now joined by retreat molar professor emeritus of physics at the university of california berkeley. professor my great to talk to thank you very much for finding the time. i'm pleased to be here that you recently call or an article in the wall street journal. much read article i should say about the odds of our school, the, to evolving naturally being extremely low. not impossible, but extremely low. i think you put it to one in a 1000000000 before we talk about that, let me ask, you know, how did of color all super i know we like yourself become interested in the novel corona virus. oh my, my, my back when i was in particle physics and i've gone into archaeology, i've gone into climate studies, created a whole nonprofit to, to study global warming. so i always learned from my mentor louis, i'll send you something to contribute your, your scientists before you are

a physicist. and if you know things that are relevant, if you have a way of analyzing things, then then it's your responsibility to do it. especially on an issue that is publicly important and i think. ready some of your critics may say that because you're not a doctor, you should not be speaking on the issue. but what i found very persuasive about your argument is that you're actually watching a legion scientific process. you're calling for the scientific procedure to be upheld and for the evidence that it delivers to be respected. you're exactly right . and those, those people who say, if you don't have the credentials, we shouldn't listen to you are the same. people say so. and so as a credential there, for i will listen to what he says that without any skepticism, and that's not the scientific process and the scientific process. you look at what someone says, not with their credentials are now i have great credentials and science and i've kind of course many, many different fields. so this whole idea though that, that listen to people's credentials rather than their arguments is antithetical

science. now, you focus primarily on the so called double c d g sequence which exists in covered 90 packages and which makes it so much more lethal. why are you inclined to think that it couldn't have appeared there naturally? okay, well let me 1st begin by saying no, we don't focus on that. the wall street journal article had 2 major points of the 5 major scientific points that each one of which argues against this being a, a naturally evolve a pathogen. by the way, when we say it was made in the laboratory, what we really mean was that a bat corona virus was taken, wasn't made from scratch and this bathroom virus was a changed in the laboratory to make it much more dangerous. there was still a human hand there and the human hands. as far as i understood your argument,

what is what made it so much more lethal than what made it lethal and it leaves behind these clues in the, in the genome itself of the virus is clues, and there are, there are 5 really big ones. each one of which is sufficient to show it came from a laboratory. this c, d, c, g, g is, is part of one of them the, the virus has in it what's called a pure and cleavage site. and this is something that when it gets to the cell, the cell looks at this thing. it says, ah, this is something i need, i open up and let the material come in. so the virus doesn't join again. somebody has this code on called it for a cleavage site, and when that happens, it makes it much, much, much magic word opening the gate like a question. where did the steering clearing side come from? if you, there are 2 possibilities. one is from random mutations, but it's a complex thing. the idea that came out of nowhere is like saying that the human

eye just popped up one day because of the mutation is too complex for that. so the other possibility is that it came from recombination or recombination is when you have another virus that has this in it and your coal, it doesn't. and they get into the cell together and they, they're being manufactured, but it gets confused. and if you're in cleavage, site moves over. now the issue there is that this kind of recombination in only take place with a similar, similar a groan of virus. and so there are $58.00 known true viruses that could france for appear and cleavage size. and none of them have appearing plebiscite if i understood it correctly while the nature doesn't really favor this particular sequence. it happens to be a darling of many lab technicians around the world, and it has been used many times already. now what you're talking about here is part of the pure and cleavage, which is a little section called c, d, c z,

a double say. now, there are c g, g sequences in other viruses. but in, in, in, in the corner of virus. what this does is it is it is, it creates a amino acid known as known as, as originated. but, but the thing is there are 6 different ways you can create for argentine and the virus is lot use different ones. this is the one that happens to be used in the laboratory by most people. so it's a secondary bit of information. the fact that this is there just, it, we, there's no possible way it could have gotten there from, from, from natural gene transfer. but the fact that it happens to be the one that lab technicians use is another clue that in that, that supports the contention that was put in there may. okay. now the, the chinese side have long claimed that they've been the trans band as they can be,

and the lease sign his publish, sorry, go be to partial genome as early as february, 2020, which i gather, you're not satisfied with what's, what's your problem with i don't think anybody today would say that trends that china was being transparent and the, the, the w h o, a group that went over there, ask them also today which, which were denied. but let me talk about that february publication, because in that, the chinese published the genome of coding of, of the cold current of ours. but they didn't do the whole genome. they, they did most of it and they stopped short right at the point with 6 pieces down later after that the, if you're in clever psych was there, there publication did not include the hearing leaving side, which is so critical to understanding this and so critical to finding it, so even there are publication the most read publication,

nature magazine in the last 10 years, millions of reads. and if they left out a critical part that it's in conceivable that they profess them all over. and there's a little knowledge that i know about that i have about the subject. i mean, those were very early days of depend damage and there's still much we don't know about 900 isn't. is that really surprising that some portion of that gina would be missing? oh yeah. you know, because this was supposedly the old you know, that they publish. and it was a critical part and they stopped just short of it. 666 nuclear died short of it. anyway, i don't want to get into that because i'm not interest so much in describing blame to anybody. what, by my cases of scientific case, that, that there are 5 key scientific discoveries that each one of which strongly favors the origin of

a natural bad virus manipulative laboratory. and if i list the number of the about of evidence for this, for the natural occurrence, it's all been disproven. i mean, the original evidence for this was russia. i mean, sorry, russia, i'm talking to russia, that was china had actually completed the study and demonstrated that it came from iraq in the one where the market. and everybody said they didn't done the work. they've done it quickly. they don't transparently array for them. well, it turns out they had to withdraw all of that. all of those claims with the early paper in, in the lines, it appraised them for having been so transparent, but what they said turned out to be false. and nobody denies that. it was false, at this point, they said it was, it was a premature conclusion. so the evidence in favor of what's called the sonata mac or the natural origin. there is now, papers that you mentioned there,

well health organization. and there has been a notable turn around and its position as well. i, i guess the american prussia has had its effect, but the chinese are still very adamant about how much active they're willing to, to give. now, we know, i mean it's been well established that the a center for disease control has have certain contracts with that libraries or do you think that the americans indeed know as little as they claim to know about this whole thing? because even if the chinese or supper and about producing more information, do you think the americans on their side could, could have contributed more to the public knowledge? well, if you know, i don't, i don't really know, but that's not in my mind. the issue, the 1st step is to figure out if this truly was done in the laboratory. and as i said, there is lots of evidence for this. i mean,

the 1st bit of evidence is simply their total failure to find an animal from whom it could have been transferred the recent report, they look at $80000.00 animals in china, everything from wild animals to market animals or to farm animals. and in each one they look to see whether it has any evidence of having held this virus and, and turned out to be 0 or $80000.00. now this in previous academic, so the, sorry den with 2003 the, the middle east, murder is academic. they found the animals pretty quickly. and secondly, well, when you, when you look at the, this, this, this site that's there and there's no possible way to get in there. and yet, is the sort of thing that was actually put in viruses by people and one in the past . another one is the fact that in, in, in the previous virus diseases, what happens is an animal carries it and starts giving it to people hobble, heard about almost having people start getting it and they get sick and they go to

the hospital, but they don't spread it because it takes a mutation before it spreads from human to human. so one of the things that's done in these viruses, if you look back at the hospital cases and there are some 8000 hospital cases in which people have been been study to see that they had those pirates before it became human to human. not one of them had it. so this is complete departure from what has happened in the past. this is genetic purity because of the way spreads and animals and jumps many, many, many, many times you typically get many different varieties of this right from the very beginning. but in this case, there was for the 1st 9 months, there was no improvement in the iris. it jumped out fully made. now that is a real sign of what's called, again, a function work. i think in a function where you take a buyers, you want to make it more lease. also you're exposed to human eyes. mice. it makes

many, many, many, many, many cycles. and in just a few months, you can get something that appears to be evolved over years. and the fact that this, when this came out was all ready adapted for human to human transmission is again, an unprecedented professor. we have to take a very short break right now, but we'll get back with you moment they can. the me or i need the

i use the ah, me for me.

i welcome back to will depart with richard miller, professor americas of physics at the university of california berkeley, professor. before the break we, we were talking about the lab work to supercharge the virus. and i want to ask you about one other thing that has long been puzzling me. you know, this virus seems to have this uncanny ability to identify an individual's molnar abilities and strike where it hurts the most. and that's why they're, you know, the symptoms are all around the board, they're really individual rather than collective. and that i wonder if that would be penned on these sort of lab manipulation or is it something that we have seen in other viruses? also know this, this is worse than those viruses and it's worse because it takes the most,

the most virulent, the most harmful aspects of previous viruses and combine them into one. so there are 2 things. one is what's called the ace to receptor. and that is that this virus one is looking around for a cell. if there is a, a receptor on the cell, it's fix. that's the 1st step. and a to receptor is a receptor that's in the you and the long it's in the human brain. it's the cardiovascular, just picking this receptor already makes it specialized for humans. the 2nd thing is when it's fixed, it has this so called pure and cleavage site, which is a code on the surface of the virus. when it, when the cell do text code, it opens up think this is something benign, thinks this is something that the rest of the body is sending it for its own health . so this combination which, which is something that we haven't seen before, that combination is really, really super dangerous. and that's one of the reasons why this is, is so bad. there are other aspects to it too. i think the fact that you don't

notice the infection for the 1st week or so when you are a carrier in spreading. and so these are other aspects to that, thomas, i don't have any evidence that that was designed in, but it could have been done by the selection of the right of the right virus. these wires, it's prevalent, not in a linear way, because i mean that we well known a couple of cases here and there when, for example, my neighbors, you know, at a man died his wife, you know, they, even, in fact they decide caring for him. so there is clearly something about the ability of the person to be caught that particular virus. and i think at least my very limited knowledge suggests to me that it has something to do with the preexisting immunity which may be compromised by the persons metabolism. and we know that people with type 2 diabetes, for example, are usually of my much greater risk of over 9 over 900 complication. anyway, what, what am i trying to ask?

and i do want to appear a conspiracy theorist here. but given the preponderance of metabolic disorders around the world, what is the natural dicks packet of some scientists would be playing around the edges of chronic and metabolic diseases. and trying to establish whether there would be any connection between the u. r. any been edge, negative energy that you i my, my expertise on this has to do with the, with the origins of the virus and not in a generic, any issue of, of other diseases. i mean, my sense is that a large number that most, most diseases that affect humans are involved in a much larger ecological community of animals. and they jump to humans. and it takes several mutations for them to become a pandemic in you humans. but i'm on the general issue. the whole purpose of the

research that was supported to, to, to, to create more dangerous viruses was, was thought of as a way of accelerating natural evolution. so the so called gain of function method means that you take a virus and you put it in, in animals, but the human eyes down was called you and eyes. mice will stay the same a, to refine the receptor on it, and then go to a many, many, many generations and spread from mouth to mouth and so on. and then within, within a few months or a year, you would see what might evolve over a 100 years out in the while. so the idea that variance derives from you taishan of last very long things is really a foundation of, of her ology. and again, a function was meant to do that. when you start sticking in a, a,

if you're in cleavage sites, then you're doing something that would not occur in nature. and i don't want to tell or ologist what they should do, what they shouldn't do, but whatever they do should be done with complete transparency. so the world can watch and make sure that they have the security that they need. and that they're being sufficiently careful. and that has not been the case in now speaking about this trajectory of the been damage, which you say is an evidence of some manipulation in and of itself. even though there were some very few mutations in the beginning of the sprint damage. we are now dealing with increasingly burial and variations. so russia is now in the grips of this delta barrier, which is a far dad layer than what we saw before. i didn't know if you have enough expertise for that, but i mean, tell me your advocated gas. do you think we will have to go down the last and

alphabet with ever increasing decimal, or is it likely if this pandemic likely to peak as some of the some of the varying? yeah. these, these viruses, viruses are fascinating things. because they, they mutate very quickly, why not too quickly? so you have to be able to mutate in order to become more dangerous. but if you may take too much, then you can read, so that they write on this narrow boundary line. and what we typically see is a lot of mutations in the beginning, and then you get a virus where additional mutations don't make it any worse. and so is the one that don't mutate that for the most rapidly, like it normally takes days, 2 weeks. and you see this mutation taking place within a month or 2, you may have the optimum virus and then any kind of mutates, it just disappears because it's not as it can compete with the one. it takes much,

much longer then for it to develop the beta gamma delta versions of this. but those, those will happen eventually this dies out and it dies out because enough people get it and recover. there is an immune system, you have the immunity and then it can't mutate around that. the key thing in the mutation is does it affect the, the, the policy of the back seen to, to attack it and most of the cases it has not. the backseat doesn't attack this other change that makes it go quicker. but when in the end, you might need new vaccines, i think the solution to this, there are 2 solutions. one is hurting me and they get lots of people die. you know, there is heard immunity through vaccination, and the vaccination is not solely for the benefit of the individual. it's for the benefit of the community. some people say, well, i'd rarely get sick,

but the problem is if they're going to spread it to others and that that's, that's their social response. well, i think the problem with that is also that they never, they could never know how bad it would be. because, i mean, judging from russia data received the average age of people who add up and intensive care units grow every younger. so it's a, it's a, it's a very dangerous thing, and the, many of the people who die from it are in their forties, at least in my country. now, speaking about russia, i'm currently preparing for an interview with the top russians by and when asked about the origins of this virus. he eventually sad that the origins and all that important because any government has to do with, as it is, make decisions about vaccines. make it to make decisions about public health, etc. do you agree with that? and if not, what practical value could be?

knowledge of the viruses early days bring for the treatment of this ill. misc? none, i agree with him completely. the reason we're starting the origins is to make sure it doesn't happen again. and if this happened in a secret laboratory, then we need to have a demand transparency of all laboratories that are doing this kind of research. i mean, real transparency, not where well, we'll keep it secret, but they won't actually publish it. if you're working with such dangerous things, then you have to allow observers from other countries to come in and see precisely what you're doing. and that's the real value. the purpose of this is not to treat the current illness any, any better? no, we don't need that. we know this as we have the genome. the danger is the future. and if there are laboratories around the world in the united states, in china,

or in russia that are developing pathogens, that there may be some valid reason for doing it. but if they're doing something like that, it has to be early open and transparent. well, technically speaking, virus research doesn't fall under the biological weapons regulation, even though if, if your hypothesis is correct. and i do, well, may have killed more people than all biological weapons combined. do you think those things should be regulated and internationally brag biological weapons convention is very weak, and it's mostly here is what you should be doing. and here's what you shouldn't be doing. cover doesn't cover the virus research. so essentially there's very little oversight and it's treated as a national security issue. but as we, i mean again, if your hypothesis is correct, that is a matter of roles secured and just national security, it's absolutely global. you know, these things different cross course borders and that that's real change. and one of

the way, i think, i think i'm, it was trying to, didn't release this purposely. now for the very simple reason that if they had one and she said as a weapon, they would not have released it in one china, one place where they have this kind of research going on. that was clearly accidental if they wanted to use it in a nefarious way. they would have taken it to the united states and release it for dietrich where we, where we have biological research going on. so it was an accident and, and i personally suspect they really didn't want to get to the united states because the virus itself was the whistleblower. the virus itself was the eye witness. it carried with it a code that tells us all about its origins and, and that, that code then is how the information leak out of trying to that they were doing something that they should not have been doing. okay. can i ask you the last question? if we, if we knew for

a fact that these viruses away was indeed alive as came. do you think it would have altered in any way public health programs that were rolled out a year ago? do you think it would have changed the law of the panoramic because i agree. i mean if it's a lot of gave you kind of you know, penalized china for that. but if they knew that and if they weren't fully transcribe them, they bear responsibility. not only for half a k, but also for many of the wrong assumptions that would have been taken based on these in order k processes. you understand what i'm trying to say. you know, i see what you're trying to say and the issue i, you know, i, if they've been more transparent in the beginning, it might have help. but again, i know my scientific expertise is on the origin. and there are 5 clear bits of evidence that are strongly in favor that this was had been manipulated and

made more dangerous. in the laboratory, there is no evidence that i can find that supports the national origin, all of the, the early papers that said it was natural says, and we'll see this will find the animal and you'll see these, there are other things. hospital measurements will show that people were pre infected and so on, and all of their predictions turned out to be wrong. the surviving evidence in favor of natural has just disintegrated, but they are all, it is very strong evidence in favor of being for laboratory creation. so no, this doesn't affect how we treat the disease at this point. it does affect how we prevent it from happening again. ok, well professor molar great stuff. thank you very much for your time and say thank you for watching and hope to hear again next week. or the walter part

the the in the me i always be polite, never engage with an aggravated or confrontational office. don't get into any conversation to start answering questions. just ask for an attorney to survive and interrogation. you've gotta be ready. you're definitely don't want to be going to throw in a jump. so one cups you're more likely to walk free if you're

rich and guilty when you are, if you're poor, you got 2 eyes and 2 ears and one mouth. so you should be seen in here and a whole lot more than you're saying if you don't take that advice, usually going to date yourself a whole join me every thursday on the alex simon show. when i was speaking to guess in the world, the politic sport business. i'm show business. i'll see you then. me. driven by a dreamer shaped by those in me dares

thing. we dare to ask me. ah, your approve of secret documents is reportedly found that the bus stop suggesting that the british royal navy was looking for a reaction from us after one of a small ship that russian waters in the black sea on one thing. also in the headlines the shape the week to be tech well reels of the death of anti virus software pioneer john mcafee, was found dead in spanish prison. so i would say was previously tweeted, tape never is life and dozens of criminal cases are open data. hundreds of web pages removed, russia bottles of moving.