Thread by @Dry_Observer

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand I just sent the @FBI a message about the argument SARS-CoV-2 could not have been engineered or otherwise weaponized.

Included below, but with the most-dangerous parts redacted.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI "I am writing now about the prevalent assumption shared with the press and widespread over the Internet that SARS-CoV-2, the virus driving COVID-19, could not have been the product of deliberate engineering in a lab as a bioweapon."

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI "If the logic driving this assumption is featured in this article from Nature, “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” there appear to be some critical flaws in their line of reasoning."
nature.com/articles/s4159…

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI "Let me begin with a more-obvious blind spot, and then continue with a key fallacy regarding how..." <redacted>

To quote their analysis (sans formatting):

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI “While the analyses above suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may bind human ACE2 with high affinity, computational analyses predict that the interaction is not ideal7 and that the RBD sequence is different from those shown in SARS-CoV to be optimal for receptor binding7,11."

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI "Thus, the high-affinity binding of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to human ACE2 is most likely the result of natural selection on a human or human-like ACE2 that permits another optimal binding solution to arise."

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI "This is strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of purposeful manipulation.”

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI And further:
“It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of a related SARS-CoV-like coronavirus. As noted above, the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is optimized for binding to human ACE2 with an efficient solution different from those previously predicted7,11."

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI "Furthermore, if genetic manipulation had been performed, one of the several reverse-genetic systems available for betacoronaviruses would probably have been used19."

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI "However, the genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone20."

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI "Instead, we propose two scenarios that can plausibly explain the origin of SARS-CoV-2: (i) natural selection in an animal host before zoonotic transfer; and (ii) natural selection in humans following zoonotic transfer."

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI "We also discuss whether selection during passage could have given rise to SARS-CoV-2.”

We should appreciate that the authors used the word “improbable.”

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI However, let us be blunt. If you were engineering a virus to be used directly against a superpower which could wipe out your entire population with thermonuclear weapons before you could begin to ready your liquid-fueled ICBMs...

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI ...or sail your any missile submarines halfway across the Pacific before launching, would you go through additional effort to obscure its origins?

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI Especially if there were any possibility that the press and/or scientific community might exonerate you of any bioweapons research related to the virus?

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI Indeed, even if there were any possibility such a nation – much less the entire world – might be the indirect victim of your work, would making the extra effort be less probable, or more so?

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI Please note: Any substantial biowarfare program almost certainly costs far less than a credible thermonuclear deterrent again the United States, or a near-peer conventional military.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI Hence, the additional cost and effort may appear even more of a bargain for would-be bioterrorists of any stripe.

This point is perhaps even more critical going forward.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI Whatever the origin of SARS-CoV-2, if anyone can assume a genetic design representing extra work or an improbable model will make the world assume an engineered pathogen is actually natural, or muddy the waters and delay a rapid and aggressive response...

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI ...every bioweapons program will want to include any such “exculpatory” genetic markers. No matter what lengths they have to go to include them.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI We should keep this in mind when analyzing forensic data about other unusual epidemics or pandemics, henceforth.

Perhaps more importantly, there is a larger assumption about how the virus would have been created...

<Redacted>

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI The second & more significant half is for the @FBI alone.

Explaining how to start a biological weapons-of-mass-destruction program isn't something we need to get into on public forums.

And perhaps our experience with COVID-19 may help us realize how dangerous such programs are.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI To be clear, the virus *could* be naturally occurring.

But I wouldn't make assumptions based on the facts we've been provided thus far.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI To sum up:

If discovery of an engineered bioweapon could lead to thermonuclear annihilation so swift the source nation could not deter it...

They would *not* bother to make any extra effort to cover their tracks.
cc: @RepAdamSchiff @DHSgov @NSAGov @CDCgov @NatashaBertrand

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI @RepAdamSchiff @DHSgov @NSAGov @CDCgov Again, I believe *that* conclusion alone shows a logical flaw in this peer-reviewed article.

"Getting burned down to radioactive bedrock? Who would make the slightest effort to avoid *that?*"
cc: @NATO @NIH @joshrogin @dlippman @laraseligman @ericgarland
nature.com/articles/s4159…

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI @RepAdamSchiff @DHSgov @NSAGov @CDCgov @NATO @NIH @joshrogin @dlippman @laraseligman @ericgarland I’d be less concerned about an article whose authors used the word “probable,” if it weren’t being cited as absolute proof of purely natural causes... everywhere.

Congratulations may be in order for “Thousand Talents Press.”

But more likely, no one really thought it through.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI @RepAdamSchiff @DHSgov @NSAGov @CDCgov @NATO @NIH @joshrogin @dlippman @laraseligman @ericgarland To clarify, if your core argument is: “Who would go through the extra trouble, just to avoid being nuked?”

...

Everyone.

Even if WMD development never involved multi-billion dollar budgets.
@DeptofDefense @DARPA @GCHQ @AIVD

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI @RepAdamSchiff @DHSgov @NSAGov @CDCgov @NATO @NIH @joshrogin @dlippman @laraseligman @ericgarland @DeptofDefense @DARPA @GCHQ @AIVD If there’s classified intelligence making it clear COVID-19 has purely natural origins, then great!

But we might want to skip a public argument this flimsy, on the off chance anyone *does* read it.

Ever.

Being a rather pressing issue at the moment.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI @RepAdamSchiff @DHSgov @NSAGov @CDCgov @NATO @NIH @joshrogin @dlippman @laraseligman @ericgarland @DeptofDefense @DARPA @GCHQ @AIVD If someone outside the field needs around ten minutes to see the problem...

Counting reading and rereading the article to see if they were actually serious, and something wasn’t missing...

Then perhaps we could advance more rigorous arguments in the future?

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI @RepAdamSchiff @DHSgov @NSAGov @CDCgov @NATO @NIH @joshrogin @dlippman @laraseligman @ericgarland @DeptofDefense @DARPA @GCHQ @AIVD If we permit this to be the prevailing public view, it won’t matter if every intelligence agency on Earth knows better.

We’ll be encouraging future bioterrorists in the belief they can get away with it given a novel natural source or some extra effort in their engineering.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI @RepAdamSchiff @DHSgov @NSAGov @CDCgov @NATO @NIH @joshrogin @dlippman @laraseligman @ericgarland @DeptofDefense @DARPA @GCHQ @AIVD This will be true whatever the provenance of the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself.

This argument, far from being conclusive, is misleading and should not be allowed to stand.

@atrupar @NatashaBertrand @FBI @RepAdamSchiff @DHSgov @NSAGov @CDCgov @NATO @NIH @joshrogin @dlippman @laraseligman @ericgarland @DeptofDefense @DARPA @GCHQ @AIVD Apparently Western/#fvey intelligence agrees with the basic argument presented above.

Given the evidence they're presenting that China *was* developing an untreatable, human-contagious bat virus, and we knew about it.
dailytelegraph.com.au/coronavirus/bo…