zlacker

[parent] [thread] 11 comments
1. deevia+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-06-04 01:29:02
If this is the most shocking article you have ever read in your life, I feel you haven't read many articles in your life.

There is absolutely no evidence in it. Just a pile of conjecture. It is absolutely the stuff of conspiracy theories.

The truly shocking thing is that world does not hold China liable for this disaster. It really doesn't matter if it started in a lab or in one of their wet markets; it was incompetence and negligence on China's part in either case. China should pay reparations to the world for turning it off for what looks to be like multiple years, and killing millions of people.

replies(4): >>jacque+T >>wombat+n1 >>WillPo+Ov >>rvanla+IT
2. jacque+T[view] [source] 2021-06-04 01:39:00
>>deevia+(OP)
China could - rightfully - point out that they in fact did get the situation more or less under control and that in spite of being fully aware of the seriousness of the situation the bulk of the governments in the West (those who presumably would be first in line to demand reparation) messed it up all by themselves.
3. wombat+n1[view] [source] 2021-06-04 01:42:42
>>deevia+(OP)
When China started welding doors on high rises to keep people in, that was the signal to take it seriously-despite what the WHO was saying
replies(2): >>swader+L2 >>sgt101+Mx
◧◩
4. swader+L2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-04 01:54:55
>>wombat+n1
They never welded people in, it was to funnel them through common exits where they could be disinfected.
replies(1): >>themac+p6
◧◩◪
5. themac+p6[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-04 02:27:38
>>swader+L2
It was reported that some residential unit were literally blocked from entry/exit: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/coronavirus-residents-welded-insi...
6. WillPo+Ov[view] [source] 2021-06-04 07:23:28
>>deevia+(OP)
There is absolutely no evidence in it. Just a pile of conjecture

There is much more evidence in the article for a lab leak than there was for the wet market story which was uncritically parroted in the media for over a year.

replies(1): >>deevia+Ua1
◧◩
7. sgt101+Mx[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-04 07:49:33
>>wombat+n1
This did not happen as far as I can discover - there were stringent lock down measures in Wuhan, but they came very late. In fact six weeks into the outbreak the Wuhan authorities held a party for 40k people. So - in fact it was the opposite, they treated it recklessly, which makes me think that they didn't have much to hide (until they realised that they had recklessly let it, whereever it came from, get out of control).
replies(1): >>rasz+2m2
8. rvanla+IT[view] [source] 2021-06-04 12:30:57
>>deevia+(OP)
The origin does matter.

If it evolved in a lab, it is highly likely that the virus is better at infecting people in lab conditions, for example that would mean inside.

Which, coincidentally is exactly what we're seeing. People with masks on get infected inside buildings. Outside the risk is much much lower.

replies(1): >>deevia+Yf1
◧◩
9. deevia+Ua1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-04 14:32:38
>>WillPo+Ov
> There is much more evidence in the article for a lab leak than there was for the wet market story which was uncritically parroted in the media for over a year.

There was zero evidence of a lab leak in the article, only conjecture. So the bar of "same amount of evidence as the article for lab leak" is pathetically easy to reach. The fact you are throwing the "parroting" term around is ridiculously ironic as well, the "lab leak" has been parroted around the world since day one.

More importantly, who gives a shit even if *was* a lab leak? It's literally the less evil/worse of the two possibilities (wet market vs lab leak). Since that means it was "only" a lapse in lab security (one which will probably be learned from and not repeated) rather than the result of negligence in keeping open these markets despite being told over and over again that they are going to cause outbreaks just like this one, and these markets are still open!

replies(1): >>Rapzid+WS2
◧◩
10. deevia+Yf1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-04 15:06:00
>>rvanla+IT
> If it evolved in a lab, it is highly likely that the virus is better at infecting people in lab conditions, for example that would mean inside.

Zoonotic diseases jump from animal to human regularly. Countless recommendations from health organizations around the world warned about and predicted a zoonotic disease event base around one of these wet markets.

> If it evolved in a lab, it is highly likely that the virus is better at infecting people in lab conditions, for example that would mean inside.

Feels like you pulled that out of your ass. Random is random and evolution is a thing. The fact that covid is effective at infecting people means only that, it has no definitive statement on it's origin. Yes, we know that a virus can be engineered in a lab to be more infectious, but billions of humans come in contact with billions of animals so it don't matter if the chance of natural zoonotic boundary jump is small.

◧◩◪
11. rasz+2m2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-04 20:08:16
>>sgt101+Mx
Clearly those are cut scenes from Resident Evil, the one that came out in February 2020 https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1703503427818
◧◩◪
12. Rapzid+WS2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-05 00:00:29
>>deevia+Ua1
Also the opposite of the "lab leak" theory(which is very overloaded) is probably the "species jump" theory and not the "wet market" theory.
[go to top]