Fox News’s Tucker Carlson railed against a growing trend in science to engineer viruses as well as humans in ways that are harmful and deadly, all while being funded by taxpayers and tech behemoths like Google.
Carlson began his Tuesday show monologue with details surrounding a recent “Tech Health Conference” sponsored by The Wall Street Journal, during which a reporter asked David Feinberg, head of Google’s Health Division, why the search giant appeared to be censoring results regarding the increasingly discussed theory that COVID-19 escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China.
Feinberg, Tucker continued, admitted that yes, searches for news and information about the theory are intentionally being quashed by Google because the company doesn’t want to “lead people down pathways that we would find to be not authoritative information,” the Health Division rep said.
“All you’re allowed to see is authoritative information. So it’s worth knowing in this and many other cases, what is it?” Carlson said. “And where exactly did Google get its so-called ‘authoritative information?’
“In this case, it came from a group led by a noted man of science called Peter Daszak. If the name sounds familiar, Peter Daszak is the person who almost single-handedly stopped virtually all public speculation about the lab leak early in the pandemic,” he added.
Carlson went on to remind viewers that Daszak was behind a letter dozens of scientists signed onto that was published in the prestigious journal, The Lancet, early on in the pandemic discounting the lab-leak theory and, instead, promoting the narrative that the virus transitioned from a bat to humans.
“Almost no one asked why Peter Daszak might be saying this,” Carlson said. “We now know the answer: Peter Daszak himself was funding research on bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, using U.S. taxpayer dollars, supplied by [lead U.S. immunologist Dr.] Tony Fauci.”
The host, who said that research led by Daszak sought to develop viruses that were more infections to humans using mice, went on to play a clip of the scientist talking about how easy it is to “manipulate bat coronaviruses” in a December 2019 video posted to Google-owned YouTube.
(Video: Fox News)
“Coronavirus is a pretty good… You can manipulate them in the lab pretty easily. It’s spike protein, spike protein drives a lot of what happens with the coronavirus, zoonotic risk. So you can get the sequence, build the protein,” Daszak says in the clip.
Carlson went on to mock as “absurd” Daszak publicly denying that the virus could have escaped from a lab in Wuhan while at the same time funding bat-related coronavirus research in the same lab.
“What’s amazing is Google knew it. The evidence was right there on one of its platforms — YouTube, which it owns,” he said.
The host then cited a story published Tuesday by The National Pulse detailing Daszak’s and Fauci’s connections to risky “gain-of-function” research “with pandemic potential,” the article stated.
“It turns out Tony Fauci wasn’t the only one funding Peter Daszak’s research on bat viruses. Google was funding that research, too. It sounds unlikely, but we know it,” said Carlson.
From there, Carlson pivoted to additional, questionable research that is currently taking place and which could also have profoundly negative impacts on humanity.
“If they can engineer bat viruses to make them more infectious, and oops, they escaped from a lab, what else are they doing?” he asked.
“Now that we know liars and moral pygmies — people like Tony Fauci, and the soulless bots at Google HQ — and running global science, maybe it’s worth being slightly more inquisitive about what’s happening in labs around the world. Why not? It could affect us,” he continued.
Next, Carlson played a video clip from a 2016 event called the “World Science Festival” featuring comments by New York University Bioethics and Philosophy Prof. Mathew Liao, in which he discussed the potential to re-engineer human beings so as to deal with real or imagined global crises such as “climate change.”
“Liao is among the most influential bioethicists in the world — a fact that will amaze you. Liao explained that climate change can be solved with something called ‘human engineering,'” Carlson said before playing a clip in which the professor said:
My view is that what we need is a really robust ethical framework and within this ethical robust framework I think there’s a way going forward where we can do this ethically. But there’s actually a lot of opportunities for this to solve big world problems, one thing is climate change. Climate change is a really big problem we don’t really know how to solve it but it turns out we can use human engineering to help us address climate change.
“Here’s a tip: anyone who uses the phrase ‘robust ethical framework’ wouldn’t know ethics if they got in the shower with them,” the host quipped. “And you know that for a fact because he uses the phrase ‘human engineering.”
At that, Carlson mocked and criticized Liao’s suggestion, noting, “People aren’t bridge improvements. You can’t just add rebar, pour a few yards of concrete, and improve the human condition, much less the human soul.”
The host reported that Liao recently argued in a paper published by the Journal of Ethics, Policy & Environment that humans, for instance, could be engineered to shun hamburgers, resulting in the need for fewer cattle and thus, less methane production that is harmful to the atmosphere.
“People like hamburgers, it turns out. How can we get people to stop eating hamburgers? Not by convincing them that hamburgers are bad. That was the old way. That’s how democracy worked. You would tell people something, if they believed they did it, if they didn’t believe you, they didn’t. But it turns out that’s too time-consuming,” he said.
“The new model is we just use pharmaceuticals. Your kids are getting uppity? Dope them out, and they’ll obey. Liao proposes a nationwide system like that, a pill that would make people nauseous at the sight of red meat,” the host continued.
Carlson then played another clip of Liao further elaborating on his human engineering theory:
So here’s a thought, we have this intolerance for example I have milk intolerance, some people on intolerant to fish so possibly we can use human engineering to make it the case where we are intolerant to certain types of meat, certain types of bovine proteins, so that’s something we can do through human engineering, possibly address really big world problems through human engineering.
“Didn’t we decide this kind of thing in Europe 80 years ago, and at the time, didn’t we agree we’re not going to do that ever again?” Carlson said regarding the concept.
After playing another clip of Liao suggesting that humans could be engineered to have smaller children who would grow to be smaller adults and create a smaller carbon footprint on the environment, a stunned Carlson noted, “That was at a public conference five years ago. Nobody said anything. That’s where we are.”
“Surprised? You shouldn’t be. In fact, it’s less ghoulish than some of the things happening in labs right now. This is what science looks like when it’s been completely decoupled from wisdom, decency and Christianity,” he said in closing.
“It’s a science fiction novel come to life, except it’s real. In fact, Google might be funding it right now. “
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- Jan. 6 committee chair Benny Thompson offers a stunning take on potential Trump criminal actions - January 2, 2022
- Life-long New Yorker posts ‘sad’ Twitter ode on post-pandemic Big Apple being ‘shadow of its former self’ - January 2, 2022
- NYPD officer shot in head in police lot as he slept in vehicle between shifts - January 2, 2022
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.