zlacker

>>ruarai+(OP)
This article is written by a journalist who is clearly knowledgeable about safety practices and mistakes in US labs, but does not consider the extensive knowledge we have about the sequence of SARS-COV2. The preponderance of evidence supports a natural origin of the virus.

This is no way exonerates the Wuhan government from possible culpability—indeed government officials did deliberately suppress information—but this investigative opinion doesn’t pass scientific muster. Misinformation.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

>>tbenst+Zu1
You are indeed misunderstanding the point.

Smallpox is also naturally originating virus. That doesn't prohibit it from leaking from a lab.

>>SpaceR+Zv1
The author is irresponsibility propagating a conspiracy theory and elevating its status in the public’s mind.

I’m a bioscientist. It’s frustrating to respond with evidence and in good faith, and be downvoted by those who simply disagree. But sadly it appears that the loudest voice prevails over reason.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00599-7

>>tbenst+Ky1
Empirically, HN collectively gets things like this right much more often than not. It’s been right about the coming pandemic as early as beginning of Feb, it’s been right about masks when it was dismissed by CDC, and lab leak hypothesis has been dismissed as crank the whole time while building more and more of an implausible case that it wasn’t lab-leaked. HN has been coming around to that too. Of course, nothing is conclusive yet but you’re actually furthering the damages caused by misinformation by grouping this into it. If lab leak comes to fruition, there’s just going to be further outrage against traditional authority sources of info that gets things wrong, railing against people like you who called their correct hypothesis misinformation.

>>reduce+OI1
ive been here for a decade... its my opinion that HN very much does NOT get things like this right more often than not. its very hard to even guage what the hn opinion is to begin with

>>the_ca+9L1
> "its very hard to even guage what the hn opinion is to begin with"

Not sure how to square this with the fact you're saying HN collectively gets it wrong. Either you can't even determine what it is they're getting wrong or you're exceptionally good at gauging what the HN opinion is. Because of your quote, I'll assume you're not accurately gauging what HN's majority opinion is on issues, because it's "very hard." I spend a lot of time here and don't think it's difficult at all. While there's a lot of debate and disagreement, most issues have fairly clear >2/3 majorities.

Classically liberal, anti-trumpism, climate change urgently needs addressing, anti-BigTech, static typing, Rust/Go > Java/C#, anti-CCP, anti-surveillance, pro-encryption / pro-privacy, pro-fasting, pro-lifting, decriminalize drug use, pro-rationalist, crypto mostly snake oil, more Twitter use/discussion than IG/Snap/TikTok though it's less popular, etc.