Thread by @kmpanthagani

There's a new "explosive paper" (not yet available) that claims SARS-CoV-2 was man-made.

An earlier version of these claims was published by the same group last year. Until the new paper is available, here's a review of the previous claims, many of which appear unchanged.

In their original paper, they lay out several claims based on the structure of the spike protein which they claim are evidence that it was engineered by humans and did not arise naturally. They use a lot of flowery scientific language, but here is what they argue, simplified:

1. They blasted 'rolling windows of 6 amino acids' of the spike protein, and some of them matched to the human genome (were 'human like'). I did the same thing for this sentence, and much of it also matched to the human genome,

because 6 amino acids is an incredibly short sequence to blast, and will have some similarity to just about every genome in existence.

2. The spike protein has concentrated positive charge on its surface - they claim this is a sign of genetic engineering, because the charges are on the *surface*, and thus can bind receptors better.

No.

Many proteins have positive charges on their surface. It is not a strong indicator of manipulation, but rather is a strong indicator the spike protein is made up of atoms.

3. These charges allow the virus to bind other tissues, again suggesting that's a sign of engineering.

Please enjoy this fully functional turbine that arose naturally in bacteria, and don't tell me a cluster of charges is a sign of human engineering. bit.ly/3p2zK9i

(The new paper, as reported by the Daily Mail, mentions there are 4 positively charged amino acids in a row, which it claims defies the laws of physics, and thus is man-made. But as others have pointed out, even man-made things must obey the laws of physics.)

4. There is another domain which has a slightly different isoelectric point than other similar domains, and has some new disulfide bonds. They postulate this domain is also engineered and is being "field tested," again without providing any evidence.

Before the next part, they say "We refute pre-emptively objection that this methodology does not result in absolute proof by observing that to make such a statement is to misunderstand scientific logic."

So there's that.

Next they tell a story of a series of experiments which they allege show proof of engineering of SAS-CoV-2. Some of it they state without references or evidence. The studies they do cite tell a story of scientists studying coronaviruses using common techniques.

None of it is a slam-dunk "this was definitely engineered." It's no secret that people were studying coronaviruses before the pandemic; the fact that people were studying them, especially after the SARS and MERS outbreaks, is not proof of anything nefarious.

Their narrative could be described, at best, as a very, very weak case of circumstantial evidence, and one that could likely be made about any field of virology should a pandemic strain arise.

In summary, this paper is very odd, and takes common protein features and dramatically speculates these to be signs of human engineering, despite nature having a far more impressive track record than humans for making pandemics.

That is the summary of their original claims published previously. Reading the Daily Mail's reporting on the new paper (which, according to them, is soon to be published), many of the arguments seem similar in the new paper.

Also my sincere apologies to people who saw the original version of this thread, where I confused the previously published paper with the new one. Since the title and authors were the same I mixed up the two. Deleted that thread and reposted the analysis of the old paper here.

Thanks for all your kind comments on this thread, glad it's helpful! For those who are interested, I run a website devoted to assessing and explaining erroneous scientific claims, right now mostly focused on the COVID pandemic. Check it out if you please!

youcanknowthings.com