zlacker

>>option+(OP)
I like Carl Bergstrom's take on this:

I have reason to believe that if the outgoing administration claims to have reason to believe something but refuses to provide the evidence behind it, they are lying.

https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1350292056782954498

Here's a very serious, legitimate review of the possible origins of SARS-CoV-2: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-01205-5

Unfortunately, from my experience, most people are going to believe what they want to believe, based more on political affiliation more than anything else, and the empirical facts don't register too strongly.

>>raphli+r3
Maybe if authorities were a bit more neutral. Some plausible options were ruled out from day 1, without any investigation.

And words like "empirical facts" and "independent review" in context of China, do not add much credibility.

If virus has natural origin, we should be able to find population of infected bats. Until then it is just another unproven theory.

>>throw3+F7
I should clarify, neither I nor Dr. Rasmussen are claiming that we know what the true origin is, or that zoonotic spillover is definitely what happened. There is not enough evidence to make such a definitive conclusion. I can see how people might read my comment as implicitly asserting that if people did understand the empirical facts they would come to the conclusion of zoonotic origin.

That said, there are facts, and they are relevant: the fact that COV RaTG13 has 96.2% similarity to SARS-COV-2. The incredible diversity of bat coronaviruses, and the fact that only fraction are studied and understood, despite serious study by the WIV.

Here's another good quote from another good thread: And investigating zoonotic origins can take decades, and you may NEVER find the "smoking bat" or whatever other intermediate species that may be involved. It's like looking for a needle in a planet-sized haystack. -- https://twitter.com/angie_rasmussen/status/13497545972759142...

The main point that I was trying to make, which I stand by, is that most people are going to base their beliefs about this question on essentially political considerations: do you trust the CCP or the US State Dept more? Unfortunately, both of those institutions have done terrible damage to objective scientific inquiry, and in my opinion neither one is really deserving of trust. Better to follow the science where it leads, but this is an often frustrating and time consuming process.

>>raphli+59
Human share 98.5 percent of DNA with shimpanzee. Percentage is just a pop science. Find the missing link and you have a proof.

But for start we could explain how south china wild bat got into wuhan meat market, 500 km from its origin.

I am not from US or China. From my view Wuhan lab was sponsored by US. My concern is how often will current crisis repeat, every 10 years? Nobody is answering this question.

And we do not need "lab origin" to pin blame on China. Wuhan meat market is open again, more bats sold...