Backstory: Origins of the COVID-19 Virus


Guest post by Dave Archibald

Who does the virus call ‘Daddy’? In the 1950s, oil geologist Michel Halbouty said that “oil is first found in the minds of men“, meaning that someone has to imagine the existence of an oil field before they can go out to find it. The same is true of most of the fruits of mental endeavour.

Similarly, the COVID-19 virus is artificial so someone conceived it in his mind before it was created in the lab.

The construction of the place where the virus was created, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, was funded by the French government in 2004 in an attempt to ingratiate themselves with the Chinese dictatorship. Upon completion, the Chinese let only one Frenchman into the building.

3D Architectural rendering from http://english.whiov.cas.cn/About_Us2016/Brief_Introduction2016/

The events that led to the making of the virus started decades before with the founding of The Wildlife Trust in 1971 by English wildlife lover Gerald Durrell. Its headquarters moved to New York. In 1997 the Wildlife Trust spun out The Consortium for Conservation Medicine. This organisation has been described as a “unique collaborative institution that strives to understand the link between anthropogenic environmental change, the health of all species, and the conservation of biodiversity.”

In other words, it is a spiritual home for health academics worried about global warming.

The Wildlife Trust and the Consortium for Conservation Medicine merged in 2010 to form the EcoHealth Alliance. One benefit from the name change would have been to enable government health bodies to give it money.

Dr Anthony Fauci and his offsider at the National Institutes of Health, David Morens, have been publishing papers like this one since 2004.  In that paper they list ‘Intent to harm’ as a contributing factor in the emergence of infectious diseases.  This is expanded in a paragraph on ‘Deliberately emerging infections’:

Deliberately emerging microbes are those that have been developed by man, usually for nefarious use. The term ‘deliberately emerging’ refers to both naturally occurring microbial agents such as anthrax 6 , and to bioengineered microorganisms such as those created by the insertion of genetic virulence factors that produce or exacerbate disease. Deliberately emerging microbes include microorganisms or toxins produced in a form that would cause maximal harm because of ease of dissemination, enhanced infectivity or heightened pathogenicity.

The first of Fauci and Morens’ subsequent papers to mention “global warming in the emergence of diseases” was this one from 2008. About the same time, virus researchers in the US started doing interesting things. Two labs altered the H5N1 avian flu strain so that it was more readily transmittable between ferrets. Ferrets use the same cellular receptors as humans for the virus, and strains that infect people spread among ferrets and cause similar symptoms. This is ‘gain of function’ research which is another way of saying they were trying to make deadly viruses yet more deadly. Because of lab mishaps, gain of function research was outlawed in the US in 2012.

It was at this time that somebody, one Nicholas Evans, nailed Fauci’s idee fixe. In a reply to a paper co-authored by Fauci’s sidekick Morens is this sentence:

To claim that nature conducts research is playing fast and loose with the criteria; that nature breaks the rules smacks of an animism that is hard to fathom.

Fauci has got animism, the attribution of a soul to plants, inanimate objects, and natural phenomena, really bad.

Fauci reacted to the ban on gain of function research by taking it to China. This was channelled through his ideological soulmates at EcoHealth Alliance. As Rudi Giuliani said in an interview:

Back in 2014, the Obama administration prohibited the U.S. from giving money to any laboratory, including in the U.S., that was fooling around with these viruses. Prohibited. Despite that, Dr. Fauci gave $3.7 million to the Wuhan laboratory. And then even after the State Department issued reports about how unsafe that laboratory was, and how suspicious they were in the way they were developing a virus that could be transmitted to humans, we never pulled that money.

This is why the US consulate in Wuhan visited the lab a number of times and wrote reports complaining about the poor biosecurity standards there. A lab mishap duly occurred at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Satellite imagery shows road blocks around the lab on 6th to 11 October, 2019. This is supported by US mapping of mobile phone traffic which showed a reduction in traffic from the affected building. The Russians realised that troop movements could be mapped by the US from mobile phone data so Putin banned Russian troops from carrying mobile phones a week later.

The virus spread. Zinc is known to inhibit viral replication. Doctors in Wuhan remembered a 2014 paper which showed that chloroquine is a zinc ionophore and found that it worked in treating infected patients. On 22nd May, 2020. medical journal The Lancet joyously published a paper stating that chloroquine doesn’t work. Medical authorities around the world reacted by withdrawing chloroquine from treatment of the Wuhan virus. Death rates spiked up dramatically about two weeks later. This is illustrated by the experience in Switzerland, as shown by the following graphic from France Soir:

The grey-shaded area is the period of increased deaths in Switzerland due to the study in The Lancet. The death rate jumped 13 days after the administration of chloroquine was withdrawn, it dropped 13 days after the resumption of dispensing chloroquine. That was just Switzerland. The Lancet retracted the paper on June 4th, more over the damage it was doing to its reputation than embarrassment at the number of deaths it caused. Nobody in the media has displayed any interest in who was behind this hit job on chloroquine.

It has been estimated that the media blitz against chloroquine resulted in 80,000 deaths around the world.

A similar hit job was attempted on the diabetic drug metformin which had also been found to be effective against the Wuhan virus.  From down in the comments it is noted that “hydroxychloroquine did show excellent results just for prophylaxis of diabetes” in a paper from April, 2019. So it seems that diabetic drugs are effective against the Wuhan virus, perhaps all of them. This is due to reduced conversion of sugars to fat. Chloroquine combines that effect with being a zinc ionophore.

Somebody funded the hit jobs on chloroquine and metformin but there has been no interest in finding out what motivated these. The lesson from this is that medical researchers are quite happy to cause the deaths of tens of thousands, if you cross their palms with silver. So you can imagine how readily climate scientists can keep up their fraud – nobody dies straight away and they may not be proved wrong for decades.

Now back to Dr Fauci. In September he and his sidekick Morens published the latest iteration of their 2004 paper. Fauci’s weltanschauung is succinctly put in this paragraph from the September, 2020 paper:

The COVID-19 pandemic is yet another reminder, added to the rapidly growing archive of historical reminders, that in a human-dominated world, in which our human activities represent aggressive, damaging, and unbalanced interactions with nature, we will increasingly provoke new disease emergences. We remain at risk for the foreseeable future. COVID-19 is among the most vivid wake-up calls in over a century. It should force us to begin to think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature.

What does that remind us of? It reminds us of the Unabomber’s manifesto which stated in part that modernity has,

“…subjected human beings to indignities, has led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and has inflicted severe damage on the natural world.”

Fauci’s writing style is better than the Unabomber’s but otherwise there is no difference. But now we have motivation. Why would Fauci send all that money to the Wuhan lab knowing that they would use it to manipulate bat viruses to make them infectious in humans?

He is a global warmer and the warmers have a big problem. The world has failed to heat up as predicted, instead remaining stubbornly pleasant. The appearance of the Wuhan virus suggests (at least to those who beleiev such things) that Nature is taking its revenge on humans for not living in harmony with it. Dr Fauci, with the means and the motivation, just gave it a little help along.

President Trump has said that China should be made to pay for the Wuhan virus. Not so fast. It is possible that a bit of investigation may find that the origin was just down the road at 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland, where Dr. Fauci works.

It has been said that global warming has yet to kill anybody.  In all likelihood that remains true but belief in global warming has now killed over a million people.

If you think that is a bit far-fetched, consider that Voltaire predicted just such an eventuality when he said ‘Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.’ Global warming is the biggest absurdity of the modern era – it can’t happen in theory and hasn’t happened in practice. A big absurdity begets a proportionate atrocity.

David Archibald is the author of American Gripen: The Solution to the F-35 Nightmare

Leave a Comment

Participate in relief program