I suppose you could say that people infected at the lab were taken to the market, to misdirect any investigation or, in the more sinister version, to kick off a massive outbreak. It still wouldn't explain the correlation of animal and virus evidence from 2014 and 2019.
You’d have to read the article in its entirety to grok what I’m taking about.
Its was in the name of "
science" we should insolate and "kick the crub" and take the jab without asking any questions. Now how did that work out for most people?
The whole thing of screaming "
science" is a quite argument a science isn't a constant thing, but evolves over time and to do that it must be open to new ideas and concept.
The word "science" was used as a political tool to force/convince that they were the ones with the moral high ground and they therefore where the only one that was right.
Many words during this phase became both politicalized, weaponized and everything was either black or white. Heck they still use it that way attempting to force people to believers of their cult religion of Science.
The problem with that is that they are not really referring to science, but to their truth. I do believe in science is a good very thing for mankind and the very reason why our life standards have improved. But I beg to differ that their version of "science" has anything to do with real science which always seeks the truth.
Now in the aftermath there is every day coming out more and more data that shows a whole different side of the coin. Some still won't accept it even though the data is screaming people straight in the face.
It is all out there on the internet and easily accessible if you just bother to look it up.