Caution: Potentially Misleading Contents
Substantial peer feedback has been received that this record does not follow the norms of scientific rigour or balance, and thus the main claims may not stand the test of scientific scrutiny. For example:
Working paper Open Access
Yan, Li-Meng; Kang, Shu; Hu, Shanchang
Two possibilities should be considered for the origin of SARS-CoV-2: natural evolution or laboratory creation. In our earlier report titled “Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route”, we disproved the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 arising naturally through evolution and instead proved that SARS-CoV-2 must have been a product of laboratory modification. Despite this and similar efforts, the laboratory creation theory continues to be downplayed or even diminished. This is fundamentally because the natural origin theory remains supported by several novel coronaviruses published after the start of the outbreak. These viruses (the RaTG13 bat coronavirus, a series of pangolin coronaviruses, and the RmYN02 bat coronavirus) reportedly share high sequence homology with SARS-CoV-2 and have altogether constructed a seemingly plausible pathway for the natural evolution of SARS-CoV-2. Here, however, we use in-depth analyses of the available data and literature to prove that these novel animal coronaviruses do not exist in nature and their sequences have been fabricated. In addition, we also offer our insights on the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated naturally from a coronavirus that infected the Mojiang miners.
Revelation of these virus fabrications renders the natural origin theory unfounded. It also strengthens our earlier assertion that SARS-CoV-2 is a product of laboratory modification, which can be created in approximately six months using a template virus owned by a laboratory of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The fact that data fabrications were used to cover up the true origin of SARS-CoV-2 further implicates that the laboratory modification here is beyond simple gain-of-function research.
The scale and the coordinated nature of this scientific fraud signifies the degree of corruption in the fields of academic research and public health. As a result of such corruption, damages have been made both to the reputation of the scientific community and to the well-being of the global community.
Importantly, while SARS-CoV-2 meets the criteria of a bioweapon specified by the PLA, its impact is well beyond what is conceived for a typical bioweapon. In addition, records indicate that the unleashing of this weaponized pathogen should have been intentional rather than accidental. We therefore define SARS-CoV-2 as an Unrestricted Bioweapon and the current pandemic a result of Unrestricted Biowarfare. We further suggest that investigations should be carried out on the suspected government and individuals and the responsible ones be held accountable for this brutal attack on the global community.
Publication Note (July 17th, 2021):
The three Yan reports used scientific evidence and analyses to prove that SARS-CoV-2 is an Unrestricted Bioweaponcreated by military scientists of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime. These reports have played a pivotal role in revealing the true identity of the ongoing Unrestricted Biowarfare. For this reason, the CCP and its allies have been constantly launching attacks at the Yan Reports. Very recently, the Rule of Law Foundation (ROLF) and Rule of Law Society (ROLS), which we have listed as our honorary affiliation in our reports, requested Zenodo to have the original uploads of our reports closed. This was done by the ROLF & ROLS without informing us authors or seeking our agreement. This is unacceptable because the work was done by us authors independently with no financial assistance provided by the ROLF & ROLS or any other organization. Their action here has no scientific basis and is against the rules of scientific publications. To restore the availability of our reports to the world, we have therefore re-uploaded the three Yan reports. Our affiliation has been changed to Yan Research – An Independent Research Team.
The current report was originally published on October 8th, 2020. As of July 16th, 2021, the original Zenodo upload of it has been viewed 371,926 times and downloaded 146,513 times. Upon mutual agreement, Dr. Jie Guan opted out of this publication and his contributions have instead been specified in the acknowledgements. Three minor typos have been corrected.
The 2nd Yan Report.pdf
|All versions||This version|
|Data volume||1.1 TB||1.1 TB|