>>12406409You either need help, are doing some top bait or a genuinely incapable of rational thought.
This is /sci/. This isn't /x/ or /pol/.
The burden of proof is on you because your statement is literally against the scientific consensus.
You may be right. If so, post proofs. So far you have posted 0 proofs and/or logical critiques of the current scientific consensus that this is a real strain of a virus
We could argue your general points that may have some merit but your main point is that this virus does not exist. Therefore the onus is on you to prove this assertion especially when it is against a consensus across the entire world spanning different warring political bodies.
Your central point about
>Muh asked someone to prove the virus exists.Ok, which standards of proof would you accept? In this thread you've mish-mashed a number of biological, political and scientific concepts.
