Boycott China.

Budley Doright

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
All of what is being said here is true for the most part and for the most part the world (USA most notably) has promoted everything that China has accomplished. Now let’s just get through this then talk about a solution. Our propensity to want stuff, and cheap stuff has allowed us to be blinded by the unjust treatment of all workers everywhere. The world knew what was happening and still allowed unchecked travel everywhere. The economy and optics “trumped” all. Unfortunately our greed and need for cheap shit got the better of us.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
DaFreak said:
Everything you are saying is 100% racist. Hold a people responsible because of nature. Dude. Sorry but you’re trash.
Click to expand...
I did not hold a people responsible. I hold the government of the PRC responsible. The CCP is to blame.

Claiming that I said anything racist is just a cowardly attempt to besmirch my character because you have no response to the arguments in the thread. In fact, I didn't even hold the Chinese people responsible for the consumption of exotic and critically endangered animals. That's the elite, powerful and rich. That's the CCP.

Supporting the most racist government in the world is racist. The CCP is even more racist than the Trump admin. Learn to read, any fucking language, ya dumb ass.
 
Wattzzup

Wattzzup

Well-Known Member
I love u guys saying ban China. Look at labels. China is a producer and we are a consumer. Ban them and the price of everything doubles. If you really want to do something stop consuming things in abundance. We don’t have the man power to produce like they do.
 
zeddd

zeddd

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
No, it's scientifically proven. There's even a peer reviewed study that concludes as much and it's published in no less that Nature, probably the most reliable scientific journal ever.

I stopped reading there because I don't suffer foolishness well. If you want me to read your posts, don't start with foolish statements.
www.nature.com

The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 - Nature Medicine

www.nature.com www.nature.com
Click to expand...
It’s not yet scientifically proven, that is a letter not a peer reviewed piece of science, it does however suggest it’s very unlikely to have been genetically engineered and quite likely to be an inter species novel virus, although there are quite a few “probably s” in the letter. I’m not saying it didn’t arise from a wet market but there are other more sinister possibilities to consider. Imo
 
Budley Doright

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
zeddd said:
It’s not yet scientifically proven, that is a letter not a peer reviewed piece of science, it does however suggest it’s very unlikely to have been genetically engineered and quite likely to be an inter species novel virus, although there are quite a few “probably s” in the letter. I’m not saying it didn’t arise from a wet market but there are other more sinister possibilities to consider. Imo
Click to expand...
I guess you missed the memo ...... debate was ended lol.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
zeddd said:
It’s not yet scientifically proven, that is a letter not a peer reviewed piece of science, it does however suggest it’s very unlikely to have been genetically engineered and quite likely to be an inter species novel virus, although there are quite a few “probably s” in the letter. I’m not saying it didn’t arise from a wet market but there are other more sinister possibilities to consider. Imo
Click to expand...
It's published in Nature. 30 very prestigious peers listed. It's peer reviewed. The probability and whatnot comes from not knowing which of two answers is correct. It is 4% different from SARS-CoV. That 4% difference is either because of an intermediate host, such as a pangolin or because of mutations in a human host.

It came from a bat and spread to humans in the bushmeat market. That part is a fact.
 
Wattzzup

Wattzzup

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
It's published in Nature. The probability and whatnot comes from not knowing which of two answers is correct. It is 4% different from SARS-CoV. That 4% difference is either because of an intermediate host, such as a pangolin or because of mutations in a human host. It 100% came from a bat and spread to humans in the bushmeat market.
Click to expand...
But how do we blame China? Can we say the bat came from there? Give them something
 
captainmorgan

captainmorgan

Well-Known Member
America sent all it's manufacturing to China and else where out of the greed by corporate executives to increase profits and there by getting larger executive pay, not because people in America were pining for cheap crap.
 
D

DaFreak

Well-Known Member
No, I’m saying that you are racist. You can pretend to be critical of their government but you have an iPhone so you’re a hypocrite, a racist, and trash.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top