zlacker

>>nnx+(OP)
It's interesting to see that with Donald Trump out of office, the "lab escape" hypothesis is not roundly dismissed as a right-wing conspiracy theory anymore.

>>incrud+I2
It's almost as if the motivation for a claim matters.

>>Touche+D3
So, if a claim is made, but the person who claims it has bad intentions, it can be dismissed?

I believe there's a logical fallacy for that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

>>incrud+S3
If a claim is made and no evidence is provided, then should anyone give it much credibility?

The news prints these stories then they become the truth in the minds of many people.

>>mellin+45
In hindsight, I'm not happy with the word "claim" either, but I don't want to edit the comment again.

Let's go with "hypothesis" for the sake of argument:

In this case, we have a basket of competing hypotheses, none of which have any solid evidence going for them.

Yet, some of these hypotheses have not been dismissed as conspiracy theories. Those were the hypotheses that conveniently fit a "humans encroach on wildlife"-narrative.

I'm just pointing this out as "interesting", I'm not arguing that this circumstance gives validity to one hypothesis over another.

>>incrud+P5
In the past, we have seen...

So we have prior evidence...so we give more weight...

The investigators should examine all possibilities, of course.

Repeating the most “exciting” theory on Opinion News night after night...

>>mellin+K6
We have prior evidence for both lab escapes and gain-of-function experiments on coronaviruses (in Wuhan, no less).

Assigning weights to these circumstances can be done arbitrarily, to the point where the lab escape hypothesis becomes the most plausible one:

https://www.rootclaim.com/analysis/What-is-the-source-of-COV...