Are they spooks or scientists? And why do they regurgitate the globalist/Fauci/Daszak narrative so glibly? Virologists Andersen and Garry to testify tomorrow to Congress

Here is their written testimony and my comments

This is the House Committee on Oversight’s Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. The title of the hearing is cute:

“Investigating the Proximal Origin of a Cover Up”

It deals with the authors of the Nature Medicine article “Proximal Origins” of March 2020 designed to permanently get rid of the idea that COVID19 may have originated in a laboratory. I have had much to say about this paper since I first posted on it in March through May 2020. The paper is a hash-up of meaningless gibberish, using both a straw man argument and other nonsensical ploys to say it could not have come from a lab, because… if it had come from a lab, it would have looked different. We would have used certain techniques to make it, but they were not used, ergo it did not come from a lab.

The fact that so many were taken in by this paper should worry us all, because apparently scientists are no better than anyone else (and maybe worse) at identifying logical flaws. Which begs the question: if you couldn’t see through this paper, and you are not a logical thinker, are you competent at science?

After I proposed that the authors were directed to write this nonsense by someone else (in a June 2020 taping for the film Plandemic 2) it turned out that they were! They were directed by Fauci (raking in the bucks at Georgetown) and Jeremy Farrar, who is now the Chief Spook (error, Scientist) at the WHO.

Here is a compilation of some of what I wrote in 2020 and 2021 about this subject, which RFK Jr. also interviewed me about.

Three authors of the paper will not be testifying tomorrow. Two (Eddie Holmes from Australia and Andrew Rambaut from the UK) sent their regrets. Ian lipkin appears to have skated.

Kristian Andersen (whose mama named him Kristian but didn’t manage to teach him not to lie) and Robert Garry will be there in person.

Here is the conclusion of Garry’s written testimony:

The global community remains ill-equipped to prevent or manage the emergence of novel viruses.18 Prevention efforts for the next coronavirus emergence should focus on obtaining a greater understanding of the diversity of the Coronaviridae family in wild animals, increased surveillance at the animal-human interface, and stringent oversight of the wildlife and fur trade. As mentioned earlier, I’ve spent much of my career developing countermeasures for emerging viruses. Diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for potentially pandemic coronaviruses and other high-risk viruses, can and must be developed and prepositioned.

Ignore Vitamin D, IVM and HCQ; instead be fearful, and beg me for some countermeasures. I own a company in Germantown, Maryland near Fort Detrick that would love more contracts for diagnostics, vaccine and drugs for the next pandemic, even though we supposedly have no idea what organism might cause it.

And go with the WHO-global biodefense agenda to surveille animals and people for viruses constantly, lookinng for the one with “pandemic potential.” Blame the wildlife trade, not us good guy scientists.

Here is the conclusion of Andersen’s written testimony:

The attacks directed against science and scientists are reckless and the effects, far-reaching. In the light of land-use change, population expansion, and climate change, the risk of devastating pandemics caused by novel and emerging pathogens is real and ever-increasing. We need more research and commitment to science, not less, to better prepare for them. However, scientists, including myself, who dedicate their professional lives to critically impactful research are being targeted and used as pawns in a political game. While asking the question “might this virus have come from a lab?” is a natural and reasonable one to ask — and one asked (and believed) by many people acting in good faith — at this point it is not supported by scientific evidence, and most, albeit not all, of the “lab leak” narratives are being fueled by conspiracy theories and political narratives.

Taking a complete look at all the facts, peer-reviewed scientific literature must be given appropriate weight in comparison to speculation and baseless narratives. The breadcrumbs of the origin of COVID-19 lead us directly to the doorstep of a single market in central China that was selling illegal wild-life in late 2019. I suggest we start there.

Andersen always goes on the offense—I know cause he used to do that on Twitter, then he deleted his account. Then he asks for your pity: poor scientists are being attacked unmercifully when all they want to do is help us. Feel sorry for this pawn who has made out like a bandit from his ‘biodefense’ work. Look over at China, please.

His Daszak/Fauci line is “In the light of land-use change, population expansion, and climate change, the risk of devastating pandemics caused by novel and emerging pathogens is real and ever-increasing.” That is what they globalists want us to believe, and only they can save us. Except it is only the lab-made pandemics that are increasing.

The hearing starts at 10 am tomorrow and can be watched here:

https://oversight.house.gov/hearing/investigating-the-proximal-origin-of-a-cover-up/