zlacker

That is not evidence! It is at best a coincidence. An even stronger coincidence would be that this lab had a genotypically similar virus stored prior to its detection. But even that is not evidence of release; it is just a stronger hypothesis.

If I was near a bank robbery at the time of occurrence, it does not count as evidence that I did it. Not even if I have a history of robbing banks. It must be combined with other, stronger evidence (I was inside the bank, my fingerprints were there, I was caught on camera) to build a case.

>>beowul+(OP)
But it is the only evidence, coincidental or otherwise. No other evidences have been found.

>>beowul+(OP)
I've seen enough police/crime/legal dramas to know that's 'circumstantial evidence'..! Of course that doesn't preclude it being a coincidence. (Hence the phrases 'that's just circumstantial' and 'that's one hell of a coincidence').

(I'm only commenting on the words, I don't think I care where it came from at this point, not sure I could ever really believe it, whatever was concluded. Unless perhaps a bunch of countries/labs agreed, including the blamed one if applicable.)

>>AzzieE+i1
Lack of evidence usually means something didn’t happen.

We don’t imprison people for crimes on the basis we couldn’t find any strong evidence, thus what ever shitty “evidence” we did find must be an acceptable basis for punishment.

>>beowul+(OP)
Friendly suggestion to all that Bayes Theorem is the right way to deal with this kind of weak evidence. We should not adhere to arbitrary legal standards in our own thinking about the truth.

>>beowul+(OP)
At best a coincidence and at worst what? Evidence? I think being near or at a bank at the time it was robbed totally does count as evidence that you may have done it. Forgive me for pointing out little details in your post, but

> It must be combined with other, stronger evidence ...

This sounds like you agree. It's just weak evidence, and that's for darn sure.

>>resoni+gl1
I don’t agree that the virus appearing near a lab is evidence that it was released from a lab, no. Just like I don’t believe being near a bank robbery at the time of a robbery is evidence I did it.

The comment mentioning Bayes Theorem has the right idea. Your priors are exceptionally different from my own, so we do not see this the same way and maybe never will.