Homo Erectus emerged around 1.9 to 2 million years ago in Africa. They went extinct roughly 110,000 years ago. They also evolved into other human species.
I suspect that they didn't seem much different to our ancestors.
There is some evidence of different human species interbreeding. This includes humans and Neanderthals, but also Homo Erectus with Denisovans.
Modern Europeans have about 1% to 2% Neanderthal DNA in their individual genomes, with essentially 100% of people with European ancestry carrying these traces.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: John Coffey<john2001plus@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: The Math Problem That Breaks Evolution’s Timeline
To: Grant
Grant,
I have been hearing similar arguments for at least 40 years, going back to my biology student days in the early 1980s. During my education, my position went from being unsure about evolution to being convinced that it is correct.
I think that people misunderstand both entropy, which applies to a closed system and not to the Earth as a whole, and evolution.
According to Google, every human child typically receives about 50 to 90 new mutations that were not present in either parent's DNA. I view every biological organism as a new genetic experiment. The changes in one generation might not be significant, but these changes accumulate over time and combine with changes from other individuals.
It is unlikely for organisms to remain exactly the same over long periods of time. There are a few exceptions where organisms have been so successful that they have remained essentially the same for tens of millions of years. However, I think it is unlikely that humans will be the same tens of thousands of years from now, given that humans have changed somewhat over the last few tens of thousands of years.
I prefer a more traditional view of God, in which He is the creator of the laws of physics and not constrained by them.
The simpler explanation for the origin of species is not that they came from other worlds or that some form of magic created them. The simpler explanation is that they arose naturally through the laws of nature as evidenced by the clear observations we have made.
When I was young I would have agreed with you completely. In Jr High, my math teacher, Dr Edwin Hershey, believed Darwinism but also believed in scripture and God as the creator. Personally I had spiritual experiences testifying of a loving Father, but I accepted science without significant questioning. More recently, a geological engineer friend lent me a book by the head of the geology department at the U of U who likewise believed in God but accepted Darwinism as one of His tools and didn't see a conflict. They held that God directs nature but didn't create the laws, a little like my wife creating and maintaining our garden but not making the plants from nothing. I.E. from youth I was taught that God did not create the laws of nature but rather mastered them including laws we do not yet know or comprehend. He also has somehow mastered time or else how could the prophets correctly foretell the future, such as Isaiah, Daniel, David and Book of Mormon prophets detailing events of Christ's birth, ministry, crucifiction and resurrection, plus foretelling events of our day, including the return of the Jews to Jerusalem, the Civil War starting in South Carolina (JS) and world wars and earthquakes coupled with signs in the heavens such as our numerous solar and lunar eclipses including the moon turning to blood which many will shortly witness. Natural disasters aren't new, but the apparent increased frequency and severity are consistent with prophecy. As I studied more science (e.g. 2nd Law of Thermodynamics) and engineering this whole creation process would require even more time than timelines suggest, which is what this author is saying about whales and implying in more general terms.
In the scriptural and scientific observation, simpler organisms came before more complex ones, and plants had to prepare the way for the animal kingdom. My personal conclusion (not doctrine) is that perhaps evolution, according to updated Darwinism, could have resulted in all the life forms we have but they were generally developed elsewhere over much more time on other worlds. God then followed the creative sequence from Genesis which per my interpretation matches the order from textbooks where plants largely preceded animals (in order to have oxygen for the animal kingdom) and protected sea life came before birds (dinosaurs) and mammals and finally man. Under this scenario, God placed on earth a variety of life in the sea and then placed seeds upon the earth for grasses, trees etc. and then later placed various species of mammals, culminating in anthropoids and hominids. There were destructive periods as well and he finally placed Adam and Eve in a garden in Eden. Were they the culmination of evolution or created from scratch? I don't think it matters, but they were grand beings who were expelled from Eden for sin and entered the already "lone and dreary world" where creatures had been dying for millions of years as evidenced by fossils, coal and limestone formed in the depths of the oceans. Personal belief: We are principally descendents from Adam and Eve, corresponding to written histories, and most of the hominids died out with the mammoths, saber tooth tigers and giant land sloths at the last ice age and from subsequent wars; however, Adam's posterity gave us written records and greater civilization, but there were a few men already in the world, so Cane, for instance, had no problem finding a wife after he killed Abel and was forced to leave.
Summary: My scientific/mathematical concern is that more time is required to create all the coordinated extremely complex diversity than is allocated by geologists and anthropologists. My engineering training says "don't reinvent the wheel", meaning if there is a god or gods (including alien theories), planting seeds and placing animals on earth is much easier and less time consuming than waiting for them to evolve and stay on the right productive path, which is statistically virtually impossible per the principle of entropy, without a divine overseer.
The main problem with these arguments is that they don't take into account the massive parallelism taking place across the entire species, with genes coming from multiple ancestors and genetic errors accumulating over many generations. The genetic pool is effectively a soup of randomness. Nature weeds out the worst combinations, with up to half of all pregnancies terminating spontaneously before the mother even knows that she is pregnant.
The other problem is that we know evolution happened from the evidence in the fossil record and from genetics. Two facts are strongly supported by evidence:
1. The Earth is very old.
2. Simpler organisms came before more complex ones.
Where did the more complex organisms come from? You could say that they were created by God, but we don't have good evidence for that. The scientific explanation is that complex organisms arose from simpler ones.
@john2001plus
16 hours ago (edited)
A person's feelings about their body do not make a man a woman or a woman a man, nor is it possible to make the switch. A trans person will never be able to produce children. The changes are cosmetic only and don't change the fundamental reality of a person's biology. It seems to me that people are sold a lie about gender affirming care.
From what I read, some people do benefit psychologically from surgery. However, this is a serious operation that does irreversible damage to the body, with potential complications. Maybe psychological care would be more appropriate?
Some of us didn't exactly win the genetics lottery. We have to deal with the reality of our bodies instead of some fantasy. Surgery only becomes needed when it is medically necessary.
I saw one of these tube testers in the 1970s, maybe at a TV repair shop. I think that my dad simply bought a replacement vacuum tube for one that had gone bad in a TV. He was good at fixing things.
Vacuum tubes work like transistors in that they allow a small current to control a much larger one. This is necessary for the amplification of radio signals that are very weak. In the case of the vacuum tube, electrons on a grid block the flow of the larger current.
Given how primitive this seems, I am impressed that something as complex as a cathode ray television could be made with these tubes. The response time to controlling the current flow would have to be in nanoseconds to deal with VHF signals. Furthermore, they have to control the path of the electron beam on the cathode ray tube.
This echoes pooints I have seen in other videos. Long distance space travel seems too dangerous. Even going to Mars is very risky.
I have long speculated that in some distant future we might send android robots, with human personalties, to the stars. By coincindence, I'm listening to the "Bobiverse" audio book series about that same topic.
Of course, this video comes across as staged rather than spontaneous.
My degree is in biology, and my education convinced me that evolution is the best explanation for the diversity of life.
I'm not going to claim to know everything, but I do try to stay well informed about the subjects I have opinions on.
I feel that the video is full of inaccuracies, and I don't think a real biologist would respond the way the person in the video does.
The claim that there are no transitional species is simply false. The fossil record is incomplete and never will be complete, but many of the species we have discovered can reasonably be viewed as transitional between earlier and later forms. For example, there is a well-documented transition between land mammals and whales and dolphins.
However, every time paleontologists discover a new fossil that fills a gap—for example, if they connect species A and C by finding an intermediate species B—critics simply argue that we are now missing the transitions between A and B, and between B and C. The expectation of an infinitely detailed fossil record is unrealistic. Fossilization is a rare event, and evolution often proceeds relatively rapidly in response to changing environmental pressures, leaving comparatively few fossils from those transitional populations.
There are a couple of facts that are strongly supported by the evidence:
1. The Earth is very old. 2. Simpler organisms appeared before more complex ones.
How did the more complex organisms arise? One could argue that God created them directly, but we do not have physical evidence for that. The simpler scientific explanation is that complex organisms evolved from simpler ones. Many creationists try to challenge the mechanisms by asking questions such as, "How could this possibly work?" But even if we did not fully understand every mechanism, that would not change the historical evidence that evolution occurred. The evidence tells us that it happened.
That said, we do have a good understanding of the mechanisms involved. DNA replication is not a perfect process, and extremely small mutations occur in every generation. If too many harmful mutations accumulate, the organsim is often not viable. In fact, roughly half of all pregnancies end in spontaneous miscarriage before the mother even realizes she is pregnant, often because of chromosomal or other genetic abnormalities.
Some mutations, however, are neutral or beneficial. Those mutations increase genetic diversity, and that diversity gives populations a better chance of surviving changing environmental pressures. Over many generations, natural selection acting on that genetic variation can produce the large-scale evolutionary changes observed in the fossil record and in living organisms.
Some limited evolution has been observed in organisms alive today.
P.S. I meant to add that birds are part of Theropods that make up dinosaurs. Many theropod dinosaurs shared characteristics in common with birds, such as feathers.
Birds have been reclassified as avian dinosaurs, with only the non-avian dinosaurs considered extinct. I'm not totally comfortable with this change in classification. It seems to me that birds are different enough from what we think of as dinosaurs to be considered separate from them.
Several lines of evidence support the hypothesis that the Huanan market was the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic and that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from activities associated with the live wildlife trade there. Spatial analyses within the market show that SARS-CoV-2–positive environmental samples, including cages, carts, and freezers, were associated with activities concentrated in the southwest corner of the market. This is the same section where vendors were selling live mammals, including raccoon dogs, hog badgers, and red foxes, immediately before the COVID-19 pandemic. Multiple positive samples were taken from one stall known to have sold live mammals, and the water drain proximal to this stall, as well as other sewerages and a nearby wildlife stall on the southwest side of the market, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (24).
Rand Paul is using Fauci as a punching bag, trying to implicate Fauci for the pandemic, implying that it was created in a lab, to which Fauci provided a modest amount of funding to catalog bat viruses. However, none of this is supported by evidence, so this is just a witch hunt.
Many conservative commentators that I like regularly make statements about the pandemic that aren't supported by research. The truth is that masks and the vaccines slowed the spread of the disease. I have read the studies. The truth is that the vaccines reduced overall mortality at all ages.
Fauci deserves at least some credit for dealing with a major crisis under difficult circumstances. Instead, people want to condemn him over actions they find questionable. It is easy to second-guess people when you are not the one facing tremendous responsibility.
The number of active satellites in orbit has grown exponentially from about 1,400 in 2015 to about 15,000 currently. As many as 100,000 are expected to be in orbit within the decade
We know that roughly 60 thousand years ago, humans built the first permanent structures.*
However, farming wouldn't come along until the neolithic period, about 11 to 12 thousand years ago.
Either way, humans would have some sort of civilization to manage their affairs, even if it was primitive.
* I had previously read that a drought in Africa had nearly wiped out the human race, forcing a small population to live along the southern coast of Africa. They came out of this drought roughly 50,000 years ago, beginning the Upper Paleolithic period.
However, I keep reading different numbers as to when this occurred. Some sites say 60,000 to 70,000 years ago. However, Google AI is telling me that it started 190,000 years ago.
ChatGPT tells me the following...
The confusion comes from the fact that several different events are being conflated. They are not all referring to the same thing.
Here's a rough timeline based on the current evidence:
~300,000 years ago:Homo sapiens first appears in Africa.
~195,000–130,000 years ago: There is evidence that human populations went through one or more severe bottlenecks, although their causes and severity are still debated. Some researchers link these to long periods of climatic stress, while others argue they resulted from a combination of factors. This is likely what Google AI was referring to.
~74,000 years ago: The eruption of the volcano at Lake Toba occurred. It was once thought to have nearly wiped out humanity, but that hypothesis is no longer widely accepted.
~70,000–60,000 years ago: Southern Africa experienced periods of severe drought associated with changing climate. Archaeological sites such as Pinnacle Point and Blombos Cave show that coastal populations survived by exploiting seafood, shellfish, and other marine resources. These populations also developed sophisticated stone tools and symbolic behavior.
~70,000–50,000 years ago: Modern humans began expanding out of Africa, eventually reaching Asia, Europe, and Australia.
~50,000 years ago: The Upper Paleolithic began in Europe. This date marks the appearance of advanced stone-tool industries there, not the end of an African drought. Humans had already been behaving in "Upper Paleolithic" ways in parts of Africa for tens of thousands of years.
The statement that "only about 7,000 humans survived" also needs some qualification. Older studies often estimated an effective breeding population of only a few thousand individuals. More recent genetic studies usually estimate an effective population size of roughly 1,000–10,000 breeding individuals, which does not mean there were only that many people alive. The actual census population may have been several times larger.
So the dates you've seen correspond to different ideas:
190,000 years ago: An early proposed population bottleneck.
70,000–60,000 years ago: A later period of climatic stress in southern Africa and the expansion of coastal populations.
50,000 years ago: The beginning of the Upper Paleolithic in Europe.
The version you previously read—that a drought reduced humans to a relatively small coastal population in southern Africa that later expanded—is still a plausible summary of one influential hypothesis. However, archaeologists today tend to view the story as more complex, with multiple climate fluctuations and population bottlenecks rather than a single catastrophic event that almost exterminated humanity.
Here in Utah, Taco Bell is highly suspect because they get their lettuce from Mexico.
For a long time I liked to eat salads. But lettuce doesn't keep very long and now I am highly suspicious of things like that.
I eat Roma tomatoes for the higher lycopene content.
I have concluded that a moderate amount of chips with salsa is healthy, and a good substitute for salads. The high fiber is filling and helps with appetite.
Tortilla chips are high in resistant starch, which is linked to some health benefits.
Google AI says...
Yes, lycopene is highly beneficial. It is a potent antioxidant found in red foods like tomatoes, watermelon, and pink grapefruit. It protects your cells from oxidative stress and is associated with a lower risk of heart disease, prostate cancer, and strokes. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
For maximum benefit, consider these key details:
Better with fat: Lycopene is fat-soluble. Eating lycopene-rich foods with healthy fats (like cooking tomatoes in olive oil or eating them with avocado) boosts your body's absorption by up to 4.4 times. [1, 2, 3]
Better when cooked: Heating and processing tomatoes (e.g., in tomato paste, sauce, or salsa) actually makes lycopene more bioavailable than eating them raw. [1]
Yes, salsa contains lycopene. Because tomatoes are the primary ingredient in traditional red salsa, the condiment is packed with this powerful antioxidant. Lycopene is linked to reduced inflammation, better heart health, and a lower risk of certain cancers. [1, 2, 3, 4]
The bioavailability of lycopene actually improves when tomatoes are cooked, processed, or mixed with a little fat (like avocado), making this flavorful condiment an excellent way to boost your daily nutrient intake. [1, 2, 3]
Yes, resistant starch is highly beneficial. It bypasses small intestine digestion, reaching the colon intact to feed beneficial gut bacteria. This produces short-chain fatty acids (like butyrate) that improve gut health, stabilize blood sugar, increase satiety, and support heart health. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Key benefits of resistant starch include:
Blood Sugar Control: Because it resists digestion, it does not cause blood sugar spikes. Some research indicates it can also increase insulin sensitivity. [1, 2]
Gut Health & Digestion: It acts as a prebiotic, nourishing your microbiome and protecting the lining of the colon, which may lower the risk of colorectal cancer. [1, 2]
Weight Management: By fueling the production of satiety hormones like GLP-1, it helps you feel full longer. [1]
You can naturally incorporate resistant starch into your diet by eating legumes, seeds, unripe (green) bananas, and whole grains. Additionally, cooking and subsequently cooling starchy carbohydrates (like rice, pasta, and potatoes) turns them into resistant starches. [1, 2]
Yes, corn tortillas contain resistant starch. The traditional process of making them—called nixtamalization, where corn is soaked in an alkaline lime solution—alters the starch and naturally increases resistant starch. [1, 2, 3]
You can boost the resistant starch content even further by cooking and cooling them (e.g., storing them in the fridge), which causes the starches to crystallize and become more resistant to digestion. For example, fresh corn tortillas might contain roughly 2.6 g of resistant starch, but this can increase to over 3.5 g after being chilled in the refrigerator. [1, 2, 3]
“You can and should continue to eat fruits and vegetables, but you might want to take additional precautions depending on where you live,” says James E. Rogers, PhD, director of food safety at Consumer Reports, who notes that so far, the majority of infections have been reported in Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia, Indiana, and Kentucky. “If you’re in one of those states, I recommend avoiding eating lettuce and salad greens until we know more, but currently, there is no data to support avoiding fruits and vegetables generally.”
Roughly 70,000 years ago, an ice age in Europe caused a massive drought in Africa. Most of the human population died off, with roughly 7,000 individuals surviving along the southern coast of Africa. However, these people built the first permanent dwellings, invented many new tools, and learned to fish.
Once the drought receded, these more technologically advanced humans began spreading out. In a couple of thousand years, they would reach other continents. They likely outcompeted, if not killed, other species of humans.
People of European descent still have a small amount of Neanderthal DNA. Decades ago, there was a report of a skull found in Israel that was half Neanderthal and half Homo sapiens.
@john2001plus
2 years ago
I didn't notice sugar-alcohols in very many products. I have occasionally bought no-sugar-added mini-pies that contain sugar-alcohols. They give me gas, but as long as I eat them in moderation, I am fine. Too much can have a laxative effect.
The initiative is intended to help jump-start the US nuclear sector, which largely stagnated after the 1970s due to shifting public opinion, political pressure, and increasingly stringent regulations that prioritized safety above all else. The result was an approval process so complex and costly that it was almost impossible to navigate without going bankrupt. Launched in 2025, the Reactor Pilot Program seeks to fast-track a new generation of reactors by using the DOE's independent safety authorization and oversight process at federal laboratory sites rather than the standard Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) commercial licensing pathway for early-stage technology validation.
I still believe that Quantum Computing is not very practical. It reportedly has limited use cases and it is very difficult and expensive to implement.
However, I suppose that it is possible that if they keep working at it, the technology could eventually be very powerful, but I think that it is going to be a long wait.
In jurisdictions like Maine, harvesters are required by law to throw back both undersized and oversized lobsters. The large lobsters are more fertileand help sustain the population. Also, the meat is tougher.
@umustwantme
4 months ago
"Where have you been"?
"I was abducted by aliens,... Again"!!
@Hala-ataa
2 months ago
I heard Celine Dion humming as he disappeared in the water
@Sana_foxian
1 year ago (edited)
For everyone else wondering: No the lobster is not dead, he's just old as hell and when you're old moving is hard but he is alive. His eyes legs and even antennae move in this video he is alive.
@remedyhunter3561
1 year ago
fun fact: when lobsters get this old they don’t die of “old age” like humans do, their telomeres don’t wear down like humans so they can’t age to death. instead they get so massive (like this distinguished gentleman) that when they molt out of their shell it gets progressively more and more difficult, until they die in the process. that’s why he said he probably has only a couple years left, he’s reaching the limit of manageable size
Every time a healthy cell divides, its telomeres become slightly shorter. Scientists often compare telomeres to the plastic tips on shoelaces because they help protect chromosomes from fraying or breaking apart.
Eventually, telomeres shrink to a critical length, triggering a process called replicative senescence. At that point, the cell can no longer divide. This natural limit acts as one of the body’s important defenses against cancer.
Tumors must bypass that barrier to survive.
Many cancers accomplish this by reactivating telomerase, an enzyme that rebuilds telomeres and extends a cell’s lifespan. In melanoma, mutations in the TERT gene, which produces telomerase, are especially common. About 75% of melanoma tumors carry these mutations.
But there was a puzzle researchers could not explain.
From the article I calculate that I should eat 5.67 ounces of protein per day. I don't nornally read food labels for the protein content, but now I am curious.
GlyNAC (a combination of Glycine and N-acetylcysteine) is highly beneficial as a strategy for healthy aging, specifically by boosting natural glutathione levels.
Research indicates that as people age, their ability to synthesize glutathione—the body's "master antioxidant"—declines. GlyNAC provides the necessary precursors to restore these levels, which in turn recharges cellular "batteries" (mitochondria) and combats oxidative stress.
Key Health Benefits
Clinical trials and research studies highlight several specific areas of improvement:
Brain Health & Cognition: Supplementation has been shown to reverse age-associated cognitive decline and support overall brain health in both human and animal models.
Physical Strength & Mobility: Older adults taking GlyNAC experienced significant improvements in muscle strength, gait speed, and exercise capacity.
Metabolic Health: Studies found GlyNAC reduces insulin resistance and improves mitochondrial fuel oxidation, which is particularly beneficial for those with type 2 diabetes or metabolic dysfunction.
Cellular Protection: It reduces chronic inflammation, oxidative stress, and genomic damage (DNA damage), which are key hallmarks of aging.
Specific Conditions: Benefits have also been observed in patients with HIV, where it helped correct premature aging defects and improved quality of life.
Comparison: GlyNAC vs. Glutathione
While one might assume taking glutathione directly is better, researchers often prefer GlyNAC because:
Bioavailability: Oral glutathione is often broken down in the stomach before it can be used.
Synthesis: GlyNAC provides the specific building blocks (glycine and cysteine) needed for cells to produce their own glutathione according to demand.
I don't have an insect problem in my house except I had some ants invade the kitchen. I bought a bottle of ant poison from Walmart and this took care of the ants.
Fusion is still pie-in-the-sky and a long way from being practical. Radiation damage to reactors is likely to make it very expensive.
If only we had an enormous ball of hydrogen to generate fusion power.
Solar power is reportedly borderline cost-effective. As fossil fuel reserves decline and likely become more expensive, solar power should become more economical. However, I’m not sure how long this rise in cost will take; it could be decades.
Installing solar panels on your roof can make roof replacement twice as expensive. Panels can also damage or overheat your roof, and storms could damage them as well. I would rather leave that to the power company.
The solar roof tile idea is interesting, but only if there is a shortage of land for solar installations. There is a great deal of surface area on roofs that we could utilize.
I found this really interesting, but I assume that most people wouldn't want to watch the full 33 minute video.
The bottom line is that the AIDS drug Ritonavir started crystallizing during production making it not useful. This is because chemicals can take different arrangements called polymorphs. Once the process starts, it is impossible to stop because the crystals are self-replicating, and it is not simply a matter of cleaning or replacing all the equipment.
This process could affect many drugs we take. One researcher made it happen with aspirin.
This problem has led to increased medical regulation requiring research on possible polymorphs.
Climate Alarmism has become a religion. I think that it is confirmation bias for the political left because it justifies authoritarian government control over the entire energy sector. It was justification for Biden bragging about shutting down coal plants. This is what the Climate Alarmist Skeptics are afraid of. They don't want authoritarian government. They want free choice.
They also don't want the government spending a trillion dollars of their money to fix the problem until we are sure that it really is a problem. When government provides incentives to do a particular thing, this is a form of coercion because it causes people to make economic decisions that they would have not otherwise made, and at the expense of taxpayers.
The actual temperature changes are not very scary and the public in general senses this. When temperatures are not much different than they were in my childhood 60 years ago, I notice, and so do many other people.
The data shows that it took 140 years for the average atmospheric surface temperature to rise by 1 degree celsius. In short, these changes happen very gradually giving the people and the government plenty of time to adapt if we need to.
Saying we have a large number of record warm days sounds scary, but when those records are by 0.01 or 0.02 degrees, we are clearly being manipulated by graphs that resemble a hockey stick.
Apparently, the somewhat questionable need for massive AI datacenters is causing the country to not worry so much about our energy usage and climate change.
I think that humans have a psychological need to worry about something. The boogey man of the day could be government, corporations, or climate change, but it feels like much ado about nothing.
I had to shorten my comments because the website limited the number of characters that I could use. Well, maybe brevity is better...
John Coffey
1 minute ago
It is possible that the COVID-19 virus came from a lab leak. Reportedly, it is less likely that it came from Gain of Function research, but on both points we don't have enough evidence. We are in the dark.
Much speculation has been made about a relatively small U.S. grant to the Wuhan lab to catalogue bat viruses that had nothing to do with Gain of Function Research. However, we have no evidence about what the Chinese researchers may have otherwise been up to.
Parts of the article are factual, but it is constantly engaging in emotionally tinged conspiratorial language. These are speculations and I do not accept them as fact until we have more evidence. What is described as a coverup may have only been scientists defending what they thought was correct. Some of this was very likely CYA because scientists didn't want their research grants denied because of false claims.
Maybe the full truth will eventually come out or maybe it won't. I see at least three possibilities...
1. The virus came from a natural source, either mutating before or after it infected humans.
2. Since the Wuhan lab was cataloguing natural viruses, with the intent of finding ones dangerous to humans, the lab leak theory is plausible. I heard a report of researchers getting sick after collecting bat viruses from a remote cave.
3. The Wuhan lab was working on Gain of Function Research that leaked. One of the lab's scientists was quoted as feeling relieved that COVID-19 was not related to her research viruses.*
* However, we have no way of knowing if this claim is true.
