1:42. I offer six statements and opening.  

ONE:  there is no dispositive evidence that the pandemic began as a spillover of a natural virus in a market all evidence is consistent with a laboratory acquired infection I do understand that this conclusion is not widely held and I can I can and I could spend an entire hearing painstakingly going through the scientific evidence for this conclusion but that's not the purpose of today's meeting I'm happy to discuss the evidence contained in my written remark during questioning I'm also willing to publicly debate any virologist on this question at any time or place only one infectious to see infectious disease doctor was willing to debate this question with me last year in a formal debate debate format and he lost I'm also willing to testify under oath if requested.

TWO: All evidence is consistent with an accidental not a deliberate release.

THREE:  SARS-2 has features consistent with synthetic biology gain of function research.  Two features involved acceptable academic gain of function research: the receptor binding domain optimization and the firin cleavage site.  These two features have never been found in nature in related viruses that could have reasonably started the panic because of the closeness of these viruses to Wuhan these two features are on the other hand routinely engineered into viruses in 2018 us and wiv scientists proposed inserting quote human specific Theron cleavage sites in a bat virus backbone 2 years later SARS appeared on the wiv doorstep SARS too is about derived virus with a human specific firon cleavage site one region of SARS 2 called orphe has features of forbidden gain of function research asymptomatic transmission and immune system evasion the wiv was engineering a protein related to orphe to have these two forbidden properties before 2019 as shown in two masters degree thesis available only in Chinese