajte tog lika i zapamtite njegovu facu. to je jedan od glavnih igrača koji nam je iskemijao sa svojom prijateljicom kineskinjom u Wuhanu virus SARS-CoV-2 i onda nam poklonio pandemiju. lik dobiva na dnevnoj bazi tisuće prijetnji ubojstvom ali ne nervira se on jer drži svih za muda i na svom tweet profilu otvoreno se sprda i ruga cijelom čovječanstvu.
ovo je školski primijer psihopate.
Guest- Guest
Re: Da remiziramo...
by Guest 18/12/2020, 01:29
Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance Has Hidden Almost $40 Million In Pentagon Funding And Militarized Pandemic Science
“Pandemics are like terrorist attacks: We know roughly where they originate and what’s responsible for them, but we don’t know exactly when the next one will happen. They need to be handled the same way — by identifying all possible sources and dismantling those before the next pandemic strikes.”
This statement was written in the New York Times earlier this year by Peter Daszak. Daszak is the longtime president of the EcoHealth Alliance, a New York-based non-profit whose claimed focus is pandemic prevention. But the EcoHealth Alliance, it turns out, is at the very centre of the COVID-19 pandemic in many ways.
To depict the pandemic in such militarized terms is, for Daszak, a commonplace. In an Oct. 7 online talk organized by Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, Daszak presented a slide titled “Donald Rumsfeld’s Prescient Speech.”:
“There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns — there are things we don’t know we don’t know.” (This Rumsfeld quote is in fact from a news conference)
In the subsequent online discussion, Daszak emphasized the parallels between his own crusade and Rumsfeld’s, since, according to Daszak, the “potential for unknown attacks” is “the same for viruses”.
Daszak then proceeded with a not terribly subtle pitch for over a billion dollars. This money would support a fledgling virus hunting and surveillance project of his, the Global Virome Project — a “doable project” he assured watchers — given the cost of the pandemic to governments and various industries.
Also on the video was Columbia University professor Jeffrey Sachs. Sachs is a former special advisor to the UN, the former head of the Millennium Villages Project, and was recently appointed Chair of the newly-formed EAT Lancet Commission on the pandemic. In September, Sachs’ commission named Daszak to head up its committee on the pandemic’s origins. Daszak is also on the WHO’s committee to investigate the pandemic’s origin. He is the only individual on both committees.
These leadership positions are not the only reason why Peter Daszak is such a central figure in the COVID-19 pandemic, however. His appointment dismayed many of those who are aware that Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance funded bat coronavirus research, including virus collection, at the Wuhan Institute for Virology (WIV) and thus could themselves be directly implicated in the outbreak.
For his part, Daszak has repeatedly dismissed the notion that the pandemic could have a lab origin. In fact, a recent FOIA by the transparency group U.S. Right To Know revealed that Peter Daszak drafted an influential multi-author letter published on February 18 in the Lancet. That letter dismissed lab origin hypothesese as “conspiracy theory.” Daszak was revealed to have orchestrated the letter such as to “avoid the appearance of a political statement.”
Sachs for his part seemed surprised by Daszak’s depiction of Rumsfeld but Daszak reassured him. “It’s an awesome quote! And yes, it’s Donald Rumsfeld, Jeff, and I know he’s a Republican, but — what a genius!”
https://www.independentsciencenews.org/news/peter-daszaks-ecohealth-alliance-has-hidden-almost-40-million-in-pentagon-funding/
“Pandemics are like terrorist attacks: We know roughly where they originate and what’s responsible for them, but we don’t know exactly when the next one will happen. They need to be handled the same way — by identifying all possible sources and dismantling those before the next pandemic strikes.”
This statement was written in the New York Times earlier this year by Peter Daszak. Daszak is the longtime president of the EcoHealth Alliance, a New York-based non-profit whose claimed focus is pandemic prevention. But the EcoHealth Alliance, it turns out, is at the very centre of the COVID-19 pandemic in many ways.
To depict the pandemic in such militarized terms is, for Daszak, a commonplace. In an Oct. 7 online talk organized by Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, Daszak presented a slide titled “Donald Rumsfeld’s Prescient Speech.”:
“There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns — there are things we don’t know we don’t know.” (This Rumsfeld quote is in fact from a news conference)
In the subsequent online discussion, Daszak emphasized the parallels between his own crusade and Rumsfeld’s, since, according to Daszak, the “potential for unknown attacks” is “the same for viruses”.
Daszak then proceeded with a not terribly subtle pitch for over a billion dollars. This money would support a fledgling virus hunting and surveillance project of his, the Global Virome Project — a “doable project” he assured watchers — given the cost of the pandemic to governments and various industries.
Also on the video was Columbia University professor Jeffrey Sachs. Sachs is a former special advisor to the UN, the former head of the Millennium Villages Project, and was recently appointed Chair of the newly-formed EAT Lancet Commission on the pandemic. In September, Sachs’ commission named Daszak to head up its committee on the pandemic’s origins. Daszak is also on the WHO’s committee to investigate the pandemic’s origin. He is the only individual on both committees.
These leadership positions are not the only reason why Peter Daszak is such a central figure in the COVID-19 pandemic, however. His appointment dismayed many of those who are aware that Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance funded bat coronavirus research, including virus collection, at the Wuhan Institute for Virology (WIV) and thus could themselves be directly implicated in the outbreak.
For his part, Daszak has repeatedly dismissed the notion that the pandemic could have a lab origin. In fact, a recent FOIA by the transparency group U.S. Right To Know revealed that Peter Daszak drafted an influential multi-author letter published on February 18 in the Lancet. That letter dismissed lab origin hypothesese as “conspiracy theory.” Daszak was revealed to have orchestrated the letter such as to “avoid the appearance of a political statement.”
Sachs for his part seemed surprised by Daszak’s depiction of Rumsfeld but Daszak reassured him. “It’s an awesome quote! And yes, it’s Donald Rumsfeld, Jeff, and I know he’s a Republican, but — what a genius!”
https://www.independentsciencenews.org/news/peter-daszaks-ecohealth-alliance-has-hidden-almost-40-million-in-pentagon-funding/
Guest- Guest
Re: Da remiziramo...
by darth_vader 18/12/2020, 02:37
aben wrote:epikur37 wrote:Evo sam borerom uhvatio trenirku...zamotalo i stegnulo jaja.
pocijepalo novu trenirku ...
Pozdrav.
ča je borero?
jesi ti živ, ćo? stroh me bilo da se nisi razboli pa u bolnicu, duplo na grbaču poreznih obveznikov...
darth_vader-
Posts : 19734
2014-04-17
Age : 45
Re: Da remiziramo...
by michaellcmacha 18/12/2020, 07:13
Ok, ajmo sad lagano podvući refu. 
To su brojevi, koji su u odnosu na početak rasprave između mene i šejkera narasli za cca 1300%.
Ali dobro na Ivanje počinjemo sa MASOVNIM cijepljenjem tako da bi se situacija trebala bitno popraviti tamo do idućeg Božića...
Nije da želim koga plašiti ali u siječnju ćemo imati na dnevnoj razini i po 150-170 smrtnih ishoda... Ali nije to tako ni strašno jer su nam kalkulacije, da će umirati samo starci i oni koji su se nepotrebno prežderavali, a ti nam ionako samo smetaju...
To su brojevi, koji su u odnosu na početak rasprave između mene i šejkera narasli za cca 1300%.
Ali dobro na Ivanje počinjemo sa MASOVNIM cijepljenjem tako da bi se situacija trebala bitno popraviti tamo do idućeg Božića...
Nije da želim koga plašiti ali u siječnju ćemo imati na dnevnoj razini i po 150-170 smrtnih ishoda... Ali nije to tako ni strašno jer su nam kalkulacije, da će umirati samo starci i oni koji su se nepotrebno prežderavali, a ti nam ionako samo smetaju...
_________________
https://i.servimg.com/u/f25/20/30/76/79/flag-k10.jpg
"Snažni su duhom, njihova je vojska ustrajna jer brani svoju DOMOVINU"
michaellcmacha- Posts : 21325
2015-08-08
Re: Da remiziramo...
by veber 18/12/2020, 07:18
ponavljanje je majka znanja
moramo se prisjetiti velikih riječi našeg cijenjenog kolege analitičara
moramo se prisjetiti velikih riječi našeg cijenjenog kolege analitičara
_________________
AfD
veber-
Posts : 53509
2014-12-30
Re: Da remiziramo...
by veber 18/12/2020, 07:32
i tako šaltam po tv-u i u kakofoniji programa naletim na nekog popa iz rijeke koji kao da je u kontaktu s kolegom vakuftetlijom i inžinjerom.
koliko lik nadrobio gluposti to je za nebilivit.
a, mlad čovjek.
ono kaj je dan simmons rekao, čovječanstvo je tehnološki u jednom stoljeću napredovalo više nego od kada je lovilo po savanama afrike.
samo je problem što je mentalno i dalje u srednjem vijeku.
koliko lik nadrobio gluposti to je za nebilivit.
a, mlad čovjek.
ono kaj je dan simmons rekao, čovječanstvo je tehnološki u jednom stoljeću napredovalo više nego od kada je lovilo po savanama afrike.
samo je problem što je mentalno i dalje u srednjem vijeku.
_________________
AfD
veber-
Posts : 53509
2014-12-30
Re: Da remiziramo...
by T. 18/12/2020, 09:16
nije sve u rentabilnosti...veber wrote:ne kužim taj mentalitet.T. wrote:Zamisli tek kako je na kraju...aben wrote:veberu, mi smo otočani, mi 40 maslin imomo na području od četire km2, da do većine ne moireš dojti ni karijolon. dogovor za nadničarenje bi tribo biti njemu 110, a meni -10.veber wrote:gle, imam i ja 40ak neobranih oraha. u biti susjed održava, čisti, pazi. meni 40, njemu 60. zagorac je pa to ispadne 65-35, ali realno neradeći imam 35%. malo ga svake godine sjebe mraz, pa je slabiji urod pa meni 30% njemu 70%.aben wrote:finally. sa razumiš zoč je maslina neobrana.veber wrote:s ekonomskog stanovišta ja bi kupio neki stari maslinik, srušio ga, stabla prodao u italiju.aben wrote:a, sa razumin.veber wrote:da se od dalmoša nemre čut za fleksu, bormašinu, lopatu, kramp i sl.aben wrote:je mi to nešto provivoš reći, ili samo testiroš tipkovnicu?veber wrote:znam.aben wrote:općenito na sjeveru veliš, dopeljaj bormašinu i dva borera. za metal.
za bauštelu veliš, a daj dopeljaj hilticu.
-veću ili manju?
bez obzira kaj imaš makitu, znaš kaj je hiltica.
kao što kutnu brusilicu zoveš fleksa po austrijskoj firmi Flex koja proizvodi rezne šajbe.
na flajšmašini koristiš šajbu 2-3-5-7-12 već prema potrebi.
u našen kraju neš čuti ni flekserica nikad, osin ako je radnik zagrebanac, srbin ili turčin
kod vas se čuje;
maslina je neobrana
nema nikog da ju bere
ćaća je zapro oči
a mi pivamo ispod masline da ju nema tko obrat.
znam da se ne čuje.
jer je papa zaspa, maslina je neobrana, a pet mulaca ispod pjevaju kako je pape zanavik zaspa i da je maslina neobrana.
mogli bi isto tuliti dok beru maslinu, pa ne bi bila neobrana.
jesi ikad čuo slavonsku da je stari umro, a da se žito nije ovršilo. ono uz zvuk tamburice
stari je umro
sutra nam je žetva
valja žito u hambar spremit
bit će duga zima
pa, intersantno je kako su inžinjeri loši ekonomisti..
zarada od maslin je manja od zarade od pivanja o maslinami. ako bismo češali masline, gubili bi šoldi.
od države pobrao poticaje za mladi maslinik, na zemljištu bi pride napravio heritage dalmoš living, kada bi maslina došla u rod pustio bi dušik i prijavio mraz usred ljeta i pobrao odštetu.
samo gledam s nekog naslijednog aspekta.
samo kaj meni nije bitan plod. moj stari ih je pažljivo birao i usmjeravao.
a u brodogradnji sirovi orah na plantaži je 800€/m3.
tako da je i orah neobran, samo ja ne tulim s društvom ispod njih kako su neobrani.
ali ka to vidiš, duša ti se preporodi.
a da neko oće dojti viti tvoju pripizdinu, pivo bi ti i o orasima, nebojse
50 stabala na 7-8 lokacija...
Udaljene po 3-4 km...
Bez ceste, kosina, srušene gomile...
ako je nerentabilno prodaj. sruši, posadi nekaj kaj je rentabilno.
spomenuti orasi uskoro idu u rušenje i u italiju, zemlja u prodaju. da dobijem 10kn/m2 zaradio sam 100 000kn jer nisam ni orao ni kopao.
plus orah koji ide u furnir.
da imam stari maslinik, i da tulim da je neobran, srušio bi ga kao što rekoh. u italiji prodao stabla.
popikao mladice s dušikom ih pofurio i nakon toga bi od poljoprivrednog zemljišta napravio miješanu građevinsku zonu i prodao bi zemljište treći red od mora-kaj ovi znadu kaj je Nm, nomadske fore i suživot sa prirodom.
(treba na visu, korčuli, komiži sada kupovat)
maslinik star 150-200 godina ima afektivnu vrijednost...
osim toga, ako kroz godinu na maslinik utrošiš 15-20 dana i 1.000 kn (gorivo za kola i pilu, kas), a dobiješ cca 150-200 kg vrhunskog ulja, ne može se kazati da nije rentabilan...
ja pričam o teškoćama nas maslinara s obzirom na rascjepkanost parcela i stare dilbenice od prije 100 godina...
ali nisu to nesavladive teškoće, ima u tome i neke draži...
T.- Posts : 17408
2014-04-14
Age : 83
Re: Da remiziramo...
by Guest 18/12/2020, 09:30
veber wrote:i tako šaltam po tv-u i u kakofoniji programa naletim na nekog popa iz rijeke koji kao da je u kontaktu s kolegom vakuftetlijom i inžinjerom.
koliko lik nadrobio gluposti to je za nebilivit.
a, mlad čovjek.
ono kaj je dan simmons rekao, čovječanstvo je tehnološki u jednom stoljeću napredovalo više nego od kada je lovilo po savanama afrike.
samo je problem što je mentalno i dalje u srednjem vijeku.
Prepricaj Feberu..primjetio sam da ti je vokabular prilicno siromasan,a o nekim argumentima niti da spomenem..uvijek isto..red neodredjenosti,red izrazavanja ljubavi prema Eri,p opet red neodredjenosti..
Menthalna slika je kod tebe,vec u vrijednosti rariteta,treba ponuditi ovima..
https://www.sothebys.com/en/ nisil sam vec primjetio da nish mudro,niti uceno tehnoloski,kad se zazivas toliko tehnologije,rekao a niti stavio neki link,gdje bar kolikotoliko razumijes tematiku..
samo ko nenahranjeno peso,mumlaš i njurgas..
Guest- Guest
Re: Da remiziramo...
by michaellcmacha 18/12/2020, 09:35
OK Al koji se ti kurac javljaš, em se ne razumiješ u ništa, em lažeš dok zineš, em jedeš pokvarenu hranu, vjerojatno piješ i pivu koju si jesenas otvorio...Legendovich wrote:veber wrote:i tako šaltam po tv-u i u kakofoniji programa naletim na nekog popa iz rijeke koji kao da je u kontaktu s kolegom vakuftetlijom i inžinjerom.
koliko lik nadrobio gluposti to je za nebilivit.
a, mlad čovjek.
ono kaj je dan simmons rekao, čovječanstvo je tehnološki u jednom stoljeću napredovalo više nego od kada je lovilo po savanama afrike.
samo je problem što je mentalno i dalje u srednjem vijeku.
Prepricaj Feberu..primjetio sam da ti je vokabular prilicno siromasan,a o nekim argumentima niti da spomenem..uvijek isto..red neodredjenosti,red izrazavanja ljubavi prema Eri,p opet red neodredjenosti..
Menthalna slika je kod tebe,vec u vrijednosti rariteta,treba ponuditi ovima..
https://www.sothebys.com/en/ nisil sam vec primjetio da nish mudro,niti uceno tehnoloski,kad se zazivas toliko tehnologije,rekao a niti stavio neki link,gdje bar kolikotoliko razumijes tematiku..
samo ko nenahranjeno peso,mumlaš i njurgas..
michaellcmacha- Posts : 21325
2015-08-08
Re: Da remiziramo...
by Eroo 18/12/2020, 09:45
Ra wrote:Majstor je majstor, kapa doli, bez obzira na struku.Eroo wrote:I švajs-majstori također znaju biti od koristi, moraš priznati.Ra wrote:
Znala sam. Znaš samo kuhati.
Zato se ti i ljutiš kad ti Ero spomene švajsanje?
Usput, vidim da se ljudi strašno ljute kad im netko napiše da su obični radnici. Svi bi nešto bili akademski obrazovani, pametni, učeni, priznati i poznati....
Teško je biti normalan i običan u toj sili obrazovanih, sposobnih, pametnih i superiornih forumskih likova.
A ja bih uvijek odabrala raditi s dobrim zidarom prije nego s lošim profesorom. Zidar je svjestan tko je i što je, svoje snage i svojih ograničenja, daje svoj maksimum i ima koristi od njegovog znanja. Loš profesor nije svjestan svoje nesvijesti. :)
I kvazi stručnjaci su zastupljeni u svim strukama i zanimanjima.
Prema tome!
![:]](/users/3113/42/81/98/smiles/1823623843.gif)
Svašta ima u Allahovoj bašči...
_________________
Nulla rosa sine spina
Eroo- Posts : 78068
2016-07-22
Re: Da remiziramo...
by veber 18/12/2020, 09:47
ti si maloumni kreten.Legendovich wrote:veber wrote:i tako šaltam po tv-u i u kakofoniji programa naletim na nekog popa iz rijeke koji kao da je u kontaktu s kolegom vakuftetlijom i inžinjerom.
koliko lik nadrobio gluposti to je za nebilivit.
a, mlad čovjek.
ono kaj je dan simmons rekao, čovječanstvo je tehnološki u jednom stoljeću napredovalo više nego od kada je lovilo po savanama afrike.
samo je problem što je mentalno i dalje u srednjem vijeku.
Prepricaj Feberu..primjetio sam da ti je vokabular prilicno siromasan,a o nekim argumentima niti da spomenem..uvijek isto..red neodredjenosti,red izrazavanja ljubavi prema Eri,p opet red neodredjenosti..
Menthalna slika je kod tebe,vec u vrijednosti rariteta,treba ponuditi ovima..
https://www.sothebys.com/en/ nisil sam vec primjetio da nish mudro,niti uceno tehnoloski,kad se zazivas toliko tehnologije,rekao a niti stavio neki link,gdje bar kolikotoliko razumijes tematiku..
samo ko nenahranjeno peso,mumlaš i njurgas..
natipkao si hrpu slova koja samo u tvojoj bedastoj glavi izgledaju kao rečenice.
em si patološki lažljivac, em si glup i neinteligentan.
iz tvojih i erinih upisa nikaj pametnog.
samo kada se sjetim da ti kao "kemičar" za jednog ružičku veliš "tamo neki balkanjeros".
znači da tvoje elementarno znanje je nula.
_________________
AfD
veber-
Posts : 53509
2014-12-30
Re: Da remiziramo...
by michaellcmacha 18/12/2020, 09:49
Bogami tebe je sklepo skroz naopaka...Eroo wrote:Ra wrote:Majstor je majstor, kapa doli, bez obzira na struku.Eroo wrote:I švajs-majstori također znaju biti od koristi, moraš priznati.Ra wrote:
Znala sam. Znaš samo kuhati.
Zato se ti i ljutiš kad ti Ero spomene švajsanje?
Usput, vidim da se ljudi strašno ljute kad im netko napiše da su obični radnici. Svi bi nešto bili akademski obrazovani, pametni, učeni, priznati i poznati....
Teško je biti normalan i običan u toj sili obrazovanih, sposobnih, pametnih i superiornih forumskih likova.
A ja bih uvijek odabrala raditi s dobrim zidarom prije nego s lošim profesorom. Zidar je svjestan tko je i što je, svoje snage i svojih ograničenja, daje svoj maksimum i ima koristi od njegovog znanja. Loš profesor nije svjestan svoje nesvijesti. :)
I kvazi stručnjaci su zastupljeni u svim strukama i zanimanjima.
Prema tome!
Svašta ima u Allahovoj bašči...
michaellcmacha- Posts : 21325
2015-08-08
Re: Da remiziramo...
by Guest 18/12/2020, 09:56
no.a ti se kao nekog kurtza razumijes..mudro slusas sto pametniji od tebe pricaju pa onda to jako glasno govoris,tako ispada da kaobajagi znas..zato ti Gnječo ovdje odlicno i dojde..prisvajati necije znanje ili saznanjen ije kaznjivo,ali je podlu,a ti si jako veliki podmukli podlac..michaellcmacha wrote:OK Al koji se ti kurac javljaš, em se ne razumiješ u ništa, em lažeš dok zineš, em jedeš pokvarenu hranu, vjerojatno piješ i pivu koju si jesenas otvorio...Legendovich wrote:veber wrote:i tako šaltam po tv-u i u kakofoniji programa naletim na nekog popa iz rijeke koji kao da je u kontaktu s kolegom vakuftetlijom i inžinjerom.
koliko lik nadrobio gluposti to je za nebilivit.
a, mlad čovjek.
ono kaj je dan simmons rekao, čovječanstvo je tehnološki u jednom stoljeću napredovalo više nego od kada je lovilo po savanama afrike.
samo je problem što je mentalno i dalje u srednjem vijeku.
Prepricaj Feberu..primjetio sam da ti je vokabular prilicno siromasan,a o nekim argumentima niti da spomenem..uvijek isto..red neodredjenosti,red izrazavanja ljubavi prema Eri,p opet red neodredjenosti..
Menthalna slika je kod tebe,vec u vrijednosti rariteta,treba ponuditi ovima..
https://www.sothebys.com/en/ nisil sam vec primjetio da nish mudro,niti uceno tehnoloski,kad se zazivas toliko tehnologije,rekao a niti stavio neki link,gdje bar kolikotoliko razumijes tematiku..
samo ko nenahranjeno peso,mumlaš i njurgas..
lazem?naravno..ti nisi zasluzio istinu da ti se govori...
jedem hranu pokvarenu??Irudtejebo,kakve to veze ima sa temom..
..pivu koju jesenas...pa jebote ...sto bi to trebalo reci??...ono znam da si ficicki sheban,i da papaš kao bebica,"zdravo i hranjivo",ali ne biti bash toliki zavidnik..ja debeo ili mrsav uvijek tlak perfektan,krv,da doktorica mi kaze,da bi za zlato mogao mijenjati,a pojedem i veliku slavosku kulenovu seku u dva puta,bez da mi zlo dojde..neki dan si pricao kako si fakat fizicki sheban..daj si onda mira..najedi se kulenove seke,speka i ostaloga,pa sto Bog da,ne zivjeti ko preplaseno pašce,dropeći šiju u jogurt bezmasni...e Miha Miha..
Guest- Guest
Re: Da remiziramo...
by Guest 18/12/2020, 09:57
usput..nije dobro...
uci Miha usput..
BERLIN
Germany recorded 590 deaths from the novel coronavirus on Wednesday, the highest number of deaths in a day since the beginning of the pandemic.
The country also saw 20,815 new infections in the past 24 hours, up from 14,054 new cases confirmed on the previous day, according to the country's disease control agency.
Despite a partial lockdown that began on Nov. 2, Germany was far from achieving its target of reducing new infections to less than 50 per 100,000 people in a seven-day period.
The Robert Koch Institute (RKI) reported that the incidence rate was now 149 cases per 100,000 people, nearly three times more than the government's target.
The institute has warned that new infections among older people has increased in recent weeks, and led to a rise in the number of serious cases and deaths.
According to the latest figures, currently 4,257 coronavirus patients are receiving treatment in intensive care units (ICUs). Over 2,535 of them are on mechanical ventilators.
"These can be avoided if all prevent the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus with the help of infection control measures," the RKI said in its latest report.
"It is therefore still necessary for the entire population to be committed to infection prevention and control, e.g. by consistently observing rules of distance and hygiene - also outdoors -, by ventilating indoor spaces and, where indicated, by wearing a community mask correctly. Crowds of people - especially indoors - should be avoided."
Germany has the fifth-highest tally of coronavirus infections in Europe, behind France, Spain, the UK, and Italy.
The national total now stands at over 1.2 million cases with at least 19,932 deaths.
uci Miha usput..
BERLIN
Germany recorded 590 deaths from the novel coronavirus on Wednesday, the highest number of deaths in a day since the beginning of the pandemic.
The country also saw 20,815 new infections in the past 24 hours, up from 14,054 new cases confirmed on the previous day, according to the country's disease control agency.
Despite a partial lockdown that began on Nov. 2, Germany was far from achieving its target of reducing new infections to less than 50 per 100,000 people in a seven-day period.
The Robert Koch Institute (RKI) reported that the incidence rate was now 149 cases per 100,000 people, nearly three times more than the government's target.
The institute has warned that new infections among older people has increased in recent weeks, and led to a rise in the number of serious cases and deaths.
According to the latest figures, currently 4,257 coronavirus patients are receiving treatment in intensive care units (ICUs). Over 2,535 of them are on mechanical ventilators.
"These can be avoided if all prevent the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus with the help of infection control measures," the RKI said in its latest report.
"It is therefore still necessary for the entire population to be committed to infection prevention and control, e.g. by consistently observing rules of distance and hygiene - also outdoors -, by ventilating indoor spaces and, where indicated, by wearing a community mask correctly. Crowds of people - especially indoors - should be avoided."
Germany has the fifth-highest tally of coronavirus infections in Europe, behind France, Spain, the UK, and Italy.
The national total now stands at over 1.2 million cases with at least 19,932 deaths.
Guest- Guest
vuksadinare- Posts : 99847
2015-09-08
Page 42 of 50 • 1 ... 22 ... 41, 42, 43 ... 46 ... 50
Similar topicsPage 42 of 50
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum