设万维读者为首页 万维读者网 -- 全球华人的精神家园 广告服务 联系我们 关于万维
 
首  页 新  闻 视  频 博  客 论  坛 分类广告 购  物
搜索>> 发表日志 控制面板 个人相册 给我留言
帮助 退出
 
Pascal的博客  
“朝廷不是让我隐蔽吗?”“你也不看看,这是什么时候了?!”  
网络日志正文
美国家地理颠倒黑白恶意编造闫丽梦报告 2020-09-20 12:46:30

image.png


image.png

image.png

TWENTY YEARS AGO, data scientist Sinan Aral began to see the formation of a trend that now defines our social media era: how quickly untrue information spreads. He watched as false news ignited online discourse like a small spark that kindles into a massive blaze. Now the director of the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy, Aral believes that a concept he calls the novelty hypothesis demonstrates this almost unstoppable viral contagion of false news.

“Human attention is drawn to novelty, to things that are new and unexpected,” says Aral. “We gain in status when we share novel information because it looks like we're in the know, or that we have access to inside information.”

Enter the Yan report. On September 14, an article was posted to Zenodo, an open-access site for sharing research papers, which claimed that genetic evidence showed that the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus was made in a lab, rather than emerging through natural spillover from animals. The 26-page paper, led by Chinese virologist Li-Meng Yan, a postdoctoral researcher who left Hong Kong University, has not undergone peer review and asserts that this evidence of genetic engineering has been “censored” in the scientific journals. (National Geographic contacted Yan and the report’s three other authors for comment but received no reply.)

A Twitter firestorm promptly erupted. Prominent virologists, such as Kristian Andersen from Scripps Research and Carl Bergstrom from University of Washington, took to the internet and called out the paper for being unscientific. Chief among their complaints was that the report ignored the vast body of published literature regarding what is known about how coronaviruses circulate in wild animal populations and the tendency to spill over into humans, including recent publications about the origins of SARS-CoV-2.

The experts also pointed out that the report whipped up wild conspiracy theories and wrongly accused academic journals of plotting with conspirators by censoring important evidence.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/09/coronavirus-origins-misinformation-yan-report-fact-check-cvd/

image.png

本文只是挑选了一些示例,排除了证据,并提出了一个荒谬的设想。

大卫·罗伯逊格拉斯哥大学

七月,格拉斯哥大学的病毒基因组学研究员David Robertson在《自然医学》上发表了一篇同行评审论文,该论文显示了SARS-CoV-2的血统及其最著名的祖先名为RaTG13的病毒已经在蝙蝠中传播。人口数十年。病毒学家认为,这种亲戚与新型冠状病毒有96%的同源性,可能在蝙蝠或人类宿主中繁殖和进化,然后在适应其当前形式并引起持续大流行之前约20年未被发现。

Yan的报告声称这个假设是有争议的,并且RaTG13也是在实验室设计的。但是,面对大量关于SARS-CoV-2及其祖先的遗传证据的发表,这种说法就不成立了。更重要的是,该报告由法治协会(Rule of Law Society)资助,该协会是由前白宫首席战略家史蒂夫·班农(Steve Bannon)创立的非营利组织此后因欺诈被捕。这是许多病毒学家质疑其说法的准确性的另一个原因。

罗伯逊说:“实际上,它正在侵犯伪科学。” “本文只是挑选了几个例子,排除了证据,并提出了一个荒谬的设想。”

《国家地理杂志》与其他著名的病毒学家和错误信息研究人员联系,以更好地了解Yan报告的出处和出了错。在此过程中,他们提供了克服冠状病毒周围错误信息的技巧。

我们对SARS-CoV-2的起源了解多少?

冠状病毒存在于自然界中,可以感染许多不同的生物。在蝙蝠,猪,猫和雪貂中发现了SARS样冠状病毒,仅举几例。根据SARS-CoV-2 的遗传学,最广泛认同的起源是其祖先在跳入人类之前先在野生动物中四处游走(随其所经历的过程交换其遗传特征)。

尽管SARS-CoV-2的近亲存在于蝙蝠中,但科学家尚未找到它的直接母体。该病毒可能已通过中间动物传播,其中牵涉穿山甲,然后进化为能更好地感染人类。或以过去发生的例子为例,它可能直接使蝙蝠跃居为人类。在20年前中国爆发最初的SARS之后,研究人员开始调查当地洞穴中的野蝙蝠以及附近的人。一项2018年的研究发现,有翅哺乳动物中原始SARS病毒的遗传近亲以及人类邻居中的特异性抗体(感染的残留信号)。

寻找答案的精确事件导致溢出的流行是“大海捞针命题,说:” 伊恩·利普金,由哥伦比亚大学的流行病学家,谁共同撰写的早期研究论文自然医学有关非典(SARS)的天然来源冠状病毒2。Yan的报告称,由于Lipkin在遏制2002-2003年SARS流行病方面的工作,他获得了中国政府的奖项,因此该《自然医学》报告存在“利益冲突” 。利普金说,这项指控是“荒谬的”,当被问及他对生物工程在SARS-CoV-2起源中的作用的看法时,他补充说:“没有数据支持这一点。”

要发现冠状病毒的天然来源,可能需要对中国的动物(包括蝙蝠和人类)进行大规模采样,以追踪新型冠状病毒的进化。尽管尚未公布时间表,世界卫生组织正在准备一个小组在中国进行此类调查

 播放视

Yan报告怎么说?

Yan的报告试图以不同的方式解决这个问题,首先是一个模糊的说法,即SARS-CoV-2不好感染蝙蝠,因此不可能来自蝙蝠。但是科学家指出,病毒正在不断发展并在物种之间传播。从蝙蝠到人类的最初溢出可能发生在几十年前,这使病毒有足够的时间为其刺突蛋白(它用于进入细胞的部分)提供通过自然选择来感染人类的最佳条件。

Yan报告的另一个论点集中在刺突蛋白上存在“ 弗林蛋白酶切割位点 ”,这是一种关键的遗传特征,被认为可以增强病毒进入细胞的能力。该报告声称没有其他冠状病毒可发现此功能,因此必须进行设计。但是这种说法与发现相反:在野生种群中,在蝙蝠冠状病毒发现了类似的切割位点。

哥伦比亚大学病毒学家安吉拉·拉斯穆森Angela Rasmussen)说:“如果我不得不解释许多病毒具有切割位点的事实,我会大喊大叫。”

该报告还断言,SARS-CoV-2“可疑”类似于中国军事实验室的科学家发现的两种称为ZC45和ZXC21的蝙蝠冠状病毒。作者声称这些菌株可能已经用作克隆致命病毒的模板。但是其他科学家对此想法持反对态度。

看起来合理,因为他们使用了大量技术术语。但是实际上,他们所说的很多内容并没有任何意义。

哥伦比亚大学的安吉拉·拉斯穆森ANGELA RASMUSSEN)

首先,这两个菌株相差多达3500个核苷酸碱基对,这是遗传密码中使用的化学“字母”。因此,对于SARS-CoV-2生物工程来说,它们将是一个糟糕的起点。根据拉斯穆森和其他几位病毒学家的说法,如果设计出一种病毒,而您必须替换其基因组的10%以上,那效率是低下的,即使不是不可能。罗伯逊说,这些毒株在中国军事实验室被发现的事实也“只是偶然的”。蝙蝠冠状病毒在野蝙蝠中传播,任何人都可能发现过。

该报告还指出,SARS-CoV-2具有“限制酶位点”,即可以被酶切割和操纵的遗传序列。这些基因组特征有时在克隆中使用,并且该报告声称它们的存在指示工程病毒。但是科学家指出,这些位点自然存在于从细菌到人类的所有类型的基因组中。

“这看起来是合法的,因为他们使用了大量的技术术语。但实际上,他们所说的很多内容都没有任何意义。”拉斯穆森说。她补充说,使用限制酶的克隆类型已经过时了,因此不太可能用于制造病毒生物武器。从根本上讲,制造工程病毒并不是一件容易的事。科学家们仍然只是试图了解某些病毒比其他病毒更具感染力的分子和遗传原因。例如,为病毒添加功能以使其更易于传播,这称为功能获得研究。它在制造生物武器方面的潜力备受争议,甚至在美国被禁止使用一段时间,限制了有关其工作方式的可用数据。

那么严的报告是怎么发表的呢?

大流行的标志是迅速涌入的研究和免费共享信息以加快发现的步伐。这种发布“预印本”(学术同行尚未审查过的报告)的做法具有其优势。

罗伯逊说:“对科学界来说,它非常有用。”因为更多的研究人员可以快速分析可用数据。但是预印本也有阴暗面。错误信息是该流行病的另一个特征,预印本在加剧未经证实的声明的新闻报道中发挥了作用,包括病毒变异成更致命的形式来自蛇或比真正的致命程度低。

他说:“当这是真正的新闻时,而当不是新闻时,很难弄清。”他指出,即使是经过同行评审的有关冠状病毒的论文也都在急于出版的过程中出错。诚实的错误和阴险的错误混合在一起,可能预示着在迅速发展的危机中出版业的发展趋势。

Rasmussen说:“我不认为预印本系统会被武器那么多,因为所有信息渠道都被用来散布错误信息:从社交媒体到操纵主流媒体再到预印本再到同行评审的期刊,无所不包。”

坏事传千里

尽管专家们的反对,燕报告和冠状misformation的其他类似的例子,比如Plandemic纪录片,已经在社会化媒体,因为他们趁弱势人的情绪得到了牵引力。这些感觉可以推动恶作剧的病毒传播。

早在2018年,Aral及其麻省理工学院媒体实验室的团队通过分析Twitter的11年数据(约450万条推文),将他们的新颖性假设进行了检验。他们的计算结果显示出令人惊讶的相关性:“我们发现,虚假新闻在我们研究的所有类别的信息中都比真相传播得更远,更快,更深入,更广泛。

正如阿拉尔(Aral)在他的新书《炒作机》(The Hype Machine)中所讨论的那样,发挥的不仅仅是新颖性。人们对社交媒体上的情感故事的反应方式是强烈且可预测的。Vitriol填满了答复,然后虚假新闻被转发的可能性比真实情况高70%。

每当读者决定分享新闻时,心理因素的复杂组合就会起作用,否则聪明的人可能会成为虚假信息周期的一部分。

一个因素是对知识的忽视:“ 范德比尔特大学心理学与人类发展助理教授丽莎·法齐奥Lisa Fazio)表示:“当人们无法适当地将以前存储的知识应用于当前情况时,” 。

人脑寻找简单的选择。读者会偷工减料,经常在不深入了解故事本身之前与抢眼的头条分享故事。即使社交媒体用户确实阅读了他们分享的内容,他们的理性思维也发现了其他放松的方法。

如果您听到两次,则比只听过一次的可能性更大。

丽莎·法齐奥范德比尔特大学

例如,人类容易产生确认偏差,这是一种将新信息解释为对自己先入为主的观念的验证的方式。动机推理也打开了,大脑试图将这些新的概念性拼图拼合在一起,即使它们不合适也可以建立联系。

导致批判性思维扭曲的最有力因素是虚幻的真相效应,法齐奥在这种情况下将其定义为:“如果听到两次,则比只听一次就更有可能认为这是真的。” 因此,盛行会加剧虚假新闻,然后回音室变成了自我永存的不信之旋风。

如果新闻涉及政治,那么它还会带来另一种病毒式传播。“政治新闻比其他虚假新闻传播得更快,”阿拉尔说。“我们可以推测,它是如此避雷针,因为它充满了情感。” 对于Aral来说,Yan报告具有虚假新闻故事的所有属性,这些故事原本是要传播开来的。

“就这个特定的故事而言,我会说所有有关为什么虚假新闻传播的分析,” Aral解释说。“令人震惊;这很色情 它与正在发生的政治辩论直接相关,但是冠状病毒显然在每个人的脑海中。试图了解它的起源是一个大故事。”

A Twitter firestorm promptly erupted. Prominent virologists, such as Kristian Andersen from Scripps Research and Carl Bergstrom from University of Washington, took to the internet and called out the paper for being unscientific. Chief among their complaints was that the report ignored the vast body of published literature regarding what is known about how coronaviruses circulate in wild animal populations and the tendency to spill over into humans, including recent publications about the origins of SARS-CoV-2.

The experts also pointed out that the report whipped up wild conspiracy theories and wrongly accused academic journals of plotting with conspirators by censoring important evidence.

This paper just cherry-picked a couple of examples, excluded evidence, and came up with a ridiculous scenario.

DAVID ROBERTSONUNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW

In July, David Robertson, a viral genomics researcher at University of Glasgow, authored a peer-reviewed paper in Nature Medicine that showed the lineage behind SARS-CoV-2 and its closest known ancestor, a virus called RaTG13, have been circulating in bat populations for decades. Virologists think this relative, which is 96-percent identical to the novel coronavirus, probably propagated and evolved in bats or human hosts and then went undetected for about 20 years before adapting its current form and causing the ongoing pandemic.

The Yan report claims this hypothesis is controversial, and that RaTG13 was also engineered in a lab. But that flies in the face of the overwhelming body of genetic evidence published about SARS-CoV-2 and its progenitors. What’s more, the report was funded by the Rule of Law Society, a nonprofit organization founded by former chief White House strategist Steve Bannon, who has since been arrested for fraud. That’s yet another reason ddmany virologists are questioning the veracity of its claims.

“It’s encroaching on pseudoscience, really,” says Robertson. “This paper just cherry-picked a couple of examples, excluded evidence, and came up with a ridiculous scenario.”

National Geographic reached out to other prominent virologists and misinformation researchers to better understand where the Yan report came from and what it got wrong. Along the way, they offered tips for overcoming misinformation surrounding the coronavirus.

What do we know about SARS-CoV-2’s origins?

Coronaviruses exist in nature and can infect many different creatures. SARS-like coronaviruses are found in bats, pigs, cats, and ferrets, to name a few. The most widely agreed upon origin of SARS-CoV-2, based on its genetics, is that its ancestors moved around in wild animals—swapping genetic features as they went along—before they jumped into humans.

Scientists have yet to find the direct parent of SARS-CoV-2 in feral beasts, though its closest relatives exist in bats. The virus may have passed through an intermediate animal—pangolins have been implicated—and then evolved to become better at infecting humans. Or it may have made the jump directly from bats to humans, given past examples of such occurrences. After the original SARS outbreak in China 20 years ago, researchers began surveying wild bats in local caves and the people who live near them. A 2018 study found the genetic relatives of the original SARS virus in the winged mammals—as well as specific antibodies, a residual sign of infection, in their human neighbors.

Finding answers to the precise events that led to a spillover pandemic is a “needle in a haystack proposition,” says Ian Lipkin, an epidemiologist from Columbia University, who co-authored an early research paper in Nature Medicine about the natural origins of SARS-CoV-2. The Yan report claims this Nature Medicine report had a “conflict of interest” due to Lipkin’s work in containing the 2002-2003 SARS epidemic, for which he received an award from the Chinese government. Lipkin says this accusation is “absurd,” and when asked for his view on the role of bioengineering in the origins of SARS-CoV-2, he adds: “There is no data to support this.”

Uncovering the natural source of the coronavirus will likely require large-scale sampling of animals—including bat and human populations—in China to trace the evolution of the novel coronavirus. The World Health Organization is readying a team to conduct such an investigation in China, though a timetable has not been released.

What does the Yan report say?

The Yan report attempts to tackle this question in a different way, starting with the murky claim that SARS-CoV-2 is bad at infecting bats, therefore it could not have come from them. But scientists point out that viruses are constantly evolving and passing between species. The initial spillover from bats to humans could have happened decades ago, allowing the virus ample time for its spike protein, the part it uses to enter cells, to optimize through natural selection to infect humans.

Another argument made by the Yan report centers on the presence of a “furin-cleavage site” on the spike protein, a critical genetic feature that is thought to enhance the virus’s ability to enter cells. The report claims this feature is found on no other coronavirus and therefore must be engineered. But this statement contradicts findings: similar cleavage sites are found on bat coronaviruses in wild populations.

“I'm going to scream if I have to explain the fact that many viruses have cleavage sites,” says Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at Columbia University.

The report also asserts that SARS-CoV-2 is “suspiciously” similar to two strains of bat coronaviruses, called ZC45 and ZXC21, that were discovered by scientists at military labs in China. The authors claim these strains could have been used as a template to clone a deadlier virus. But other scientists balk at this idea.

It looks legitimate because they use a lot of technical jargon. But in reality, a lot of what they're saying doesn't really make any sense.

ANGELA RASMUSSENCOLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

First, the two strains differ by as much as 3,500 nucleotide base pairs, the chemical “letters” used in genetic code. As such, they would be a poor starting point for bioengineering SARS-CoV-2. Engineering a virus in which you had to replace more than 10 percent of its genome is inefficient, if not impossible, according to Rasmussen and several other virologists. The fact that these strains were identified at a Chinese military lab is also “just circumstantial,” says Robertson. The bat coronaviruses were circulating in wild bats and could have been discovered by anyone.

The report also argues that SARS-CoV-2 has “restriction-enzyme sites,” or genetic sequences that can be cut and manipulated by enzymes. These genomic features are sometimes used in cloning, and the report claims their presence is indicative of an engineered virus. But scientists point out these sites naturally occur in all types of genomes, from bacteria to humans.

“It looks legitimate because they use a lot of technical jargon. But in reality, a lot of what they're saying doesn't really make any sense,” says Rasmussen. She adds that the type of cloning that uses restriction enzymes is very outdated, and so it is unlikely to be used to make a viral bioweapon. And on a basic level, making an engineered virus is not a trivial matter. Scientists are still just trying to understand the molecular and genetic reasons why some viruses are more infectious than others. Adding features to a virus to make it more transmissible, for example, is called gain-of-function research. It is highly controversial for its potential to make bioweapons and was even banned in the U.S. for a time, limiting the data available on how it works.

So how was the Yan report published?

A hallmark of the pandemic has been a rapid influx of research and free sharing of information to increase the pace of discovery. This practice of posting “preprints”—reports that haven’t been reviewed by academic peers—has its advantages.

“For the scientific community [it] has been very useful,” says Robertson, since more researchers can quickly analyze the available data. But preprints have a dark side too. Misinformation has been another hallmark of the pandemic, and preprints have played a role in fueling news coverage of unproven claims, including the virus mutating into a more deadly formcoming from snakes, or being less deadly than it truly is.

“It can be very hard to disentangle when that's real news and when it's not news,” he says, citing the fact that even some peer-reviewed papers on coronavirus have made errors in the rush to publish. This mixture of honest mistakes and insidious ones may just be indicative of a larger trend with publishing during a rapidly evolving crisis.

“I don’t think the preprint system is being weaponized so much as all channels of information are being used to disseminate misinformation: everything from social media to manipulating the mainstream media to preprints to peer-reviewed journals,” says Rasmussen.

Bad news travels fast

Despite the objections of experts, the Yan report and other similar instances of coronavirus misformation, such as the Plandemic documentary, have gained traction on social media because they take advantage of vulnerable human emotions. Those feelings can drive the viral spread of hoaxes.

Back in 2018, Aral and his team at the MIT Media Lab put their novelty hypothesis to the test by analyzing 11 years of data from Twitter, or about 4.5 million tweets. Their calculations showed a surprising correlation: “What we found was that false news traveled farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth in every category of information that we studied, sometimes by an order of magnitude,” Aral explains.

More is at play than just novelty, as Aral discusses in his new book The Hype Machine. The way people react to emotional stories on social media is intense and predictable. Vitriol fills the replies, and false news then becomes 70 percent more likely to be retweeted than the truth.

A complicated combination of psychological factors is at work whenever a reader decides to share news, and otherwise smart people can become part of the cycle of disinformation.

One factor is knowledge neglect: “when people fail to retrieve and apply previously stored knowledge appropriately into a current situation,” according to Lisa Fazio, an assistant professor of psychology and human development at Vanderbilt University.

The human brain seeks out easy options. Readers cut corners, often sharing stories with grabby headlines before looking deeper into the story itself. Even when social media users do read what they share, their rational mind finds other ways to slack off.

If you hear something twice, you're more likely to think that it's true than if you've only heard it once.

LISA FAZIOVANDERBILT UNIVERSITY

For instance, humans are prone to confirmation bias, a way of interpreting new information as a validation of one’s preconceived notions. Motivated reasoning switches on too, and the brain tries to force these new conceptual puzzle pieces together, making connections even when they don’t fit.

The most potent factor that warps critical thinking is the illusory truth effect, which Fazio defines with this scenario: “If you hear something twice, you're more likely to think that it's true than if you've only heard it once.” So prevalence turbocharges false news, and echo chambers then turn into self-perpetuating whirlwinds of misbelief.

If the news involves politics, it gets yet another virality boost. “Political news travels faster than the rest of false news,” says Aral. “We can speculate that it’s such a lightning rod because it’s so emotionally charged.” And to Aral, the Yan report has every attribute of a false news story that was primed to go viral.

“In terms of that specific story, I would say all of these analyses of why false news spreads apply,” Aral explains. “It’s shocking; it’s salacious. It's immediately relevant to political debates that are happening, but obviously coronavirus is on everyone’s mind. Trying to understand its origins is a big story.”

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/09/coronavirus-origins-misinformation-yan-report-fact-check-cvd/


image.png


英雄科学家闫丽梦博士团队于美东时间9月14号早上十点,通过

社交媒体推特公开“中共病毒”报告。该报告由闫丽梦博士团队

花费数月时间整合了大量医学文献和相关资料撰写而成,报告共

二份。该报告曝光了肆虐全球的新冠病毒是中共军方实验室改造

而成的生物武器,此消息公开后全球震惊。巨大压力下,迪斯尼

公司控制下的国家地理杂志迅速发表论文回应“中共病毒”报告。

国家地理杂志论文采取断章取义手法,歪曲了闫博士报告的事实。

企图误导世界人民,以达到隐藏病毒真相的目的。本文梳理了国家

地理杂志论文与闫博士“中共病毒”报告对比如下:

国家地理杂志论文造假:

1、国家地理杂志提到闫博士论文RaTG13通过实验室改造而成;

2、国家地理杂志提到闫博士论文中新冠病毒不能感染蝙蝠;

3、国家地理杂志恶意编造闫博士论文,宣称没有发现其他冠状

病毒具有弗林酶切位点;

4、国家地理杂志提到许多病毒都有切割位点,因此没有任何证据

表明新冠病毒中具有弗林酶切位点。

闫博士“中共病毒”报告打假:

1、闫博士论文并未提到RaTG13来自实验室改造而成(康教授)

2、闫博士论文并未提到新冠病毒能否感染蝙蝠。报告明确新冠

病毒以舟山蝙蝠为模板,插入受体结合基序(RBM)和弗林酶切

位点后具备传染人能力(冠博士)

3、闫博士论文中谱系Bβ冠状病毒中没有发现弗林酶切位点,并且

增加了一个数字来区分(胡博士)

4、闫博士论文中明确新冠病毒某些部位明显改造,比如S蛋白修

改,并增加了弗林酶切位点(康教授)


在全世界调查病毒真相的大环境下,中共无法用正常科学论点回复

闫博士论文,证明其已经山穷水尽。中共企图用其管理中国的流氓

手段挑战世界文明,终究逃不过正义的审判。希望还在助纣为虐的

同胞放下屠刀,走向正义的一方,避免充当炮灰被中共吞噬。

image.png

image.png


image.png

image.png

image.png


image.png


image.png


image.png


image.png

image.png

image.png


 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


image.pngimage.png


image.png


      视频链接:

https://twitter.com/wenzhongbei/status/1307712885687070721


image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png



image.png


image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png


  



Pakistan and China have entered a secret three-year deal to expand potential bio-warfare capabilities, including running several research projects related to the deadly agent anthrax, a report by The Klaxon said, quoting multiple intelligence sources. Speaking to India Today from Sydney, the Editor-in-Chief of The Klaxon, Anthony Klan, said that the experiments were a serious 'concern' and exposed the nexus between China and the Pakistani military.Geeta Mohan New DelhiSeptember 16, 2020UPDATED: September 16, 2020 04:02 IST



Anthony Klan, Editor-in-Chief of The Klaxon. (Photo: Twitter / @Anthony_Klan)

Pakistan and China have entered a secret three-year deal to expand potential bio-warfare capabilities, including running several research projects related to the deadly agent anthrax, a report by The Klaxon said, quoting multiple intelligence sources.


CHINA-PAK MILITARY NEXUS

Speaking to India Today from Sydney, the Editor-in-Chief of The Klaxon, Anthony Klan, said that the experiments were a serious “concern” and exposed the nexus between China and the Pakistani military.

“There have been experiments carried out since 2015 with five different high level pathogens. The studies are being conducted in Pakistan. A lot of the Wuhan Institute of Virology scientists are working on Pakistan soil with Pakistan’s defence agencies which raises very serious concerns among the intelligence agencies,” said Anthony.

According to the report, China’s now infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology has signed the covert deal with Pakistan military’s Defence Science and Technology Organization (DESTO), to collaborate research in “emerging infectious diseases” and advance studies on the biological control of transmitted diseases.


据The Klaxon(新闻媒体)引征多家情报来源的报道指出,巴基斯坦与中共达成了一项为期三年的协议,旨在提升其潜在的生物战能力,其中包含运行几个致命炭疽制剂项目。The Klaxon的主编安东尼.克兰在悉尼向《今日印度》报道,这些实验令人深度担忧同时也曝光了中共与巴基斯坦军方之间的勾联。

中巴之间的军事勾联

The Klaxon主编安东尼.克兰在悉尼向《今日印度》报道,这些试验令人深度担忧同时也曝光了中共与巴基斯坦军方之间的勾联。“从2015年起有五种高致命性病菌的试验已经在巴基斯坦开展。研究也同时在进行过程中。许多中共武汉病毒研究所的科学家正在巴基斯坦本土工作并与巴国防机构积极合作,引起情报界高度关注”,安东尼表示。

据报道,臭名昭著的中共武汉病毒研究所已与巴基斯坦军方的国防科技组织(DESTO)签署了一份秘密协议,拟协同开发合作“新发传染病”及疾病传输的生物控制之先期研究。

巴基斯坦本土的试验

尽管巴中双方极力抵赖,仍有充足证据证实大量研究与巴基斯坦有密切相关。有证据表明试验是在巴基斯坦本土实施的,安东尼表示,“令人产生兴趣的是关于五种病原体的研究,武汉及中共资本被提及,在巴基斯坦当地的研究也被提及,例如来自数千的骆驼及其他动物和数千的人体血清。虽然具体实验室地址没有提到,但大致几个区域有涉及”。

巴方政府出面表示关于生物安全3级实验室没有什么可保密的,它确实在开展试验。

巴基斯坦豚鼠(小白鼠)试验

但报告的调查结果表示整个项目是中共政府与巴基斯坦军方之间的秘密协议下进行的,对方要求他们在实施的具体地点和操作隐秘性应做些保密措施。

而实际上,报告表明巴基斯坦已经把这些试验和测试付诸实践。当问及当地新闻为何未作披露参与秘密实验试验者并不知情的话题时,安东尼说,“我认为大部分的试验对象都是偏远贫穷地区的牧民,取样也都来自于他们,他们怎么会明白他们参与的是什么试验,试验的目的及结果是什么。这是相当恐怖的一件事,太多的疑问”。

关于样本量的使用,他表示,“大约2000-2500个试验品用于一种研究试验,有些约500个。总共,大约7000-8000人,4000-5000的动物参与了试验,动物里大部分是骆驼,这些动物都是被驯化或喂养的”。

中共的资助

据报道,所有研究项目都是由属于中共一带一路政策下的中巴经济走廊规划(CPEC)的资助下所提供的资金。安东尼说,“这都是一带一路政策下的中巴经济走廊规划所提供的资助,高达630亿美金的资金投入…很难取得一个具体的明细于这些每个具体的研究,但都与一带一路在巴基斯坦的投入相关。几乎所有这些完全来自于中共的中科院病毒研究所的资金提供所资助,绝大部分都是一带一路旗下的项目。”

生物武器

国际社会最大的担忧是这项危险病原体的研究可以回溯到CCP病毒爆发前,而巴基斯坦并无相应设施来处理这种病毒,这样一来,就使它变成了生物武器的滋生繁殖基地。这种对于没有设备设施的巴基斯坦来说是非常危险的。

“如多方情报所担忧的,你可以用技术来清除冠状病毒,同时也可以很容易将其武器化。这发生在巴基斯坦境内,完全由中共所资助”, 安东尼表示。他补充说:“我们都知道这些病毒对于没有具备处理能力的巴基斯坦实在是太危险了,BL3和BL4(生物安全3级和4级)是众所周知的最高安全级别,然而,并未得知巴基斯坦有BL4级的相应设施。

情报表明,包括印度次大陆的国家都向The Klaxon表示他们深切担忧这个涉及到中共在他们边境测试生物试剂并试图最小化“引发国际社会谴责的风险”的行为。一个高级情报消息表明国防科技组织(DESTO)也参与到隐秘生物武器计划下的各种与炭疽相关的军民两用研究项目。

据报道,由武汉和巴基斯坦科学家所试验的五项研究结果已经在科学杂志上发表了论文,每种都涉及到检测及动物传染病的病原体的研究。研究包含了西尼罗河病毒(West Nile Virus),中东呼吸综合征冠状病毒(Mers Coronavirus),克里米亚-刚果出血热病毒(Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic Fever Virus),血小板减少症病毒(Thrombocytopenia Syndrome Viru)以及基孔肯雅热病毒( Chikungunya Virus)。

目前尚未发现任何有效的疫苗和治疗手段来应对这些病毒,而这些都是目前世上最致命和传染力最强的病毒。

据高度可靠情报透露,中共正通过武汉病毒研究所在巴基斯坦测试致命生物制剂并为巴方科学家提供广泛的操控病毒及生物信息学的培训, 以丰富和充实他们所谓潜在的攻击性生物战计划。巴基斯坦有可能将此技术用于发动生物战争,或因贫乏的设施设备条件导致致命病毒的意外泄露。更进一步,有生物武器化和生物恐怖主义蔓延的危险,安东尼.克兰说,“令人担忧和恐惧的是,一旦这些病毒从实验室意外泄露出来,将对社会造成多么大的打击, 未来这些病毒及技术的武器化带来不可想象的后果。鉴于巴基斯坦不稳定的局面,这些担忧都有可能变为现实。中巴双方的否认,并不能抹去笼罩在世界人民头上的生物武器化及生物病毒恐怖主义的阴霾。”

点评:

病毒及其研究本属于医学范畴,医者救人之术,正常人的思维和逻辑是应该探究病毒来源,研发控制及杀灭病毒的方法和解决方案,而不是,邪恶到去把世界上最致命最有传染性的病毒研究出对付人类。玩火者必自焚!

ON PAK SOIL

Despite fierce denial from Pakistan and China, there is enough proof according to the report that a lot of the research can be tied to Pakistan.

Proving that the research is being carried out on Pakistani soil, Anthony said, “It is interesting to know that within these five studies, Wuhan is mentioned, Chinese funding is mentioned and studies on Pakistani soil are mentioned, for e.g. blood serum from thousands of camels and other animals and also thousands of humans. It does not mention specifically where the lab work is done, but mentions several areas.”

“After we first reported this, the Pakistani government came out and said there is no secret about biosafety levels 3 labs which obviously confirmed that it was happening on Pakistani soil,” he added.


PAKISTANI GUINEA PIGS

The findings of the report also suggest that the entire project is being done between the Chinese government and the Pakistani military which allows them to keep the locations a secret and the operations “covert”.

In fact, the report says that Pakistanis have been used for testing and have participated in the experiments. When asked how the news never got out and did the individuals who participated in such research in secret labs didn’t know, Anthony said, “I suspect not. I suspect that most of these studies have a rural sample size. Lot of them are herdsmen from remote areas. How much would they know of what they are involved in? These people wouldn’t know what the samples were for and what happens with the results of the studies that they have been privy to or have been involved in. It is a real scare. There are a lot of question marks.”

On the sample size used, he said, “Around two thousand to two and a half thousand samples in each of the studies. Some of them were about five hundreds. Overall, there were about seven-eight thousand people and about 4,000-5,000 animals, predominantly camels or usually those that are domesticated or reared for consumption.”


FUNDED BY CHINA

All the research projects are being funded by China under the auspices of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) which falls within China’s Belt and Road Initiative, according to the report.

He said, “It is being done under the auspices of the economic corridor under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the US $63 billion fund... It is difficult to get an exact breakdown but the money for each of these studies, when we track, is tied to the BRI initiative in Pakistan. Almost all of it is funded by China so the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Institute of Virology. A lot of it is a part of the flagship BRI project.”


BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

The biggest worry for the international community is the fact that this research with dangerous pathogens dates back to before the Covid-19 outbreak and the fact that Pakistan does not have the facilities for such viruses. Also, that this is a breeding ground for “biological weapons”.

“You can use technology to wipe coronavirus etc., but it can also be weaponised very easily as has been the concern of many intelligence sources. This is happening on Pakistani soil, fully funded by China,” said Anthony Klan.

He added, “It is happening in laboratories that are not necessarily equipped to handle some of the viruses. We know that some of the pathogens are too dangerous for the facilities that Pakistan operates. BL3 (biosafety levels 3 labs) and BL4 are known to be the most secure. There is no known BL4 facility in Pakistan.”

Intelligence sources, including from the Indian subcontinent, have told The Klaxon they have serious concerns about the secret project, which involves China testing biological agents outside its borders in an apparent bid to minimize the “risk of drawing condemnation from the international community”.

“DESTO has been engaged in various dual-use research projects related to anthrax under a covert biological weapons program,” one senior intelligence source said.

According to another report by The Klaxon, the results of five studies conducted by Wuhan and Pakistani scientists have been published in scientific papers, each involving the “detection and characterisation” of “zoonotic pathogens”.

The studies involve experiments and genome sequencing of the West Nile Virus; MERS-Coronavirus; Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic Fever Virus; the Thrombocytopenia Syndrome Virus; and the Chikungunya Virus.

There is no vaccine or cure for any of those pathogens, which are among some of the world’s deadliest and most contagious.

As revealed by The Klaxon, highly credible intelligence sources believe China, via its Wuhan Institute of Virology, is testing lethal biological agents in Pakistan and providing “extensive training on manipulation of pathogens and bio-informatics” to Pakistani scientists, which could “enrich a potential offensive biological programme”.

It was revealed China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology had allegedly recently signed a secret three-year deal with Pakistan military’s DESTO to collaborate research in “emerging infectious diseases” and the “biological control of transmitted diseases”.

That Wuhan-Pakistan military tie-up had never been publicly announced or disclosed before, said the report.

Key concerns are that Pakistan could use the technology in bio-warfare, or that deadly pathogens could accidentally escape from inadequately equipped facilities.

Raising concerns regarding biological weaponisation and biological terrorism he said, “There are concerns and the most important threat is what if these viruses escape the laboratories accidentally, how much would the impact be. Secondly, is the weaponisation and potential future weaponisation of this technology. With the instability in Pakistan, the concern is real. China and Pakistan deny it, but the real danger is biological weaponisation and biological terrorism.”

ALSO READ | Covid-19 virus made in Wuhan laboratory: Chinese virologist claims she has proofALSO READ | US issues sweeping new travel warning for China, Hong Kong



有个香港女孩叫陈彦霖!在最花季的年龄被习近平杀了! – 中国新闻中心


请你一定写上为了香港被屠杀的孩子们!! - 万维论坛


钻地炸弹写上为了香港被屠杀的孩子们!!-Pascal的博客-万维博客


美國制裁香港的精妙時間與手段| 林保華| 立場新聞


Rural Nevadan claims to own only guillotine in US | Local | elkodaily.com


图片


image.png

Image result for 德国党卫军

Image result for 德国党卫军


image.png


image.png


浏览(1210) (2) 评论(4)
发表评论
文章评论
作者:Pascal 回复 双不 留言时间:2020-09-20 17:51:53

是,双不先生说得非常客观、准确。

回复 | 0
作者:双不 回复 Pascal 留言时间:2020-09-20 17:31:56

没办法,对待新馆病毒,科学杂志一般都站老共一边。

回复 | 0
作者:Pascal 留言时间:2020-09-20 15:25:48

立法院-蕭美琴委員立法院-蕭美琴委員

第9届立法委员萧美琴.jpg第9届立法委员萧美琴.jpg

蕭美琴獲美同意成首位女性駐美代表- 政治- 自由時報電子報蕭美琴獲美同意成首位女性駐美代表- 政治- 自由時報電子報

中华民国国旗被撤换为五星旗香港科大调查台湾学生会摊位遭破坏

图片图片

景山的歪脖树及其他古树-留住京城那一抹来自历史的绿荫-搜狐博客景山的歪脖树及其他古树-留住京城那一抹来自历史的绿荫-搜狐博客

景山公园里崇祯上吊的那颗槐树,原来是假的- 快资讯景山公园里崇祯上吊的那颗槐树,原来是假的- 快资讯

https://twitter.com/bikhim?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

回复 | 0
作者:Pascal 留言时间:2020-09-20 14:03:05

新聞來源:華盛頓時報|作者: 比爾·戈茨 ;

翻譯、簡評:致良知|校對:沐子璐璐|審核:海闊天空|PAGE:玄天生;

簡評:

該文章用很大篇幅介紹中共國對世界的核威懾和生物武器計劃,以及美國方面的應對方式,用較少篇幅提及了,除閆麗夢博士以外的又一名了解中共製造病毒、從中共國人民解放軍中逃離出來的知情人士。用這位逃離者的成功逃離來引入文章主題,並提及逃離者提供的有關中共國製造病毒的信息已經送達美國情報局。

我在這裡想更多地談下中共病毒。作為比核武器技術上、成本上都相對簡單廉價的生物武器,中共病毒被率先用作生物武器的攻擊手段,引發了全球大流行,導致了數十萬人死亡。相對於核武器的高技術高要求,病毒武器更加容易製造並易投放,能掩人耳目,悄無聲息地殺人,陰毒至極。中共在這方面嚐到了甜頭,同時也在加緊相關領域的投入,在全球建設更多的病毒實驗室,打著研究病毒為人類造福的幌子,實則是在開發更多更具致病性的病毒研究。近期,閆博士不僅在媒體上,而且發出了科學論文等確鑿證據,同時揭露了病毒是中共刻意製造並投放的生物武器,極大地加速了美國及世界民眾對新型冠狀病毒的認知,以及加強各國政府對病毒追責的決心,使更多的人認識到了中共對人類文明社會的前所未有的巨大威脅。如若不將中共儘早消滅,世界可能面臨更加棘手的危害。下一個可能是核武器的危害。

第二名了解中共國生物武器的逃離者到達了美國有關中共國生物武器計劃的信息已經到達了美國情報局,這要歸功於現在正在受到歐洲保護的逃離者。 (美聯社/文件)

據知情人士說,在從人民解放軍逃出來的逃離者的幫助下,美國情報機構最近增加了對中共國秘密生物武器計劃的了解。

根據該消息源,該逃離者從中共國逃到歐洲,在歐洲他受到歐洲政府安全部門的保護。這位逃離者認為,中共國情報部門已經滲透到美國政府,因此對與美國中央情報局和其他西方間諜機構合作持謹慎態度。

除此之外,該逃離者還提供了一些有關中共國生物武器計劃的信息,這些信息已經到達美國政府。關於他逃離中共解放軍的細節沒有透露。

但該叛逃者是第二個從中共國出來提供有關具有潛在武器應用的中共生物學研究的信息的人。

中國病毒學家閆麗夢於今年春季從香港逃往美國,並在新聞訪談節目中指控COVID-19大流行背後的病毒是在武漢病毒實驗室中製造出來的,該病毒特徵體現出它是在儲存在一個中共解放軍軍方實驗室的兩種病毒的基礎上設計出來。

美國國務院於最近一份關於武器規範的報告中提供了關於中共國的秘密生物武器計劃項目的新細節。

“由於潛在的雙重用途和潛在的生物威脅,美國對中共國軍事醫療機構的毒素研發的合規性有擔憂。”報告稱,“此外,美國沒有足夠的信息來確定中共國是否按照《生物武器公約》的第二條已經取消了其被評估為生物武器的項目。”

一位川普政府高級官員在五月透露,中共國正在秘密地研發生物武器,包括能夠針對特定族群的病原體的武器。

這位官員說:“我們正在觀察(中共)針對少數族裔的潛在生物學實驗。”

自2017年以來,中共國軍事出版物已經將生物學描述成一個新戰爭領域,一份報告警告稱,未來的戰爭可能涉及“種族基因攻擊”。

國防部長埃斯珀在空間威脅上的觀點

國防部長馬克·埃斯珀警告稱,中共國和俄羅斯已經將太空軍事化,任何未來的衝突都將涉及太空戰。

“在未來的幾年中,戰爭將不僅像過去數千年一樣在陸地和海洋上進行,或者像上個世紀一樣在空中進行,而且還將以前所未有的方式在外太空和網絡空間中進行。”埃斯博在周三的講話中說。

他說,為了做好準備,美軍需要對部隊進行現代化改造以應對高強度衝突。

美國在空軍上擁有高科技的軍事優勢,但是中共國和俄羅斯正在趕上。

埃斯珀說,“與我們近乎對等的對手,中共國和俄羅斯,在試圖通過遠程攻擊,反導系統和其他不對稱能力來削弱我們在空中力量上的長期領導地位並對抗我們的力量。 ”

國防部長警告說,中共國和俄羅斯已經將曾是和平舞台的太空變成了“戰爭領域”。

埃斯珀說,“他們通過殺手衛星,定向能量武器和在利用我們的系統並瓦解我們的軍事優勢上來使太空軍事化。”

中共國最近對一架可重複使用的太空飛船進行了測試,該飛行器將一個未知物體放入太空軌道。

北京還迅速發展了一系列的空間戰能力,包括幾種類型的地面發射反衛星導彈,它們能夠擊中不同軌道上的衛星。地面激光可能會致盲或損壞軌道衛星;還有小型機動衛星,能夠操縱和捕獲軌道衛星。

俄羅斯也開發了反衛星導彈和地面反衛星激光器。

相比之下,五角大樓的新太空部隊只有一個被宣布的武器系統:一種能夠干擾衛星通信的電子乾擾器。

埃斯珀先生說,X-37太空飛機是將增強高科技軍事能力的系統之一,這是秘密可重複使用的航天器作為軍事防禦的一部分首次被提及。

X-37已經執行了六次飛行任務,目前在軌運行中。美國官員說,該飛船能夠進行太空防禦和攻擊操作。

埃斯珀先生說,未來美國的軍事力量將取決於有能力維持一種他稱之為“最終制高點”的優勢。

他說,為執行太空戰,川普政府創建了太空司令部(一個統一的戰鬥司令部)和太空軍,後者將發展一支太空戰士的骨干隊伍。

中共國的“禁止首次使用”的政策受質疑

負責核戰爭的軍事部門戰略司令部的司令說,中共國正處於大規模核建設中,在接下來的10年中共國的核彈頭儲存量將增加一倍,目前評估還不到200枚。

中共國長期以來一直表示,它不會是在衝突中首先使用核武器的國家,但中共國的核建設似乎正在為核預警發射能力做準備, 這種能力與美國和俄羅斯的類似。

戰略司令部海軍上將查爾斯A.理查德暱稱“查斯”與本報記者的對話中質疑“不首先使用”的承諾是否是北京的一個戰略欺詐。

他說:“作為一名軍事指揮官,我所看到的更多是另一個國家的能力,而不是他們的陳述意圖。我看到中共國正在發展一堆能力,這與他們宣稱的“不首先使用核武力”的政策相矛盾。”中共國核力量“一定具有執行任何核威脅或採用核戰略的能力,很明顯與其“不首先使用核武力政策”相抵觸。”

中共國已經在各種基礎模式上部署了數千枚遠程導彈,包括筒倉,公路和鐵路機動發射裝置和潛艇。

根據五角大樓關於中共國軍方的最新年度報告,北京也在開發一種由轟炸機發射的彈道導彈。一種新型DF-41導彈正在部署有多個可獨立瞄準的回程飛行器,或者叫多次獨立瞄準回程飛行器。

當被問及當前的JL-2導彈,除非它們靠近美國海岸,否則它們無法到達美國的問題時,海軍上將查爾斯回應道:“是這樣,我所關注的不是JL-2 missiles, 這是過時的,我實際上會更加註意它們正在研發的JL-3導彈,該導彈極大地擴展了它們的打擊範圍。”

JL-3將被部署在新型彈道式導彈潛艇上,並將提供更大的打擊能力。

這位海軍上將說,中共國的戰略力量不能僅僅通過其核彈頭儲備量來衡量。

理查德說:“你必須看它整個系統,其輸送系統,它們能做什麼以及它們準備好做什麼。”

理查德將軍在位於奧馬哈的負責核力量的司令部發表演講,核力量包括美國西部的陸地民兵導彈場;遍布全國各地的戰略轟炸機部隊;和長期在海上的核導彈潛艇。

俄羅斯也在建造核力量和常規力量。他指出,莫斯科和北京都在試圖超越美軍。

理查德將軍說:“我們在美國歷史上第一次走上了面對兩個和我們具有同等核能力的競爭對手的道路上。對這些競爭對手我們必須採取不同的製止方式,我們正在努力應對這一挑戰。”

俄羅斯正在使用新型核武器和常規武器,對空武器,網絡武器和新興高速超音速導彈來建設其部隊。莫斯科還正在動亂衝突下進行“灰色地帶”戰爭。

當被問及川普總統對作家鮑勃·伍德沃德的評論稱美國正在開發一種強大的秘密核武器時,理查德拒絕評論。

這位四星海軍上將還表示,儘管發生了COVID-19 ( CCP病毒)大流行,但他的部隊仍然“有能力執行任務”。

理查德將軍說,這只部隊必須適應大流行的狀況,但沒有具體說明採取了什麼步驟。

他說:“底線就是我們已經準備好了。”“為什麼這如此重要?對我們而言,重要的是要記住,貫穿整個COVID-19的挑戰中,威脅並沒有消失,對嗎?一切都沒有改變,沒有人基於COVID-19的事實放棄任何核武器。事實上,它正朝另相反方向發展。”

原文鏈接

回复 | 2
我的名片
Pascal
注册日期: 2014-10-22
访问总量: 8,519,543 次
点击查看我的个人资料
Calendar
最新发布
· 都有谁一口咬死普京会傻到屠杀上
· 都有谁一口咬定音乐厅乌克兰杀人
· 急电国安.举报央广重大泄密内奸.
· 哪里是尼克松1969年拯救了中国.
· 参战珍宝岛苏军曝.我英雄解放军
· 我潜伏万维的任务-传播我爹指控
· 我爹熊颜大悦抢先报道美制裁中共
分类目录
【他山之石】
· 都有谁一口咬死普京会傻到屠杀上
· 都有谁一口咬定音乐厅乌克兰杀人
· 急电国安.举报央广重大泄密内奸.
· 哪里是尼克松1969年拯救了中国.
· 参战珍宝岛苏军曝.我英雄解放军
· 我潜伏万维的任务-传播我爹指控
· 我爹熊颜大悦抢先报道美制裁中共
· 境外势力生生唱衰了体老老家贵州
· 天大好消息!最新研究接种新冠疫
· 基因揭示.汉族与中东北非19国民
存档目录
2024-03-01 - 2024-03-28
2024-02-01 - 2024-02-29
2024-01-01 - 2024-01-31
2023-12-01 - 2023-12-31
2023-11-01 - 2023-11-30
2023-10-01 - 2023-10-31
2023-09-01 - 2023-09-30
2023-08-01 - 2023-08-31
2023-07-01 - 2023-07-31
2023-06-01 - 2023-06-30
2023-05-01 - 2023-05-31
2023-04-01 - 2023-04-30
2023-03-01 - 2023-03-31
2023-02-01 - 2023-02-28
2023-01-01 - 2023-01-31
2022-12-01 - 2022-12-31
2022-11-01 - 2022-11-30
2022-10-01 - 2022-10-31
2022-09-01 - 2022-09-29
2022-08-01 - 2022-08-31
2022-07-01 - 2022-07-31
2022-06-01 - 2022-06-30
2022-05-01 - 2022-05-31
2022-04-02 - 2022-04-29
2022-03-01 - 2022-03-31
2022-02-01 - 2022-02-28
2022-01-01 - 2022-01-31
2021-12-01 - 2021-12-31
2021-11-01 - 2021-11-30
2021-10-01 - 2021-10-31
2021-09-01 - 2021-09-30
2021-08-01 - 2021-08-31
2021-07-01 - 2021-07-31
2021-06-01 - 2021-06-30
2021-05-01 - 2021-05-31
2021-04-01 - 2021-04-30
2021-03-01 - 2021-03-31
2021-02-01 - 2021-02-28
2021-01-01 - 2021-01-31
2020-12-01 - 2020-12-31
2020-11-01 - 2020-11-30
2020-10-01 - 2020-10-31
2020-09-01 - 2020-09-30
2020-08-01 - 2020-08-31
2020-07-01 - 2020-07-31
2020-06-01 - 2020-06-30
2020-05-01 - 2020-05-31
2020-04-01 - 2020-04-30
2020-03-02 - 2020-03-31
2020-02-01 - 2020-02-29
2020-01-01 - 2020-01-31
2019-12-01 - 2019-12-31
2019-11-01 - 2019-11-30
2019-10-01 - 2019-10-31
2019-09-01 - 2019-09-30
2019-08-01 - 2019-08-31
2019-07-01 - 2019-07-31
2019-06-01 - 2019-06-30
2019-05-01 - 2019-05-30
2019-04-01 - 2019-04-30
2019-03-01 - 2019-03-31
2019-02-01 - 2019-02-28
2019-01-02 - 2019-01-31
2018-12-01 - 2018-12-31
2018-11-01 - 2018-11-30
2018-10-01 - 2018-10-31
2018-09-02 - 2018-09-24
2018-08-01 - 2018-08-31
2018-07-04 - 2018-07-31
2018-06-01 - 2018-06-30
2018-05-01 - 2018-05-31
2018-04-01 - 2018-04-30
2018-03-02 - 2018-03-31
2018-02-01 - 2018-02-28
2018-01-10 - 2018-01-30
2017-11-01 - 2017-11-30
2017-10-01 - 2017-10-30
2017-09-22 - 2017-09-29
2017-08-02 - 2017-08-30
2017-07-01 - 2017-07-31
2017-06-02 - 2017-06-30
2017-05-02 - 2017-05-30
2017-04-01 - 2017-04-29
2017-03-01 - 2017-03-31
2017-02-02 - 2017-02-28
2017-01-02 - 2017-01-31
2016-12-03 - 2016-12-30
2016-11-05 - 2016-11-28
2016-10-01 - 2016-10-29
2016-09-01 - 2016-09-29
2016-08-01 - 2016-08-30
2016-07-01 - 2016-07-31
2016-06-02 - 2016-06-30
2016-05-01 - 2016-05-27
2016-04-01 - 2016-04-30
2016-03-01 - 2016-03-31
2016-02-04 - 2016-02-28
2016-01-01 - 2016-01-28
2015-12-03 - 2015-12-31
2015-11-03 - 2015-11-29
2015-10-02 - 2015-10-30
2015-09-10 - 2015-09-28
2015-08-02 - 2015-08-31
2015-07-01 - 2015-07-28
2015-06-02 - 2015-06-30
2015-05-01 - 2015-05-31
2015-04-02 - 2015-04-29
2015-03-02 - 2015-03-31
2015-02-02 - 2015-02-27
2015-01-03 - 2015-01-31
2014-12-01 - 2014-12-31
2014-11-01 - 2014-11-30
2014-10-26 - 2014-10-31
 
关于本站 | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站导航 | 隐私保护
Copyright (C) 1998-2024. CyberMedia Network /Creaders.NET. All Rights Reserved.