Hacker News Reader

Comment by AnimalMuppet | Hacker News Reader

Lol this Major Joseph Murphy is, pardon the pun, batshit crazy.

He's conflating an aerosol spike protein vaccine administered to bats (i.e. a nasal vaccine) with a a full fledged virus (that he thinks became SARS-CoV-2). He also seems to think that said bat vaccine/virus was based on a nonexistent virus that targeted humans (can't have been SARS, since SARS-CoV-2 is so different from it) which was changed to target bats for the vaccine, and thinks that administration of the vaccines will cause the virus to be selected back into a variant that is deadlier to humans like SARS.

Basically he's a conspiracy theorist + anti-vax nutter who has no idea what's going on here.

Maybe it's just another psyop. Funny that The Intercept_ ran a similar story [1] a few months back somewhat corroborating what PV reported on.

[1] https://theintercept.com/2021/09/23/coronavirus-research-gra...

Hold on there. No one has even established that Maj. Murphy actually wrote the document. Let's see if it's authentic first before we accuse him of anything.

Starting on page 8, there's stuff that he didn't write. It's a funding request that pretty much (to my amateur eye) says the same as what Murphy said.

Is that authentic? Because if it is, we don't have to prove that Murphy wrote what the first part claims he wrote.

Does it say what Murphy said? If so, then we don't have to worry about whether Murphy is sane.

"Never to be outdone, in May 2020, Fauci told National Geographic that this virus “could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated.” Could not. He left no room for doubt:

"Everything about the stepwise evolution over time strongly indicates that [this virus] evolved in nature and then jumped species"

That's not a refutation to the poster's question. They are asking about the documents linked on that page, not what Dr. Fauci said...

In my opinion, anybody can just make documents and stamp some names to make them look credible. Are the documents confirmed sources or not?

> These emails were originally produced redacted via the Freedom of Information Act and subsequently to Committee Republicans. At the request of Committee Republicans and pursuant to the Seven Member Rule, the Department of Health and Human Services made unredacted versions available for an in camera review but not available to the public. Committee staff, to the best of their ability, hand transcribed the contents of the emails and excerpts of those transcriptions are reproduced below

https://republicans-oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2...

>Department of Health and Human Services made unredacted versions available for an in camera review but not available to the public.

Sus.

If Fauci denies it, and Twitter censors it, it makes me consider it slightly more credible (if unproven)

If Fauci told you not to jump off a cliff, and Twitter said the same, would you do it?

If he told me the sky was blue, I'd at least go check.

Why?

That's not rational thinking or skepticism, it's just blind tribalism.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com