zlacker

[parent] [thread] 9 comments
1. m0llus+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-06-04 00:22:07
This is silly. The lab leak hypothesis was never off limits, it was ridiculed because it had little evidence and was based on political things are different this time thinking. Finding viral origins is never a fight, it is hard work requiring detailed research. Both SARS and MERS are good comparisons and took around three years to fully understand.

The lab leak theory is popular because of politics and ignoring the down sides of potential error. The lab leak theory posits that natural disasters such as have happened throughout history no longer happen because all events are shaped by the hands of man. The lab leak theory is based on the idea that establishing guilt brings justice. The lab leak theory is based on a generalized loathing of China. The lab leak theory ignores the history of ongoing transfers of animal viruses to man in favor of the view that it is different this time. Garbage in results in garbage out and the lab leak theory assumes that an incorrect idea will result in correct political action.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy here is that people are appealing to ideas about justice by saying this was a forbidden struggle that is a big fight, yet ignoring the most important realities of justice. If you really want justice then you need a coherent statement of the offense, there should be a fair hearing with representatives of all sides, there should be impartial review whether that be trained judges or a selected jury of peers or whatever else, and so on. We know what justice looks like and any serious introspection will show that this shrill advocacy of the lab leak theory is just more social media garbage like q anon and the rest. If you want justice then you will have to submit to the kind of impartiality that brings justice, but that isn't what we are talking about here.

replies(6): >>gjsman+B >>henear+K >>JPKab+O >>karate+A1 >>disgru+B1 >>tim333+551
2. gjsman+B[view] [source] 2021-06-04 00:28:20
>>m0llus+(OP)
It was off limits if you dared post it on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or any other "popular" place for public discourse.
replies(1): >>m0llus+Y1
3. henear+K[view] [source] 2021-06-04 00:29:19
>>m0llus+(OP)
Agree totally.

I'd add that, while China is ready to help and take part in the global fight against the covid, a finger-pointing shaming war against them would probably (as it already did several times) trigger the very Asian reaction of counter-fighting to not lose face, and stopping any constructive cooperation.

4. JPKab+O[view] [source] 2021-06-04 00:29:27
>>m0llus+(OP)
I'm sorry, but you are ignoring the chain of low probability coincidences that were evident from the very beginning. Also, the Lancet letter denouncing the theory, written by scientists who claimed no conflict of interest, falsely.

This is laid out clearly in Wade's article below, and saying it's political is not based on data or science.

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-peop...

Note the grant specifying the research here, with the chief author of the Lancet letter as recipient.

https://reporter.nih.gov/search/xQW6UJmWfUuOV01ntGvLwQ/proje...

5. karate+A1[view] [source] 2021-06-04 00:36:27
>>m0llus+(OP)
> The lab leak hypothesis was never off limits, it was ridiculed because it had little evidence and was based on political things are different this time thinking.

It was ridiculed because a Republican Senator popularized it, not because of evidence.

The way you know it had nothing to do with the evidence or lack thereof is that people who respond based on evidence don't usually respond with ridicule, and people who respond based on tribal affiliation usually do.

There were definitely some people saying "this is possible, but on balance unlikely given what we know today", but for the most part words like "crackpot" and "incompetent" and even "racist" were used instead. That's not what arguing from a place of facts sounds like.

6. disgru+B1[view] [source] 2021-06-04 00:36:38
>>m0llus+(OP)
> If you really want justice then you need a coherent statement of the offense, there should be a fair hearing with representatives of all sides, there should be impartial review whether that be trained judges or a selected jury of peers or whatever else, and so on.

Cool. Since China is the source of this virus, can they take the lead here? I'll wait.

replies(1): >>m0llus+a2
◧◩
7. m0llus+Y1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-04 00:40:12
>>gjsman+B
The dominance of those forums is the problem. Note how many posters on this thread are calling out how "shocking" articles and evidence are? This is how social media works by pushing hot buttons. Actual science is based on evidence and is often an extreme bore. What we are seeing is people getting excited over made up stories while ignoring the real hard work which has time and again pointed to viruses hopping from animals to humans.
◧◩
8. m0llus+a2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-04 00:42:24
>>disgru+B1
There is no lead. Since America is the prime location for infection and death we should probably try to be serious about the issue instead of getting distracted.

And what exactly is China expected to do in any case? Apologize? Pay in the way fining Germany for WWI led to WWII?

You are full of moral rage, yet still have essentially zero scientific support. Are you sure that is okay?

replies(1): >>wearyw+c3
◧◩◪
9. wearyw+c3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-04 00:55:15
>>m0llus+a2
> And what exactly is China expected to do in any case?

China, and every other country, should move such labs away from major population centers.

From the article:

> Then, in February, a research paper coauthored by two Chinese scientists, based at separate Wuhan universities, appeared online as a preprint. It tackled a fundamental question: How did a novel bat coronavirus get to a major metropolis of 11 million people in central China, in the dead of winter when most bats were hibernating, and turn a market where bats weren’t sold into the epicenter of an outbreak?

> The paper offered an answer: “We screened the area around the seafood market and identified two laboratories conducting research on bat coronavirus.” The first was the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention, which sat just 280 meters from the Huanan market and had been known to collect hundreds of bat samples. The second, the researchers wrote, was the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

> The paper came to a staggeringly blunt conclusion about COVID-19: “the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan.... Regulations may be taken to relocate these laboratories far away from city center and other densely populated places.”

Key part: "Regulations may be taken to relocate these laboratories far away from city center and other densely populated places" Isn't this common sense? I feel that those claiming there is nothing that could be done with information pointing to a lab leak, as you seem to be doing, are being incredibly disingenuous. If the virus escaped from a lab, strengthening lab regulations is the obvious response that you seem to be pretending doesn't exist.

10. tim333+551[view] [source] 2021-06-04 13:08:03
>>m0llus+(OP)
>never off limits, it was ridiculed because it had little evidence and was based on political things

re limits - I got banned from the covid19 reddit for mentioning it and was unable to write about in on Wikipedia, this in Feb 2020, pre Trump

re evidence - there were no bats anywhere near Wuhan and Daszak's gain of function funding and interview were public before the breakout but unmentionable

How is the above that the nearest viruses to the breakout were in a lab politics?

And while people like me being unable to write on Wikipedia etc may seem silly bear in mind 10m people died from this thing and several of those million may not have done if the data was not censored.

[go to top]