2 ms·

I can't speak to this article, because I don't have the technical knowledge to evaluate it. I think that if you don't accept that it's a reasonable possibility

I can't speak to this article, because I don't have the technical knowledge to evaluate it. I think that if you don't accept that it's a reasonable possibility that this escaped from one of the labs in Wuhan, you're being unscientific. The evidence for it having come from the lab is: 1. The Wuhan Institute of Virology published papers in the past two years about their experimentation with chimeric coronaviruses. Viruses similar to this one were without question present in that lab. 2. The lab is about 25 miles from the seafood market. 3. The true source of the virus couldn't have been the seafood market. We know this because four of the original cases have no apparent connection to the seafood market. The Chinese government has not identified a source of the virus given this information. 4. SARS has leaked from other Chinese research labs in the past. 5. H1N1 probably leaked from a Chinese lab in 1976 and caused a pandemic. 6. China covered up the virus in its initial stages as it tried to contain it, which would be expected if the virus originated from the lab.

mantap 7y ago
You know, people said the same things about Porton Down when the Novichok nerve agent was released in Salisbury UK. It was mightily suspicious that this nerve agent was released just down the road from the UK government bio&chemical research station. But the Russians have practically admitted to it now. Wuhan is a huge city, larger than London. It's unsurprising that it has a lab that researches coronavirusee. It's especially unsurprising that the Chinese would be researching coronaviruses as they were previously affected by SARS-1. Everybody should keep an open mind to all possibilities when the Chinese government is present. It's not wrong to consider the possibility that this might have been an accidental release. I just don't see the evidence for it.
ksec 7y ago
Nowadays any thinking outside the box, unorthodox, are considered conspiracist. My summary to the above is Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action. If the first three point as known fact ( along with the fist part of point 6 ) were not worthy of consideration and be called a conspiracist then we can call it we agree to disagree.

mantap 7y ago

You know, people said the same things about Porton Down when the Novichok nerve agent was released in Salisbury UK. It was mightily suspicious that this nerve agent was released just down the road from the UK government bio&chemical research station. But the Russians have practically admitted to it now. Wuhan is a huge city, larger than London. It's unsurprising that it has a lab that researches coronavirusee. It's especially unsurprising that the Chinese would be researching coronaviruses as they were previously affected by SARS-1. Everybody should keep an open mind to all possibilities when the Chinese government is present. It's not wrong to consider the possibility that this might have been an accidental release. I just don't see the evidence for it.

ksec 7y ago

Nowadays any thinking outside the box, unorthodox, are considered conspiracist. My summary to the above is Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action. If the first three point as known fact ( along with the fist part of point 6 ) were not worthy of consideration and be called a conspiracist then we can call it we agree to disagree.