zlacker

[return to "Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out"]
1. loveis+Oj[view] [source] 2021-04-09 15:24:15
>>todd8+(OP)
Judging by the comments in this thread, it seems a lot of people are still unaware that:

1. Gain of function research primarily uses samples collected from nature, and seeks to stimulate their evolution in as natural a way as possible to learn how viruses evolve in nature. If such viruses were to escape the lab, they would appear "natural"

2. It's not xenophobic for people from the US to suggest the possibility of a lab leak, because the US was itself funding gain of function research on novel coronaviruses in the Wuhan BSL4 lab

3. Lab leaks happen more often than most people realize[1]

[1]https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/3/20/18260669/deadly...

◧◩
2. arctic+UM[view] [source] 2021-04-09 17:34:55
>>loveis+Oj
It's also not xenophobic to suggest the possibility of a lab leak because lab leaks happen regardless of who's doing the research; even at BSL-4 facilities, mistakes are made. And also because there were two separate SARS-CoV-1 leaks/outbreaks from Chinese labs which the PRC admitted to. [1]

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC403836/

◧◩◪
3. refene+LE1[view] [source] 2021-04-09 22:11:02
>>arctic+UM
The fact that this particular theory reaches the front page of hacker news every week, despite zero evidence besides the existence of a lab.. hey, we're just asking questions, here, right?

Frankly, it would be irresponsible NOT to provacatively suggest this thing we have no evidence of, repeatedly.

◧◩◪◨
4. arctic+tM1[view] [source] 2021-04-09 23:09:45
>>refene+LE1
Yes it sure would be irresponsible to ask questions about the...

(1) BSL-3 lab doing bat coronavirus research...

(2) on gain-of-function projects...

(3) one block away from the epicenter of a coronavirus pandemic with bat ties...

(4) that nobody's being allowed into...

(5) when they have a history of coronavirus lab escapes.

I'm not saying we know this is what happened. I'm saying it's not a far-fetched position and there's a lot of experts who agree. I hear there's even an MIT Technology Review write-up about it.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. refene+QN1[view] [source] 2021-04-09 23:21:23
>>arctic+tM1
The write-up specified that they're a noisy minority who disagree with the consensus. In the subheading, after the heading 'scientists say..'. Media!

It's still 100% speculation. The question to ask is, would there be this level of suggestive speculation if it wasn't America's newest top rival?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. arctic+oO1[view] [source] 2021-04-09 23:26:44
>>refene+QN1
Sure, but also, if the PRC didn't have a tendency of murdering it's dissenters and anyone who made them look bad. They're not exactly a shining beacon of transparency. If this was going down in New Zealand I'm not sure anyone would be speculating, and also WHO investigators would have been granted full access to the facility on day 1.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. refene+yQ1[view] [source] 2021-04-09 23:49:22
>>arctic+oO1
And we're up to the nub of it -- lots of people fundamentally think China is evil and this topic is just another battleground.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. arctic+iR1[view] [source] 2021-04-09 23:57:09
>>refene+yQ1
Nope, I don't think they're evil, I think they have a track record. That's not the same thing at all. Track records can be good or bad -- in this case, it's a bad track record.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. refene+bS1[view] [source] 2021-04-10 00:03:47
>>arctic+iR1
Plenty of bad track records to go around. You started off saying this wasn't about xenophobia, and sure that's a strong word, but it does seem like 'bias' would hit the mark pretty squarely.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. arctic+OT1[view] [source] 2021-04-10 00:19:02
>>refene+bS1
Xenophobia is roughly defined as "dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries." Certainly a blanket dislike without any justification.

On the other hand, what I've said is (a) I have nothing against "foreigners" (b) there's a ton of circumstantial evidence and (c) China has a long track record of silencing opposition and criticism to prevent derogatory information from getting out. That's not xenophobia.

It's like if you have someone who's robbed 6 convenience stores, and your reaction is "hey I'm not sure they're a good fit for the world of cashiering." Or better yet, a 7th convenience store is robbed adjacent to the first 6 in the same exact way, and your reaction is "someone should see what Steve was up to that night." That's not bias, that's a substantiated track record.

It's inductive reasoning.

It's utterly unreasonable to call anyone who holds China's track record against them xenophobic or biased lol. They've earned that track record. When they show a different attitude they'll get treated differently.

> Plenty of bad track records to go around.

That right there is quintessential whataboutism.

[go to top]