zlacker

>>alwill+(OP)
It's well known that local Chinese authorities silenced a doctor (Li Wenliang) who was giving early warnings about the virus. That to me is a more grave mistake than an accidental lab leak, because they lost a chance to nip it in the bud. Accidents happen and quick response is essential.

An intentional lab leak makes no sense to me at all. Its like starting a fire in your house to spite your neighbour.

>>dreen+w8
> An intentional lab leak makes no sense to me at all.

Very few people are arguing that it was intentional. I agree that an intentional lab leak is highly, highly unlikely, but I think an accidental lab leak is at least just as likely as the wet market hypothesis and CCP certainly acted extremely suspicious.

>>dkerst+w9
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

All major world governments do illegal and shady acts when faced with situations that may result in the need for extreme ass-covering. (cf. "righteous strike")

If it were an accidental lab leak: so what? How does that change things? If anything, it would accelerate a {trade,cold,cyber,shooting} war with China, which is universally a bad thing, even in pursuit of justice for something that was likely accidental (if indeed it came from a lab, which is presently undefined/unknown to the public).

>>sneak+hb
> If it were an accidental lab leak: so what?

> pursuit of justice

It has nothing to do with a pursuit of justice, at least not for me. It's about understanding where the disease came from and how it jumped to humans, so that we have a better shot at stopping something like this happening again.