Ying☮️ Profile picture
quod verum tutum; Leninism & Lysenkoism doomed to fail.
Jan 27, 2022 4 tweets 6 min read
In July 2019, Yi-Gang Tong, the PLA Major General visited JHCHS, the top US think tank on biosecurity.

Did this visit foreshadow the Covid coverup?
iecd.buct.edu.cn/2019/0426/c292…

@DrLiMengYAN1 @LawrenceSellin @dasher8090 @BillyBostickson ImageImageImageImage Tong is not only a civilian scientist in BUCT, he works on military projects as a long-time researcher in PLA Unit 62035 when he visited the US.
see Tong's CV: tonglab.cc/?page_id=148

Tong was known as the Group leader of the WHO-China Joint Mission on SARS-CoV-2 origin study. ImageImageImageImage
Aug 29, 2021 19 tweets 4 min read
[Thread] 关于情报部门的病毒起源调查
川普离任前的1月15日,David Asher和Miles Yu(余茂春) 领衔美国国务院发布“事实资料清单”
2017-2021.state.gov/fact-sheet-act…
这份文件的重要性如何强调都不过分,请有心的读者再次阅读。它明确了很多基本的事实,除了明确指向实验室,特别提出武汉病毒所与中共军方的合作。 (2) 这份文件提供了后续调查的事实基础,不可逆地推进了病毒源头的挖掘,不是阴谋论,病毒真相从此突破了各种误导的重围。
请注意,这份报告的出炉也被内部各种压力掣肘,“被迫淡化跟中共生物武器项目相关的线索”。
washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-adm…
注:拜登政府上台后终止了该团队的调查
Jul 9, 2021 4 tweets 3 min read
Jan 9, 2020 1:13 a.m.
Fang Li wanted to discuss Covid-19 with Ralph Baric.

My collage photo will tell you why. Don't miss it. 👇 Locating the "Immediate host" rushed to their mind.
Because Zhiwei Chen, Bojian Zheng and Yi Guan (Hongkong University) managed to create this narrative for SARS-1.
Zhiwei Chen's collaborator Bojian Zheng on the collage photo, btw.
Jun 23, 2021 11 tweets 3 min read
Why CCP's cover-up of the origin of Covid-19 would work? Short answer: Team Daszak. More elaborate: group thinking, data-hungry but with dogmatic premises.
As Colin Butler said, "We all think in groups and herds, so if a paper is well known, then cite it."
disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/why-does-the… The latest Bloom paper on "deleted data":
- Earliest reported sequences from Wuhan are not the sequences most similar to SARS-CoV-2's bat coronavirus relatives.
- Sequences associated with the market differ from RaTG13 by more mutations than seqs collected at various locations.
May 16, 2021 11 tweets 6 min read
李晓松进入我的视野是因为一份名单。尊重死者,先说这份名单。大家熟悉的可能就这两三位,对不对?名单里面一半是病毒学家,而且都发表过冠状病毒相关的论文,另一半是病毒检疫的一线专家,还有北京上海两地的疾控中心专员。其次,“定向委托课题”,那就是中共直接指派的 (1) ImageImage 那到底是什么项目需要这么多冠状病毒专家和病毒检疫和鉴定人员呢?跟“艾滋病和病毒性肝炎”直接相关的只有一位况轶群。
我把他们大致分成三个组:
病毒学家:石正丽、刘翟、蒋太交、孙兵、王建伟、况轶群
病毒检测:曹务春、鲁辛辛、貌盼勇、史智扬、王静
疫情管控:徐建国、李晓松、袁政安、张卫
(2) ImageImageImageImage
Apr 29, 2021 5 tweets 1 min read
关于Sad Truth,一点个人感想:
看到Sellin博士义愤填膺直接点名几位参议员,去年没有推动病毒真相的时候。我在想,为什么他们不推动呢,是因为我们给的材料不够么,说服力不强?急迫性不高?或者客观上美国疫情不够惨烈?(1) 美国国会运作有其自身逻辑,民众的批评和责问会给议员施加压力,可以影响具体议案的商讨,最终推进成法案,落实到行政。但抨击“他们不代表美国人民”不是我们绝大多数美国政治局外人的说辞,如果我们也去跟风骂几位议员,似乎只有泄愤,而且近似一种无能的愤怒。(2)
Feb 23, 2021 8 tweets 1 min read
德国大报《每日镜报》预约了汉堡大学另外一位进化学家Matthias Glaubrecht来写文章“澄清”维森丹格 (Wiesendanger) 教授的观点。看似驳斥,其实是推进了这个话题的进一步发酵。
文章给大众解释了病毒的诸多蹊跷之处,也说实验室事故不太可能。那更合理的解释是什么呢?(1)

tagesspiegel.de/wissen/debatte… 首先,文章的标题就很有意思,“没有什么是不可能的 ” ,表明“病毒起源”必须是开放的讨论。企图以“阴谋论”为借口打压“实验室起源说”可以洗洗睡了。WHO强压“实验室起源”观点恰恰是舆论催化剂。