Sure, covid came from the wet markets and not the poorly run lab doing gain of function research on it.
Several things I find interesting about this comment:
China has never been adjudicated in any court wrg to their role or the origin of COVID19, yet here Greenman has made a decision on what happened. Based on what? Interesting. I thought forming opinions was off-limits for greenman until a court tells him what to think? Yet again, greenman violates his own greenman's law of independent human thought
Here's a guy that doesn't fucking know what gain of function means, has no idea how this research works or what is required. What risks and what benefits are involved. Yet, here greenman has an opinion over it, despite his constant insistence in nearly every "conversation" here that he doesn't really follow the news, or most things, and just leads his life. Let's the experts talk about their things. Not his problem. But, you know, he's suddenly stepping into qualifications as a peer reviewer for this field.
How fascinating.
Where then does greenman suddenly gain all of this knowledge from things he always claims to stay away from, so much so that he sees himself capable of forming opinions over the things that he would never do without being legally told that he can think a certain way? (again, his own oft-repeated standard when it comes to simple adult thought)
Hey guys, do you think maybe greenman is just an irredeemable lying cvnt that simply doesn't give a fuck about honest debate and conversation? Do you think he ever believes half of the shit he posts or is anything better than a fucking lying simp for far right sociopaths?