The lab leak hypothesis has made the leap into the mainstream – not
because new evidence has come to light, but because the consensus has
subtly shifted. In political terms, what counts as a conspiracy theory
depends on who is doing the theorising.
This is a better article and is getting closer to the heart of the matter, although it is not true to suggest it is about white privilege etc.
ReplyDeleteGedaliah was told by the mossad of the day, that people were planning to assassinate him. He dismissed this as a conspiracy theory. So now we have to fast every year just because he was not open to accepting unpleasant information.
ReplyDeleteA writer and political columnist states her "expert" opinion about what is the kosher belief about Covid origins. LOLOLOL
ReplyDeleteActually more information has come to light that sheds greater doubt on natural zoonotic spillover origins. I've mentioned some of that here such as the (now leaked) DEFUSE grant proposal. And the exhaustive sequencing effort to find an "intermediate species" that turned up nothing. Just to name 2 right off the top of my head.
ReplyDeleteSo all mistakes are unforgivable or only those labeled conspiracy theories?!
ReplyDeletewhat is your point?
Maybe my point when I wrote this was that the phenomenon is not just a modern one. In the Gedaliah example, it may have seemed fantasy, but sadly it was true.
ReplyDeleteSo maybe the blood libel claims were also true?!
ReplyDeleteSo all fantasy might be true and you treat them as real!?
Not something you can derive from my example. I think it was jochanan - military leader, who told Gedaliah about the plot to murder him.
ReplyDeleteJeremiah 40
16 But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam said unto Johanan the son of Kareah: 'Thou shalt not do this thing; for thou speakest falsely of Ishmael.' {P}
R' Norman Lamm once said -" you cannot close your mind to falsehood without the risk of closing it to truth. Nor can you open your mind to truth without the risk of letting in falsehood."
ReplyDeleteThe other reason for pushback against the lab theory is the implications: China was manufacturing a dangerous virus. China is dabbling in biowarfare. That can't be ignored or dropped or sent to a committee. It has to be dealt with and no one wants to do that.
ReplyDeleteBlood libel was a conspiracy theory and it was false.
ReplyDeleteLab leak as the origin of Covid is a hypothesis, it is a plausible origin among several, and not conspiracy theory. In a previous post, you said yourself, "Maybe it did, maybe it didn't" come from a lab.
Are you now saying maybe the blood libel was true, and maybe it wasn't?!?
or that Dr Fauci , the USA and others were collaborating with WIV on a number of dastardly projects.
ReplyDeleteReally - please state what facts support your claims? the dastardly projects they collaborated were what?
ReplyDeleteHave you posted this article yet?
ReplyDeletehttps://theintercept.com/2021/09/09/covid-origins-gain-of-function-research/
that is the best you can find?
ReplyDeleteShi has in total collected 19,000 samples and coronavirus was detected in 2,481 of them, according to information she provided to the World Health Organisation in February this year. She had been engaging in genetically modifying viruses since at least 2006. A paper published in the Journal of Virology that year shows she was trying to determine how coronaviruses gain the ability to skip from one species to another by “inserting different segments from the human SARS-CoV spike protein into the spike protein of the bat virus”.
ReplyDeleteDr Anthony Fauci defended the scientists who had undertaken the controversial gain-of-function research which aims to make viruses more infectious and deadlier or more virulent, often to humans
Dr Anthony Fauci defended the scientists who had undertaken the controversial gain-of-function research which aims to make viruses more infectious and deadlier or more virulent, often to humans
STEFANI REYNOLDS/XINHUA/ALAMY
When questions arose in China about whether her laboratory was the source of the outbreak at the start of February last year — three months before President Trump raised the prospect — Shi snapped. “Those who believe and spread rumours, shut your dirty mouth,” she posted on the WeChat social media app on February 6. Instead, she said, Covid-19 “is nature’s punishment for uncivilised living habits of human beings. I, Shi Zhengli, use my life to guarantee that it has nothing to do with our lab.”
Before the ban took effect, Dr Anthony Fauci, a director at the NIH, had welcomed a voluntary pause on gain-of-function research but argued that “the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks. It is more likely that a pandemic would occur in nature [than as a result of a laboratory accident or leak], and the need to stay ahead of such a threat is a primary reason for performing an experiment that might appear to be risky.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-us-cash-funded-wuhan-lab-dealing-in-deadly-viruses-rjddc6jbt
Let's say that concrete evidence emerges that the pandemic started in a Chinese lab that was sloppy with its procedures.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the implications?
The implications are that the world will put enormous pressure on China to allow its laboratories to be overseen by an international body of scientists.
Failure of China to submit to this oversight might be followed by not allowing some Chinese scientists to participate in international conferences or to have research from other countries shared with them.
For the time being, because of all the damage the pandemic has done, out of an abundance of caution we must work on the assumption thatthe virus outbreak did indeed originate in the Wuhan lab.
There is not ample evidence to support this assumption.
But there is plenty of suspicious activity on the part of the Chinese to warrant it.
William L Shirer wrote a book on the rise and fall of the Third Reich. He notes that the nazis, yemach shmam, did not go straight into genocide, but started pushing the envelope, to see what the world would do. And the world did nothing, which encouraged them to take it further.
ReplyDeleteThe Chinese are following a similar path. Uighur concentration camps - nobody does anything, except blame Israel for fighting back against the Hamas.
Hong Kong - nothing.
Even if they invade Taiwan, the world will do nothing. Perhaps there will be economic boycott, but nobody wants to go to war with China.
was blood libel derived from an exaggeration , based on reports of metzizah b'peh?
ReplyDeleteDr. Richard Ebright, biosafety expert and professor of chemistry and
ReplyDeletechemical biology at Rutgers University, has also disputed Fauci’s
claims. Primarily, he has rebutted Fauci’s chief declaration that the
NIH “has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the
Wuhan Institute of Virology [WIV]” as “demonstrably false.”
Ebright told National Review
that the NIH-financed work at the WIV “epitomizes” the definition of
gain-of-function research, which involves working with “enhanced
potential pandemic pathogen (PPP)” or those pathogens “resulting from
the enhancement of the transmissibility and/or virulence of a pathogen.”
The
Wuhan lab’s program qualified as gain-of-function research because it
artificially engineered novel SARS-related coronaviruses to make them
more transmissible and dangerous to humans, the breeding ground for
accident, Ebright said.
Following the FOIA release secured by the Intercept,
Ebright doubled down on his repudiation of Fauci, confirming that the
NIH did conduct gain-of-function research during the five-year period in
question.
“The materials show that the 2014 and 2019 NIH grants
to EcoHealth with subcontracts to WIV funded gain-of-function research
as defined in federal policies in effect in 2014-2017 and potential
pandemic pathogen enhancement as defined in federal policies in effect
in 2017-present,” Ebright tweeted.
https://news.yahoo.com/internal-documents-further-contradict-fauci-142902303.html
Research on Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus: The Way Forward
ReplyDeleteAnthony S. Fauci
"Putting aside the specter of bioterrorism for the moment,
consider this hypothetical scenario: an important gain-of-function
experiment involving a virus with serious pandemic potential is
performed in a well-regulated, world-class laboratory by experienced
investigators, but the information from the experiment is then used by
another scientist who does not have the same training and facilities and
is not subject to the same regulations. In an unlikely but conceivable
turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus,
which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic? Many ask
reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario—however
remote—should the initial experiments have been performed and/or
published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in
this decision?
Scientists working in this field might
say—as indeed I have said—that the benefits of such experiments and the
resulting knowledge outweigh the risks. It is more likely that a
pandemic would occur in nature, and the need to stay ahead of such a
threat is a primary reason for performing an experiment that might
appear to be risky. However, we must respect that there are genuine and
legitimate concerns about this type of research, both domestically and
globally. We cannot expect those who have these concerns to simply take
us, the scientific community, at our word that the benefits of this work
outweigh the risks, nor can we ignore their calls for greater
transparency, their concerns about conflicts of interest, and their
efforts to engage in a dialog about whether these experiments should
have been performed in the first place. Those of us in the scientific
community who believe in the merits of this work have the responsibility
to address these concerns thoughtfully and respectfully. "
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3484390/
This is an academic source, writen by Fauci and published in his name - i.e. it is not a newspaper report or a book published by someone else - hence it cannot be dismissed.
Torah thought daf hayomi Rosh HaShana 6a:
ReplyDelete“ [What is the answer?] The one [set of texts [Explicitly in Deut. XXIII, verse 24, and by derivation in verse 22; v. supra p. 5b (Rashi)] deal with the case] where he had pledged himself but had not yet set aside the animal, the other with the case where he had set it aside but had not yet offered it. And both are required. For if the rule had been laid down only for the case where he had pledged himself but had not yet set aside the animal, [I might say that the reason is] because he has not yet carried out his word, but where he has set it aside but not yet offered it I might argue that wherever it is, it is in the treasury of the All-Merciful. These texts therefore were necessary. And if again the rule had been laid down only for the cases where he has set the animal aside but not yet offered it, I might say that the reason is because he is keeping it by him, but if he has pledged himself without having yet set it aside I might argue that his mere word counts for nothing. Therefore these texts are also necessary.”
My theory. “If thou hast not wherewith to pay, Why should he take away thy bed from under thee?” (Proverbs 22:27) משלי פרק כב פסוק כז
אִם אֵין לְךָ לְשַׁלֵּם לָמָּה יִקַּח מִשְׁכָּבְךָ מִתַּחְתֶּיךָ:
“That which is gone out of thy lips thou shalt observe and do; according as thou hast vowed freely unto the Lord thy God, even that which thou hast promised with thy mouth.” (Deuteronomy 23:24) דברים פרשת כי תצא פרק כג פסוק כד
מוֹצָא שְׂפָתֶיךָ תִּשְׁמֹר וְעָשִׂיתָ כַּאֲשֶׁר נָדַרְתָּ לַיקֹוָק אֱלֹקֶיךָ נְדָבָה אֲשֶׁר דִּבַּרְתָּ בְּפִיךָ:
“When thou shalt vow a vow unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not be slack to pay it; for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee; and it will be sin in thee.” (Deuteronomy 23:22)
דברים פרשת כי תצא פרק כג פסוק כב
כִּי תִדֹּר נֶדֶר לַיקֹוָק אֱלֹהֶיךָ לֹא תְאַחֵר לְשַׁלְּמוֹ כִּי דָרֹשׁ יִדְרְשֶׁנּוּ יְקֹוָק אֱלֹהֶיךָ מֵעִמָּךְ וְהָיָה בְךָ חֵטְא:
Seems repetitive. The Gamara says both passages in Deuteronomy are needed. One case a person pledged a sacrifice but hasn’t the money to buy an animal. Not so bad. A second case a person pledged a sacrifice and obtained an suitable animal, yet delays bringing the sacrifice. Is this worse? He has no good excuse. Fascinating discussion.
Allow me update:
I received today 11:50 am October 15, 2021 letter dated October 6, 2021 from the NYS Court of Appeals:
"Re: Aranoff v Aranoff Mo. No. 2021--850
Dear Mr. Aranoff this acknowledges receipt of your papers dated October 3, 2021 Your papers will be submitted to the Court as a motion for leave to appeal from the March 6, 2014 Appellate Division order included as exhibit A.
Papers opposing the motion may be served and filed on or before October 18, 2021..."
Same repeated sources and claims!
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you have an answer?
ReplyDeleteAnd your solution is to use atomic weapons?
ReplyDeletea) it's a question
ReplyDeleteb) I wasn't around at the time
c) there are similar stories about how people and their offspring became our enemies, eg Eisav 'ß daughter in law was rejected for conversion, and then bore Amaleik.
Nope, they have more fearsome weapons than the West.
ReplyDeletegain of function proponents think they can benefit, and mitigate the risks from such research. Its opponents, say the risk and outcomes are too serious, and meagre or zero benefits simply don't justify. Why don't you ask a gadol hador for their opinion?
ReplyDeleteDid you bother reading the abstract? do you disagree?
ReplyDeleteThe voluntary moratorium on gain-of-function research related to the transmissibility of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus should continue, pending the resolution of critical policy questions concerning the rationale for performing such experiments and how best to report their results. The potential benefits and risks of these experiments must be discussed and understood by multiple stakeholders, including the general public, and all decisions regarding such research must be made in a transparent manner.
Yes, and he makes explicit that he is a supproter of such research - see conclusion:
ReplyDelete"When no reasonable alternatives exist, we must take the scientific
approach to making the argument for conducting such experiments before
they are performed. The voluntary moratorium on the controversial issue
of gain-of-function research related to the transmissibility of highly
pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus is providing us the time and space we
all need to work together and get this right, and it should be continued
until we do so (5)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_H._Ebright
ReplyDeleteYou can always find minority views if you look with google!
Great cherry picking you deleted a whole paragraph
ReplyDeleteWith regard to the specific question of whether certain gain-of-function experiments related to the transmissibility of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus should be conducted at all, which addresses directly the issue of the moratorium, the U.S. Government is planning to host an international workshop before the end of 2012 with important input from the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity and with global representation, including those with biosafety and biosecurity expertise, influenza virus and non-influenza virus scientists, and representatives of the domestic and global public. The meeting participants will consider general principles concerning the rationale for and risks and benefits of such experiments and what lines might be drawn in their conduct and/or reporting.
The game has changed for influenza virus scientists and the agencies that support them. As researchers, we must realize that we are critical players in the process of policy and decision making related to DURC, but we are not the only players. Before embarking on certain types of research, we must ask ourselves critical questions about whether there are alternative ways to answer the research questions at hand. When no reasonable alternatives exist, we must take the scientific approach to making the argument for conducting such experiments before they are performed. The voluntary moratorium on the controversial issue of gain-of-function research related to the transmissibility of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus is providing us the time and space we all need to work together and get this right, and it should be continued until we do so (5).
do you follow Rav Shternbuch completely , even wher ehis is a minority view?
ReplyDeletenope, cherry picking is to take a self serving sample, which distorts the overall message - i selcting his closing statement which displays his own position.
ReplyDeletehere is an earlier statement:
Scientists working in this field might say—as indeed I have said—that
the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh
the risks. It is more likely that a pandemic would occur in nature, and
the need to stay ahead of such a threat is a primary reason for
performing an experiment that might appear to be risky. However, we must
respect that there are genuine and legitimate concerns about this type
of research, both domestically and globally. We cannot expect those who
have these concerns to simply take us, the scientific community, at our
word that the benefits of this work outweigh the risks, nor can we
ignore their calls for greater transparency, their concerns about
conflicts of interest, and their efforts to engage in a dialog about
whether these experiments should have been performed in the first place.
Those of us in the scientific community who believe in the merits of
this work have the responsibility to address these concerns thoughtfully
and respectfully.
maybe he is more independent as he is not a politically motivated scientist
ReplyDeleteTorah thought on this week’s parsha וירא
ReplyDeleteSoncino Zohar, Bereshith, Section 1, Page 105b-106a
" “God said to Abraham, Verily, the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great,” as much as to say: I have taken note of their behavior towards their fellow-men, which causes all men to avoid setting foot in Sodom and Gomorrah. So it is written: “They open up a shaft far from where men live, [in places] forgotten by wayfarers, destitute of men, far removed.” (Job. XXVIII, 4). The stream divided to swallow up any stranger who ventured to enter Sodom; for if anyone was detected offering food or drink to a stranger, the people of the town would cast him into the deepest part of the river, as well as the recipient. Hence, they are forgotten of the foot, i.e. men avoided it and never put foot into it; and as for those who happened to enter it-they are the poorest of men, they move away, i.e. as no food or drink was given to them, their bodies became so emaciated that they scarcely looked any more like human beings, and hence they moved away, i.e. people passed it by on one side. Even the birds of heaven avoided it, as it is written, that path no bird of prey knoweth (Ibid. 7). A universal outcry therefore went up against Sodom and Gomorrah and all the other towns that behaved like them."
איוב כ"ח א' – י"ב
(א) כִּי יֵשׁ לַכֶּסֶף מוֹצָא וּמָקוֹם לַזָּהָב יָזֹקּוּ: (ב) בַּרְזֶל מֵעָפָר יֻקָּח וְאֶבֶן יָצוּק נְחוּשָׁה: (ג) קֵץ שָׂם לַחֹשֶׁךְ וּלְכָל תַּכְלִית הוּא חוֹקֵר אֶבֶן אֹפֶל וְצַלְמָוֶת: (ד) פָּרַץ נַחַל מֵעִם גָּר הַנִּשְׁכָּחִים מִנִּי רָגֶל דַּלּוּ מֵאֱנוֹשׁ נָעוּ: (ה) אֶרֶץ מִמֶּנָּה יֵצֵא לָחֶם וְתַחְתֶּיהָ נֶהְפַּךְ כְּמוֹ אֵשׁ: (ו) מְקוֹם סַפִּיר אֲבָנֶיהָ וְעַפְרֹת זָהָב לוֹ: (ז) נָתִיב לֹא יְדָעוֹ עָיִט וְלֹא שְׁזָפַתּוּ עֵין אַיָּה: (ח) לֹא הִדְרִיכֻהוּ בְנֵי שָׁחַץ לֹא עָדָה עָלָיו שָׁחַל: (ט) בַּחַלָּמִישׁ שָׁלַח יָדוֹ הָפַךְ מִשֹּׁרֶשׁ הָרִים: (י) בַּצּוּרוֹת יְאֹרִים בִּקֵּעַ וְכָל יְקָר רָאֲתָה עֵינוֹ: (יא) מִבְּכִי נְהָרוֹת חִבֵּשׁ וְתַעֲלֻמָהּ יֹצִא אוֹר:
My theory. “Only the Lord had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and He chose their seed after them, even you, above all peoples, as it is this day. Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. For the Lord your God, He is God of gods, and Lord of lords, the great God, the mighty, and the awful, who regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward. He doth execute justice for the fatherless and widow, and loveth the stranger, in giving him food and raiment. Love ye therefore the stranger; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.” (Deuteronomy 10:15-19).
Abraham loved the stranger: “he said: My lords, if it please you, do not go on pass your servant. Let a little water be brought; bathe your feet and recline under the tree.” (Genesis 18:3-4) [JPS translation]. Hertz Chumash p. 789 “16.circumcise, i.e. remove. They are not allowed, as it were, a hard covering to surround their heart, making it impervious to Divine influence. ‘Your heart shall be open for recognizing the truth’ (Nachmanides)”
Abraham was teaching truth to the world God chose Abraham. Who teaches
truth to the world today?
Torah thought this week’s parsha וירא
ReplyDelete“And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne unto Abraham, making sport. Wherefore she said unto Abraham: Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac. And the thing was very grievous in Abraham’s sight on account of his son. And God said unto Abraham: Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah saith unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall seed be called to thee. And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed.” (Genesis 21:9-13).
How to explain Sarah’s desire to drive Ishmael and Hagar out of the house of Abraham? Abraham who loves the stranger, who teaches love and unity to the world?
Sarah saw Ishmael do serious radicalization attempts to Isaac. Horrible: British terrorist born in UK from parents born in Somali assassinated David Amess while David Amess was meeting in person with his constituents part of openness and accessibility UK policy.
Yes the UK must be concerned about teaching radicalization. The extreme radical Islam theology fights dirty. They are all over UK. “85 perfectly legal sharia courts in the UK” “ half of the British mosques are under the control of the Islamic movement of the Taliban.”
My theory. "And God said unto Abraham: Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman." This is what we must do to all serious radicalization attempts: shut down the sharia courts in the UK, remove all Taliban influence in the UK.
Biden/Harris tried appeasement with the Taliban agreeing to their demand of zero US soldiers by August 29, 2021. Horrible. Metaphor: one feeds the crocodile hoping the crocodile will eat him last.
At that time in Genesis 21 Ishmael and Hagar were radical extremists supporting idol worshiping, forbidden sex, etc. Ishmael and Hagar both repented later. Was their repentance related to Abraham following Sarah’s sound advice?
Torah thought on The Akedah parsha וירא
ReplyDeleteSee https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/17787
“And it came to pass after these things, that God did prove Abraham, and said unto him: Abraham; and he said: Here am I. And He said: Take now thy son, thine only son, whom thou lovest, even Isaac, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt-offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. And Abraham rose early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son; and he cleaved the wood for the burnt-offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him. On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off. And Abraham said unto his young men: Abide ye here with the ass, and I and the lad will go yonder; and we will worship, and come back to you. And Abraham took the wood of the burnt-offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took in his hand the fire and the knife; and they went both of them together. And Isaac spoke unto Abraham his father, and said: My father. And he said: Here am I, my son. And he said: Behold the fire and the wood; but where is the lamb for a burnt-offering? And Abraham said: God will provide Himself the lamb for a burnt-offering, my son. So they went both of them together. And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built the altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar, upon the wood. And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said: Abraham, Abraham. And he said: Here am I. And he said: Lay not thy hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him; for now I know that thou art a God-fearing man, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from Me.” (Genesis 22:1-12).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishmael: “In the Quranic narrative of the near-sacrifice of Abraham's son,[51] the son is not named and, although the general interpretation is that it was Ishmael, Tabari[52] maintained that it was Isaac, consistent with the Hebrew scriptures.”
My theory. Abraham took Ishmael and Eliezer with him. Abraham said to Ishmael and Eliezer: Abide ye here with the ass, and I and the lad will go yonder; and we will worship, and come back to you. When Abraham bound Isaac and laid him on the altar---God sent a prophecy to Ishmael: Go run and shout over and over: Lay not thy hand upon the lad...
Ishmael and Eliezer were both good and God fearing and extremely respectful of Abraham. The whole world today is extremely respectful of Abraham. My theory. God sent Ishmael to call out to Abraham not to do anything to Isaac. Beautiful. You like my theory, KA, Garnel, IsraelReader, JoeOrlow?
This is the Koran on The Akedah: Sura 37 verses 100-107: “My Lord! Bless me with righteous offspring. So We gave him good news of a forbearing son. Then when the boy reached the age to work with him, Abraham said, O my dear son! I have seen in a dream that I must sacrifice you. So tell me what you think. He replied, O my dear father! Do as you are commanded. Allah willing, you will find me steadfast. Then when they submitted to Allah’s Will, and Abraham laid him on the side of his forehead for sacrifice. We called out to him, O Abraham! You have already fulfilled the vision. Indeed, this is how We reward the good-doers. That was truly a revealing test. And We ransomed his son with a great sacrifice”
Yes, if only the muslims would follow this teaching!
ReplyDeleteTorah thought daf Hayomi Rosh HaShana 11a
ReplyDelete“It has been taught: R. Eliezer says: Whence do we know that the world was created in Tishri? Because it says, “And God said: Let the earth sprout vegetation תדשא הארץ דשא, seed bearing plants, fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit עץ פרי עשה פרי with the seed in it. And it was so.” (Genesis 1:11). Which is the month in which the earth puts forth grass and the trees are full of fruit? You must say that this is Tishri. That time was the season of rainfall [lit., fructification], and the rain came down and the plants sprouted, as it says, “but a flow would well up from the ground and water the whole surface of the earth.” (Genesis 2:6) [This is supposed to have been at the time of the creation, and is therefore a proof that the world was created in Tishri.]. R. Joshua says: Whence do we know that the world was created in Nisan? Because it says, “The earth brought forth vegetation: seed bearing plants of every kind, and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it thereof, after its kind. And God saw that this was good.” (Genesis 1:12) Which is the month in which the earth is full of grass and trees [begin to] produce fruit? You must say that this is Nisan. That time was the period when cattle, beasts and fowls copulate with one another, as it says, “The meadows are clothed with flocks; The valleys mantled with grain; They raise a shout, they break into song.” (Psalms 65:14) [This Psalm is supposed to refer to the creation.].”
Beautiful. Such fine poetry in Psalms 65:14. Interesting the debate on which month the world was created: R. Eliezer, Tishri R. Joshua Nisan. R. Eliezer basis his view on Genesis 1:11. R. Eliezer basis his view on Genesis 1:12.
My theory. Both are right. God created in Tishri trees and plants. In Nisan trees and plants gave fruits. The poetry of Psalm 65:14 is Nisan. In Bnei Brak I see happy flourishing families with so many babies and small children.
Thank you God in Heaven. KA thanks for the upticks.