You are correct. My bad. There is Thymine in DNA but it is replaced in RNA by Uracil. The logic still holds. Just because the sequence is not in its most simplified form does not mean it was not man made. Better to ask if the RNA sequence found in the human China Virus can be duplicated in a lab?
It is routine now to synthesize DNA and RNA with specific base sequences. We do it using a "gene machine" .
QED - If it is easy to replicate any RNA sequence in a lab, then perhaps the current human China Virus was replicated in a lab. Just because the current human China Virus does not exhibit the most straight forward way of generating the spike protein does not prove it was not replicated in a lab = man made. My QED is not for the virus was replicated in a lab but that it was possible to replicate the virus in a lab.
I can't read the article. I have read similar articles and found them lacking. Rather than just accept a news article or even an academic paper, go over the information in your mind and see what conclusion you come up with. I will be satisfied with whatever the Truth is - Nature or Lab. However, I do not have the type of mind that just accepts things that do not make sense to me. The virus is either found in Nature or made in a lab. No candidates for found in Nature yet. Increases the probability that it was made in a lab.
If it were not man made it would be a natural occurring virus leaked from the lab. Otherwise it is quite a coincidence as there is only 2 such kind of lab in China and wildlife wet markets are all over the place.
The way the information reads you obviously cut and pasted it from other places. However, I have read similar information and believe the info you have provided to be fairly reliable. None of the hypotheses have been proven but they are not that farfetched. If someone wants links here is an excellent link from the website of The United States Department of Justice on the indicment of Dr. Charles Lieber - https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harv...ationals-charged-three-separate-china-related FYI - Dr. Charles Lieber was not an Associate Prof waiting for tenure. He was the Chair of Harvard University’s Chemistry and Chemical Biology Department All of the information you have provided is disturbing. We have groups of well funded, highly intelligent people, increasing the virility of a virus. It is not like this research was going to cure cancer. What was going on and why?
Immunologist Vincent Racaniello stated that virus leaking theory "reflect a lack of understanding of the genetic make-up of Sars-CoV-2 and its relationship to the bat virus". He states that the bat virus researched in the institution "would not have been able to infect humans – the human Sars-CoV-2 has additional changes that allows it to infect humans." https://sg.news.yahoo.com/bat-virus-bioweapon-science-says-074752585.html
The source for your article is The South China Post?? What comes next is very simplified but it does carry the main points of the argument - there is a high probability that the current human China Virus was man made/modified. I am well aware of the difference between the bat virus and the human China Virus. While the bat virus samples found near Wuhan has a 96% match to the human China Virus, the bat virus lacks a 15 amino acid sequence that codes for the protein the produces the spike that makes it easier for the human China Virus to invade a healthy human lung cell. There is another mammal, pangolin, that has a sequence that codes for the spike but is only a 90% match to the human China Virus. I don't fully understand this part but the % match has to close to 99% to identify the sample as the host organism. The pangolin % is only 90%. What is missing is some combination of the bat/pangolin virus. It would be like the bat virus but also contain the 15 amino acid sequence found in the pangolin. It is called the host organism Has not been found. It should not be that hard to find. It would be a mammal, that resides in the Wuhan area, that comes in contact with humans. Has not been found. Could it exist in Nature? Yes. However, would somehow have to explain how the 2 viruses from bat and pangolin mixed and then breached human defenses. Or maybe the host organism evolved in another way but -Has not been found. If not in Nature then the only other alternative is a virus lab. In a virus lab the origin could have been either some hybrid bat/pangolin or directly change the RNA sequence of either the bat or pangolin. I would go with bat because less would have to be changed. Many are saying that the current China Virus was not produced in a lab. However, they give no other explanation for its origin except the bat in the wet market which is wrong. All we need to know is could the current human China Virus have been made in a virus lab. The answer is yes. The current human China Virus is not the most elegant but it still works. So if it is possible to make in a lab, there is a fair probability that it was. A big, big, question is why there where gain of function experiments going on to begin with at the virus lab in Wuhan? Again - not working on a cure for cancer. The current explanation of why the Wuhan virus lab was working on gain of function in infectious viruses - and it is really a stretch - is that China was trying to show the US and the rest of the world what kind of virus work they could do. (This has actually appeared in print many times as an explanation??) Meaning that China was trying to demonstrate to the rest of the world that it could handle sensitive virus experiments. Wow!! The origin of the current Pandemic is a very sensitive political issue. We will never know the actual sequence of events.