3 ms·
> they were studying it in China because it was a local virus that they were worried might one day infect humans. Maybe they were studying which changes would m
by markdown 6y ago
> they were studying it in China because it was a local virus that they were worried might one day infect humans. Maybe they were studying which changes would make it most dangerous because they wanted to be ready if those changes happened naturally.
The person you're responding to didn't say anything different to what you've said.
> Honest hard work can sometimes look like evil plans, and not every coincidence is the result of conspiracy.
Why did you say that? It certainly isn't stated or even implied by the person you're replying to.
- matthewdgreen 6y agoThe person he/she/they is responding to may not have originated the thought, but the quote this poster is responding to is very clear from context. It reads as follows: “The authors feel that, in light of this preponderance of circumstantial evidence, the hypothesis that the biogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 involved human intervention should be seen as the leading (i.e. most likely) explanation.”
- bitcurious 6y agoWhich is not an accusation of research done in bad faith. The linked paper referenced 4 others as evidence. It doesn't say that those 4 were somehow done for evil - just that they were done.