zlacker

>>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...

>>loveis+Oj
Hi, I have a PhD in virology focused on emerging viruses, and a few months back I wrote a very lengthy and involved piece full of sources.

And in there, I describe exactly how wrong your point 1 is. And how misguided your point 3 is.

The post also won a "best of r/science 2020" award!

You can find it here: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did...

>>jedueh+I31
I'm sorry man, but wouldn't you be able to just reply directly if you feel inclined to disagree with the parent. I'm not saying HN is entitled to your opinion but it feels a little lazy and disrespectful to the parent to say "you're wrong" then drop a link off site to a massive general summary of the situation in order to respond to a few specific points. Especially since point 3 has a source from a decently reputable news site with reputable sources.

>>rPlaye+kc1
Hi, I actually ended up responding below to point 3 in particular but I also respond to it in my original post. Very few, if any of these arguments are novel.

The reason you will find extremely few people with actual credentials in the science we're discussing in these discussions is that working scientists don't have the time or will to get into these debates with people who wouldn't have the faintest idea how to actually conduct the research they're criticizing.

That post I linked took like dozens and dozens of man hours to write, workshop, source, and edit.

And I wrote it so I could link it in situations like this, and not repeat myself dozens or hundreds of times.

Personally, I'm studying for the biggest exam of my professional life at the moment, and I'm procrastinating here because I find these discussions so horrifying.

This entire thread could be a valuable case study in the Dunning Krueger effect.

Not saying it's not worth talking about, but rather that the amount of time and effort it takes to refute bullshit is several magnitudes more than the amount of effort it takes to create it.

In my case, that's 10+ years studying viruses so people on the internet with no credentials can tell me I'm wrong.

>>jedueh+Av1
Firstly it is "Dunning-Kruger". Secondly you are engaging in an argument from "authority" without evidence which is often fallacious and always disingenuous.

>>phyalo+9y1
Pointing out spelling mistakes is a fallacy in the sense of attacking the person rather than the argument (as in, you know what they meant to say, but wanted to make them look silly), and they did post a literal megathread of evidence which (because it wasn't summarised for you) you decided to discount.

>>morito+pr2
I am sure you are familiar with the concept involved with Dunning-Kruger, misspelling it when trying to make a point, makes said point somewhat hard to take seriously.

I have pursued most of what OP posted on reddit, I am not qualified to judge the finer points, but it doesn't mesh up with what I have seen presented by other independent expert sources or common sense. So I discounted it for that reason not the one you gave.

>>phyalo+ht2
Here are a lot of other experts (and surveys of experts) who agree the lab leak is less likely: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did...