OK, they didn’t actually call it that, they used more measured, scientific terms
Scientists discredit raccoon dog Covid origin study
A study suggesting that raccoon dogs may have started the Covid pandemic is “risibly thin” and compiled by authors who have previously claimed to have “incontrovertible” proof of a market origin, scientists have warned.
Miriam Webster defines “risible” as “arousing or provoking laughter. Associated with, relating to, or used in laughter.” So, the study is so thin it causes laughter. So, pure trash
Yet after the study was published last night, several experts said the claims were misleading, arguing that the sale of raccoon dogs at the market was already widely known, and that discovering their DNA proved little about the origins of the outbreak.
A letter from Biosafety Now, a group of experts calling for tighter control on lab experiments which could create deadly pathogens, said: “The data provide no substantive new information about the origins of Covid-19, even if taken at face value.
“There is no evidence that this raccoon dog was even infected with SARS-CoV-2, as there was also human DNA in the sample, and the viral material could just as easily have come from an infected human.”
A statement from the Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens, the World Health Organisation group looking into how the pandemic started, also stated that the paper “does not provide conclusive evidence as to the intermediate host or origins of the virus”.
The study was leaked, and not even published till Monday, and, scientists already knew it was trash in relation to showing any link that Wuhan Flu came from raccoon dogs. It seems like a ready excuse 3 years on, when they had been blaming it on bats and pangolins, anything but that laboratory which was investigating coronaviruses and has a shoddy record with lab leaks and was right down the road.
