• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Conspiracy Theories & Claims

I saw a tweet earlier which was from the Reddit Conspiracy thread.

Basically it said that there is a theory the alien greys are actually humans from the future after some kind of DNA disaster left them looking like that and infertile. The reason they visit us and abduct people is to harvest DNA for research and reproductive purposes.

Now, bear with me, this is where it gets good.

The person, having presented all this, goes on to speculate what if the DNA disaster that resulted in us turning infertile and looking like the greys was the mRNA vaccine!

Truly, the special ones walk among us.
That's amazing

I always assumed if they were us from the future we just evolved to look like that over millions of years.

Now I'm regretting that third jab!!
 
That's amazing

I always assumed if they were us from the future we just evolved to look like that over millions of years.

Now I'm regretting that third jab!!
Aren't you enjoying the 5G connectivity and the direct life intervention by Bill Gates?

I find his insights on application architecture very soothing. Completely useless, but soothing.

That said, I am having to roll up my trousers further everyday. And wear sunglasses. And sunscreen.
 
Aren't you enjoying the 5G connectivity and the direct life intervention by Bill Gates?

I find his insights on application architecture very soothing. Completely useless, but soothing.

That said, I am having to roll up my trousers further everyday. And wear sunglasses. And sunscreen.

I had no idea that The Great Reset and Transhumanism would make me thin and guarantee me a wife.
 
Apparantly there's some kind of new conspiracy afoot. The Wuhan lab leak theory dates apparantly dont line up with cases recorded outside of China in 2019.

As someone who is most definitely not a virologist but thought the lab leak was a credible idea I can honestly say I have no idea.
Well, the lab leak has a lot of compelling evidence for it. Competing theories are mostly empty speculation.

So in what way do the dates not match?
 
Well, the lab leak has a lot of compelling evidence for it. Competing theories are mostly empty speculation.

So in what way do the dates not match?
Apparantly evidence of cases outside China before it was thought to have got beyond their borders.

The official story (see link below) seems to suggest it was in Europe in October 2019. That doesn't discount the lab leak from Wuhan but some fringe types are claiming it was even longer back and suggests either a different origin or that Wuhan was some kind of second release to pin it in that lab.

Crazy, I know. Possibly pro Russian invention to tie in with the " American Bio labs in Ukraine" story.

Official story.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-circulated-europe-china-before-wuhan-outbreak-2020-12
 
I find this information very interesting. I am one of those who looking back had a severe-for-me respiratory event around the beginning of November, 2019, involving days in bed, fever, coughing, and general weakness for six weeks afterward (ie - missed Thanksgiving and Christmas.) I also tested twice for "positive for having had covid" although I am absolutely sure that at least from March of 2020 on when we were all watching for it I was not sick. (That test can also give false positives for other covid infections - like a cold.) And given my age and lungs I would have expected to have noticed if I had it. I would be preliminarily accepting of a theory that it's been evolving in humans for some time but hit the jackpot in Wuhan with one final mutation that found its way into a crowded market at just the right time. We will never know without some considerable blood samples form fall of 2019. I still think the lab leak theories are people having fun making up stories that sound like movies and/or who are only comfortable thinking that there is a cause for everything and someone to blame.
 
I find this information very interesting. I am one of those who looking back had a severe-for-me respiratory event around the beginning of November, 2019, involving days in bed, fever, coughing, and general weakness for six weeks afterward (ie - missed Thanksgiving and Christmas.) I also tested twice for "positive for having had covid" although I am absolutely sure that at least from March of 2020 on when we were all watching for it I was not sick. (That test can also give false positives for other covid infections - like a cold.) And given my age and lungs I would have expected to have noticed if I had it. I would be preliminarily accepting of a theory that it's been evolving in humans for some time but hit the jackpot in Wuhan with one final mutation that found its way into a crowded market at just the right time. We will never know without some considerable blood samples form fall of 2019. I still think the lab leak theories are people having fun making up stories that sound like movies and/or who are only comfortable thinking that there is a cause for everything and someone to blame.
I had similar in Jan 2020.

Every symptom.
 
Apparantly evidence of cases outside China before it was thought to have got beyond their borders.

The official story (see link below) seems to suggest it was in Europe in October 2019. That doesn't discount the lab leak from Wuhan but some fringe types are claiming it was even longer back and suggests either a different origin or that Wuhan was some kind of second release to pin it in that lab.

Crazy, I know. Possibly pro Russian invention to tie in with the " American Bio labs in Ukraine" story.

Official story.
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-circulated-europe-china-before-wuhan-outbreak-2020-12
Well, my question there is "When did it escape?"

One thing that's been pointed out with Covid-19 is that it's symptoms aren't distinct enough to be able to easily discern it in medical records that are just descriptions of symptoms. Then you have all the cases where it doesn't even have symptoms. This feeds into the idea that... maybe... there's been more cases that simply didn't get attention. Of course the problem is we don't know one way or another.
 
I find this information very interesting. I am one of those who looking back had a severe-for-me respiratory event around the beginning of November, 2019, involving days in bed, fever, coughing, and general weakness for six weeks afterward (ie - missed Thanksgiving and Christmas.) I also tested twice for "positive for having had covid" although I am absolutely sure that at least from March of 2020 on when we were all watching for it I was not sick. (That test can also give false positives for other covid infections - like a cold.) And given my age and lungs I would have expected to have noticed if I had it. I would be preliminarily accepting of a theory that it's been evolving in humans for some time but hit the jackpot in Wuhan with one final mutation that found its way into a crowded market at just the right time. We will never know without some considerable blood samples form fall of 2019. I still think the lab leak theories are people having fun making up stories that sound like movies and/or who are only comfortable thinking that there is a cause for everything and someone to blame.
I had something similar in November 2019. Feverish, feeling knackered, terrible cough, lasted about 6 weeks. Thought I was better after about 3 days & went back to work but it came back with a vengeance. Spent a few days in bed etc. I have no sense of smell anyway so couldn’t notice any effect there.

Whether it was Covid I’ll never know but it certainly felt like some sort of flu.
 
Well, my question there is "When did it escape?"

One thing that's been pointed out with Covid-19 is that it's symptoms aren't distinct enough to be able to easily discern it in medical records that are just descriptions of symptoms. Then you have all the cases where it doesn't even have symptoms. This feeds into the idea that... maybe... there's been more cases that simply didn't get attention. Of course the problem is we don't know one way or another.
Yes, it takes a lab test or the unique lung xray to know.
 
From one credible study I heard about, that has been turned into a book, there is now a theory that a poor sample gathering process may have been the genesis of this, going back as far as 2017. The are caves where the bats live that are a massive reservoir for corona viruses, so they were a regular expedition destination. The authors documented many ill equipped and poorly carried out sample gathering efforts that are likely to have gotten the virus out of the cave. They reckon that even before they got back to the lab, the collection teams could have been carrying the virus and spreading it, requiring no breach of the lab itself. No one wanted to admit how poorly the operations were carried out and so no one acknowledged it.
AFAIR, the at least one author was a US academic.
Heard him talking on the radio, must look it up and get the full reference.
 
From one credible study I heard about, that has been turned into a book, there is now a theory that a poor sample gathering process may have been the genesis of this, going back as far as 2017. The are caves where the bats live that are a massive reservoir for corona viruses, so they were a regular expedition destination. The authors documented many ill equipped and poorly carried out sample gathering efforts that are likely to have gotten the virus out of the cave. They reckon that even before they got back to the lab, the collection teams could have been carrying the virus and spreading it, requiring no breach of the lab itself. No one wanted to admit how poorly the operations were carried out and so no one acknowledged it.
AFAIR, the at least one author was a US academic.
Heard him talking on the radio, must look it up and get the full reference.
hmm.... does this actually match the virus we have today though?
 
hmm.... does this actually match the virus we have today though?
It wouldn't have to . It migrates, causes cold symptoms, and then continues its normal process of changing. Eventually it changes into something that causes serious symptoms in humans. I believe that experts can trace the mutation trail back, but they've already done that, that's how they got to bats to start with.
 
It wouldn't have to . It migrates, causes cold symptoms, and then continues its normal process of changing. Eventually it changes into something that causes serious symptoms in humans. I believe that experts can trace the mutation trail back, but they've already done that, that's how they got to bats to start with.
Depends on who you ask, some researchers apparently concluded certain parts are, well... somehow copied from HIV.
 
Thanks so much for the links. I don't have the background to interpret, but note that this research is not replicated or explored by other specialists in commonly accepted journals. This could be because Mr. Fauci has suppressed this information, as part of the global conspiracy he is a leader in. However, I find all the conspiracy conjectures unlikely.

Dr Ah Kahn Syed is only located on the internet in self-published content and sites in which non-medical doctors agree with him. No peer-reviewed journal publications which I could find. For me, as a scientist, this is show-stopping.

I have some inkling how frustrating it must be for you to post this stuff on the FMB, and have it dismissed or rejected.
 
Last edited:
I had something similar in November 2019. Feverish, feeling knackered, terrible cough, lasted about 6 weeks. Thought I was better after about 3 days & went back to work but it came back with a vengeance. Spent a few days in bed etc. I have no sense of smell anyway so couldn’t notice any effect there.

Whether it was Covid I’ll never know but it certainly felt like some sort of flu.

I know someone who was living in London and fell ill in December 2019. Based on everything he's told me, we're very suspicious he had covid but of course it's impossible to know for sure. He had typical symptoms and felt so unwell he went to A&E. It was New Year's Eve so they didn't keep him in, but interestingly, the doctor was really puzzled by his condition and said herself that it was very strange. I wonder now whether any doctors look back in hindsight and think they may have treated covid patients well before the pandemic officially arrived over here.
 
Thanks so much for the links. I don't have the background to interpret, but note that this research is not replicated or explored by other specialists in commonly accepted journals. This could be because Mr. Fauci has suppressed this information, as part of the global conspiracy he is a leader in. However, I find all the conspiracy conjectures unlikely.

Dr Ah Kahn Syed is only located on the internet in self-published content and sites in which non-medical doctors agree with him. No peer-reviewed journal publications which I could find. For me, as a scientist, this is show-stopping.

I have some inkling how frustrating it must be for you to post this stuff on the FMB, and have it dismissed or rejected.
Well, peer review is a double edged sword to me. The good side is that it verifies whether ideas are actually viable and accurate. The bad side? Anything genuinely new... I don't expect it to get much serious consideration.

Why? Well... take this specific case, how many "peers" have actually sequenced the RNA of this virus? That number determines how many peers can give a meaningful consideration in peer review. I suppose you could discuss the concept of how he did the analysis? But that's kinda pedantic, and isn't necessarily about factual accuracy.

Like you alluded to, there is also the matter that a journal with a "reputation to uphold" would probably think twice about publishing anything that is politically controversial... just for fear of bad press, whether it's actually warranted or not. Modern society has far too much of that IMO.

Also... do the comments on his page count as peers reviewing the work? No, really, I don't know who they are, not really. But... some of them have a LOT to say about his work. Reading the comments takes longer than the actual paper. Whether this is "academic" or not, it IS review of his work.
I know someone who was living in London and fell ill in December 2019. Based on everything he's told me, we're very suspicious he had covid but of course it's impossible to know for sure. He had typical symptoms and felt so unwell he went to A&E. It was New Year's Eve so they didn't keep him in, but interestingly, the doctor was really puzzled by his condition and said herself that it was very strange. I wonder now whether any doctors look back in hindsight and think they may have treated covid patients well before the pandemic officially arrived over here.
I've heard a LOT of stories like that. No one can be 100% sure of anything.
 
Well, peer review is a double edged sword to me. The good side is that it verifies whether ideas are actually viable and accurate. The bad side? Anything genuinely new... I don't expect it to get much serious consideration.

Why? Well... take this specific case, how many "peers" have actually sequenced the RNA of this virus? That number determines how many peers can give a meaningful consideration in peer review. I suppose you could discuss the concept of how he did the analysis? But that's kinda pedantic, and isn't necessarily about factual accuracy.

Like you alluded to, there is also the matter that a journal with a "reputation to uphold" would probably think twice about publishing anything that is politically controversial... just for fear of bad press, whether it's actually warranted or not. Modern society has far too much of that IMO.

Also... do the comments on his page count as peers reviewing the work? No, really, I don't know who they are, not really. But... some of them have a LOT to say about his work. Reading the comments takes longer than the actual paper. Whether this is "academic" or not, it IS review of his work.

I've heard a LOT of stories like that. No one can be 100% sure of anything.

This person apparently has not asked for nor received any review from any informed peer! He may even be right, but he has no credibility. Even if there were a conspiracy, I think that other persons would be investigating alternative explanations. This is the nature of science. Currently, there are perhaps thousands of scientists across the world trying to figure different aspects of Covid. Of course genuinely new research is considered.

How he did the analysis is abso-fucking-lutely about factual accuracy - and validity and reliability and.... No, comments from anonymous strangers on a self-published website is not academic review.

You and I have very different baseline assumptions about the social context of covid: where it started, if human agency was intentional, the nature of big pharma, big government, individual profit, etc.
 
Last edited:
Communication and misinformation

An interesting article about scientists’ examination of social communication, information, and misinformation. I am posting this in the Covid conspiracy claims thread because the article contains specific examples of misinformation (mistakes) and disinformation (deliberate lies) about Covid.

The larger themes are about how humans are predisposed to pay attention to novelty; this then means we pay attention to both mis- and dis- information.

My heart warmed to the article and the main scientists because they were concerned with the social construction of knowledge, which was my thesis area, and are interdisciplinary, which was my approach to my research. It is rare to find this kind of stuff in the popular press.

Studying—and fighting—misinformation should be a top scientific priority, biologist argues | Science | AAAS
 
Well, peer review is a double edged sword to me. The good side is that it verifies whether ideas are actually viable and accurate. The bad side? Anything genuinely new... I don't expect it to get much serious consideration.

Why? Well... take this specific case, how many "peers" have actually sequenced the RNA of this virus? That number determines how many peers can give a meaningful consideration in peer review. I suppose you could discuss the concept of how he did the analysis? But that's kinda pedantic, and isn't necessarily about factual accuracy.

Like you alluded to, there is also the matter that a journal with a "reputation to uphold" would probably think twice about publishing anything that is politically controversial... just for fear of bad press, whether it's actually warranted or not. Modern society has far too much of that IMO.

Also... do the comments on his page count as peers reviewing the work? No, really, I don't know who they are, not really. But... some of them have a LOT to say about his work. Reading the comments takes longer than the actual paper. Whether this is "academic" or not, it IS review of his work.

I've heard a LOT of stories like that. No one can be 100% sure of anything.

I spent several hours looking into Syed’s article and especially the link he gives to the peer-reviewed journal he gives. The short answer is that this is false and misleading. All that he claims about covid is likely wrong. It is possible that he is right, but he has not proved it.

I give more detailed discussion points below, but these may not make much sense to someone who is not versed in academic research and publications.

In the substack.com self-published BLAST article, Syed gave a link to the article he suggested he himself had co-authored. However, the article has seven coauthors, but he is not one of them.

Journal: frontiers (sic) in Virology
. This seems to be an electronic journal, which is fine and does not constitute a legitimate concern about integrity of the scientific review process nor of the backgrounds of the reviewers. However, the journal does not have any printed publications in a traditional sense, and all the listed members of the editorial board are unconventional. By unconventional, I mean that: they are young, many do not come from traditional institutions, and most do not come from reputable research institutions. The journal does not give any curricula vita for them, and there are no links to any vitae. WTF.

Again, not an automatic disqualifier, but a cause for concern. In some academic institutions in the US, publishing in this type of low-level journal would not count towards publication history submitted in a bid to obtain tenure. It is not respectable.

How long has this journal been around? The earliest publication I could find was June 4, 2021. In other words, less than one year. This is a newborn journal. It may be I am misinterpreting this, but the journal has the unconventional sequencing system of date of publication, and not the more common – and useful – system of volume, number, and date. Only 13 articles published to date.

Is the journal organized with recognized, respectable editors and reviewers, especially as it is a new journal? Short answer: no.

A single “specialty chief editor,” David Schwartz, with no current institutional affiliations. It seems as if he is a retired professor from “Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, United States.” This by itself is fine, but unconventional.

A single editor for the article, Xin Yin, with the listed institutional affiliation of “Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences.” This listing of a single editor, by itself, is unconventional but not a cause for concern. However, coupled with a single reviewer, see below, this is a warning sign of poor quality.

For the article itself: a single reviewer, Jitao Chang, from a veterinary research institute. No other reviewer is listed. Normally, a group of reviewers is listed. A single reviewer is not qualified to evaluate any article submitted for publication, because he or she cannot possibly be expert in all areas covered by the article and there is no mechanism to guard against an individual’s bias. This is a definite and irrecoverable flaw.

The history of the review process, with reviewers, dates, issues, and resolutions, is not given. Perhaps there wasn’t one. This is a definite and irrecoverable flaw. Normally, with a respected journal, a history is included so the readers can see the history of problems flagged by the reviewers, and the authors’ responses, leading to both a better article and a better understanding of the conceptual organization of the authors and the article.

In the bottom of the article, in the comments section, are some very pertinent comments by specialists which indicate that the article is not robust on several fronts: 1. unclear citation, 2. misuse of the basic BLAST algorithm, 3. misuse of probability set-up, 4. mistakes in independent and dependent variables categorizations, 5. lack of alternative explanations, etc.
 
Scientists under attack.

When Marion Koopmans, a virologist at Erasmus University Medical Center, visited a museum in Amsterdam with her family last year, she was spotted by the wrong crowd: people who hate Koopmans because of her work on COVID-19. “They started really yelling, banging,” she says. “Security locked the doors.”

Since early in the pandemic, Koopmans has found herself targeted by people who believe the pandemic is a hoax, the virus was created intentionally to cause harm, or vaccines are dangerous. She has received death threats, been accused of belonging to an elite network of pedophiles—a belief held by devotees of the QAnon conspiracy theory—and told she should be tried for crimes against humanity.

Now, Koopmans no longer makes public appearances without first alerting the police. As a frequent guest on Dutch TV, “I cannot go out on the street anonymously,” she says. Her family is not comfortable walking outside with her, and they worry about her ever traveling to the United States, where much of the vitriol originates.

She’s not alone. When, in March 2020, a science story became the biggest news story in the world, scientists became household names overnight, even celebrities. But many also became the targets of new and extreme levels of harassment, intimidation, and threats. U.K. Chief Medical Advisor Chris Whitty was accosted by two men in a London park; disease ecologist Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance received a letter containing white powder that resembled anthrax; Belgian virologist Marc Van Ranst and his family were moved to a safe house after he was threatened by a former soldier who was later found dead in a national park.

To better understand the level of intimidation, its effects, and the ways scientists cope with it, Science asked 9585 researchers who have published on COVID-19 to fill out an online survey about their experiences. Of 510 who responded, 38% reported at least one type of attack, ranging from insults to death threats, delivered on social media, by email or phone, or sometimes even in person. Those who were harassed described a range of effects on their lives, including workplace problems and mental health issues. (For more details on the survey, see sidebar, below.) ...

https://www.science.org/content/art...-scientists-face-avalanche-abuse-survey-shows
 
Conspiracy to kidnap Governor Whitmer.

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (AP) — A man upset over state-ordered coronavirus restrictions was sentenced to just over six years in prison Wednesday for planning to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a significant break that reflected his quick decision to cooperate and help agents build cases against others.

Ty Garbin admitted his role in the alleged scheme weeks after his arrest last fall. He is among six men charged in federal court but the only one to plead guilty so far. It was a key victory for prosecutors as they try to prove an astonishing plot against the others.

“I cannot even begin to imagine the amount of stress and fear her family felt because of my actions. And for that I am truly sorry,” the 25-year-old aviation mechanic told the judge.
In his plea agreement, Garbin said the six men trained at his property near Luther, Michigan, constructing a “shoot house” to resemble Whitmer’s vacation home and “assaulting it with firearms.”
The government, noting Garbin’s exceptional cooperation, asked U.S. District Judge Robert Jonker to give him credit for helping investigators reinforce their case against his co-defendants.

The “Constitution is designed to ensure that we work out our fundamental and different views peacefully, not at the point of a gun, not with some other blunt force threat or a kidnapping conspiracy,” the judge said.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mich...ing-plot-ty-garbin_n_6126b6a1e4b092664347f434

The case comes to court.

Four men accused of wanting to kidnap Michigan's governor were ready to use machine guns and grenade launchers as part of the plot, a US court has heard.

The accused are on trial accused of targeting Gretchen Whitmer in 2020 over Covid rules she imposed early in the pandemic. Their lawyers argue they were entrapped - or improperly induced into the crimes - by government agents.

The four are facing charges of kidnapping conspiracy. Two of the men are also facing charges of conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction.

According to prosecutors, a group of men - some of whom are alleged militia members - planned to abduct the Democratic governor from her holiday home with the intent of putting her on a "treason trial" and then setting her adrift in a boat on Lake Michigan.

The FBI arrested 14 suspected kidnappers in October 2020, six of whom were charged in a federal court. The other eight face separate state charges.

Two of the men who were charged federally have since taken plea deals, which included agreements to take the stand against their alleged former co-conspirators - Adam Fox, 38, Daniel Harris, 24, Brandon Caserta, 33, and Barry Croft, 46. ...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60876858
 
Pfizer/Alopecia:

Pfizer is giddily popping Champagne over its HUGE win at the Academy Awards this week. Check out this crazy timeline:​

• Between December 2020 and December 2021: VAERS receives over 3,000 reports of vaccine-induced alopecia after first or second dose of Pfizer Covid vaccine.
• February 2021: Arena Pharmaceuticals begins third round clinical trials for its new drug, Etrasimod, which treats alopecia.
• December 2021: Pfizer buys Arena Pharmaceuticals for $7 billion. (Arena’s website is gone now, swallowed up by Pfizer; use the Wayback Machine if you go looking.)
• March 23, 2022: Pfizer issues a press release announcing “Positive Top-Line Results for Phase 3 Trial of Etrasimod” (now called Ritlecitinib).
• March 27, 2022: The Academy Awards begin, sponsored by Pfizer.
… Chris Rock makes a joke about Jada Smith’s alopecia at the Academy Awards.
… Will Smith sissy-slaps Chris Rock on live TV and acts very put out, and says some non-family-friendly stuff, but gets the award anyway. And gets to keep it. And doesn’t have to take anger management.
… For the next few weeks, corporate media becomes fascinated with alopecia, how it hurts women, and why Jada Smith was so understandably upset about the joke. If only there were a safe and effective treatment! And, everybody’s talking about the Oscars. Bonus.
I’m not saying Chris and Will faked the slap. Who knows? But it sure was a great night for sponsor Pfizer, a real marketing coup. My gosh, Pfizer is on a roll — it was so lucky that Chris Rock told THAT exact joke, and THAT exact joke made Will Smith mad enough to act out so totally uncharacteristically and coincidentally promoted Pfizer’s new $7B medication that treats a painfully obvious side-effect of its Covid drug. I mean, what are the odds!
 
Major medical publication, peer-reviewed, placebo double-blind, I haven't had time to read it and won't for a while but I don't have the statistics to critique the detailed design. I'm good. Go ahead take the stuff and make sure the manufacturer profits but leave enough on the shelves for the people who actually need it.
 
Back
Top