[DiogenesKynikos]

> a "gain of function" virus would contain random differences, and would look indistinguishable from something "created by nature."

No, a chimeric virus created in a gain-of-function experiment would look extremely similar to known viruses, because these chimeras are created by combining elements of known viruses. It would not be 4% different from the closest known natural virus. Accumulating thousands of mutations throughout the entire genome takes decades of evolution. In the wild, that means thousands of generations of hosts.

A virus created in a gain-of-function experiment would also use a well-known backbone. It would not be based on some virus that nobody had ever heard of.

[scottlocklin]

Yeah dude that could never happen. Except it already did:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4797993/

https://norkinvirology.wordpress.com/2015/12/04/genetically-...

https://www.pnas.org/content/113/11/3048

I don't know what your purpose is in regurgitating verifiable but admittedly realistic-sounding bullshit on hacker news, but virtually every statement you have made here is obvious bullshit.

I don't even particularly believe the "possibly released from a lab" meme, and am generally against the shadowy dipshits that push it. But you're not helping here.

[DiogenesKynikos]

What happened?

Are you saying that a chimeric virus created in a lab was found to have thousands of seemingly random mutations throughout its genome?

Or are you claiming that a chimeric virus was created using a backbone that nobody had ever heard of?

Be specific, because it's impossible to respond if you vaguely call what I'm saying BS.