zlacker

[return to "Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed"]
1. gregwe+pV1[view] [source] 2021-03-22 22:00:55
>>ruarai+(OP)
This is a great article explaining why a lab leak should always be a suspect. The alternative theory is that a virus traveled on its own (via bats or other animals) from bat caves 900km away to Wuhan where there are 2 labs researching bats. One of the labs is lesser known but is right next to the seafood market and the hospital where the outbreak was first known. [1]

This article points out that a lab outbreak could have happened in the United States and many places in the world. We need to avoid demonizing China over this if we want to ever find out the truth and learn how to prevent another pandemic outbreak.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20200214144447/https://www.resea...

◧◩
2. strogo+R42[view] [source] 2021-03-22 22:48:18
>>gregwe+pV1
An eerily prescient quote from a paper[0] published in 2015, two of the authors of which are with Wuhan Institute of Virology:

> Understanding the bat origin of human coronaviruses is helpful for the prediction and prevention of another pandemic emergence in the future.

China has clearly contributed valuable research into bat coronaviruses. They had all the motivation to look into these after the first deadly SARS. I think it’s silly to presume CCP engineered a virus as part of some warfare strategy, or even to vilify/sanction them for a lab leak if it indeed was the cause (mistakes happen). However, CCP’s resistance to a proper thorough study of the origins of COVID is IMO not exactly appropriate.

Active research was taking place in the vicinity of suspected ground zero. Lab escapes happen—there are well-documented cases of the original SARS virus leaking from a lab in Beijing in 2004 (killing at least one person). Why was this time such a scenario discarded as so ridiculously impossible at first, and is still considered “extremely unlikely”? Is it politics?

[0] https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12985-...

◧◩◪
3. Aeolun+gk2[view] [source] 2021-03-23 00:29:47
>>strogo+R42
> However, CCP’s resistance to a proper thorough study of the origins of COVID is IMO not exactly appropriate.

It is, in fact, highly suspect. I’m not at all positive that it indeed leaked from a lab in Wuhan, but the fact they won’t let an independent investigation anywhere near it makes me lean more strongly towards that as a possibility.

The description of the last investigation into the origins of the virus felt more like a ‘guided tour’.

◧◩◪◨
4. incomp+rx2[view] [source] 2021-03-23 02:15:57
>>Aeolun+gk2
I don't think that's quite accurate: https://thewest.com.au/news/health/who-team-visits-wuhan-res...
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. zensav+1C2[view] [source] 2021-03-23 02:57:54
>>incomp+rx2
Except that it was (allegedly) a whole load of BS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evHFsNSMTLM
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. hungry+FE2[view] [source] 2021-03-23 03:21:29
>>zensav+1C2
You have to keep in mind laowhy86 isn't exactly know to be impartial
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. coupde+Q13[view] [source] 2021-03-23 07:34:07
>>hungry+FE2
How so? Be specific.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. bmn__+Ei3[view] [source] 2021-03-23 10:10:38
>>coupde+Q13
I make no moral judgement about impartiality. Work out the implications yourself.

I make no comment about the content of the video linked in GGP's post.

That being said, the following is publicly known (but unverified by me) and quite apt to affect impartiality (whether under his control or not, whether consciously or not):

1. He was persecuted in China by the authorities and barely escaped with the posessions on his body.

2. He is currently under attack by brigades and agents of the persons he is critical of. The attacks follow standard psychological warfare patterns, including death threats to himself and the family.

Additionally, some speculation from me:

3. He has no journalistic training, both his business partner and his peers in the wider YT/Patreon business don't have either, and to me it seems both content producer and audience have come to a shared understanding that the shows are primarily entertainment and should not be held to the same rigour of journalistic integrity one would expect from e.g. a traditional print periodical. Adv Media's income entirely depends on YT/Patreon, and employing sensationalism – which results in uneven amplification of the reported reality – brings in more money. I haven't seen a completely sober/dry video.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. coupde+eq4[view] [source] 2021-03-23 17:17:03
>>bmn__+Ei3
Have you seen their older videos? They had to hold back any criticism, and everything was mostly peachy. Now, the gloves are off, and they do have an ax to grind, unquestionably. However, just because they have to respond to tons of wumaos and tankies doesn't mean what they say isn't true. Furthermore, they do not pretend to be journalists, so I don't think this criticism has integrity.

Their experiences living in China line up with mine. I haven't seen an instance of them compromising their integrity.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. bmn__+145[view] [source] 2021-03-23 20:21:08
>>coupde+eq4
You have not understood me well. I did not say that I think "what they say isn't true". I did not say that I think they "pretend to be journalists". You interpret things into my post and attempt to refute that are not there, which is a shame because I took great deliberation to formulate it precisely the way it is. The topic under discussion is impartiality, not integrity! Be mindful of the difference.

> Have you seen their older videos?

I am subscribed since late 2016.

> Their experiences living in China line up with mine.

same

[go to top]