A research team of mathematicians have shown that the so-called natural origin hypothesis of Covid-19 is deeply flawed. They subjected the major paper that argued for the natural origins hypothesis to a statistical critique. It was shown that the idea that the ground zero of the virus was the Wuhan sea food market was not justified, using advanced statistical methods (Monte Carlo, methods, I could not work out what this was from a brief internet search), and vast computing power. While we lay people, and even most scientists, will not understand the details of this, the point is that there is the beginnings of a scientific critique of the Covid narrative that has remained intellectually protected and unquestioned for some time. Certainly, refuting the natural origins view of Covid-19, and supporting the lab origin, moves the narrative away from that which establishment health authorities have pushed.
"Remember those scientists, federal bureaucrats posing as scientists and politicians pressuring the rest of us in society into diminishing the lab leak theory origin of SARS-CoV-2, despite evidence to the contrary? It was apparent to us at TrialSite Inc. early on that given the pressure from the federal government, not to mention social media censors (evidenced in the Missouri case against the Biden administration) it was certainly a probability that some cover-up occurred. In a bid to only promote zoonotic origins as the most likely genesis of SARS-CoV-2, the credibility of any group that argued to the contrary could be at the time permanently blemished by powerful interests. We experienced this firsthand with censorship on social media such as YouTube and Facebook when merely suggesting some sort of leak could be possible. And this was because early on, really smart scientists in the TrialSite network raised profound questions as to SARS-CoV-2 origins. Alas, the pressure for cover-up, or whatever is going on, worked for the most part, and it's certainly problematic when scientists make wholesale unfounded claims inspired by politics as opposed to purely scientific aims, badly hurting science along the way. We all had a right to question the major institutions, their premises and associated activity during the pandemic. Independent media emerged as absolutely vital. To show statistically that the zoonotic premise via the Wuhan wet market (Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market) was not likely the true origins of SARS-CoV-2, a couple of top mathematicians all but invalidate a primary study justifying the position in the first place.
Dietrich Stoyan, with the Institut für Stochastik, TU Bergakademie, Frieberg, Germany and Sung Nok Chiu, a mathematician at Hong Kong Baptist University demonstrate via the use of statistics that the claim of one prominent study used to strongly bolster the zoonotic argument for origins of SARS-CoV-2 was actually highly flawed for two reasons: 1) the assumption that a centroid of early case locations or another simply constructed point is the origin of an epidemic is unproved; and 2) a Monte Carlo test used to conclude that no other location than the seafood market can be the origin is flawed according to the math of the recent analysis."
"AbstractIn a recent prominent study, Worobey et al. (2022. The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan was the early epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. Science, 377(6609), 951–959) purported to demonstrate statistically that the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was the epicentre of the early COVID-19 epidemic. We show that this statistical conclusion is invalid on two grounds: (a) The assumption that a centroid of early case locations or another simply constructed point is the origin of an epidemic is unproved. (b) A Monte Carlo test used to conclude that no other location than the seafood market can be the origin is flawed. Hence, the question of the origin of the pandemic has not been answered by their statistical analysis.