4 ms·
I strongly suspect this is the case, though talking about it too loudly quickly brings accusations of crankery and "sinophobia". There are far too many coincid
by Mizza 6y ago
I strongly suspect this is the case, though talking about it too loudly quickly brings accusations of crankery and "sinophobia".
There are far too many coincidences and the damage has been too catastrophic for this not be investigated so that it isn't allowed to happen again.
Even if can be scientifically proven that the virus was not engineered, there is still plenty of evidence that China covered it up, silenced researchers and destroyed evidence which would have helped prepare the international community, all in the effort to save the reputation of the ruling party. The WHO played a role in this as well - they still have tweets up saying that human-to-human transmission is not possible, because they trust the Chinese scientists who told them so!
I have spent time in China and found the disregard for public safety, and more generally the disregard for the value of human life, to be absolutely shocking. (As an example, when I was there, they opened the bullet train from Shanghai to Beijing. In the opening weeks, there was a disastrous collision, knocking a whole train off of a bridge and killing everybody on board. It was, quite literally, covered up: they simply covered the destroyed train with dirt, not even removing the bodies. Train service resumed shortly after [0]).
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenzhou_train_collision https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenzhou_train_collision
- zrth 6y agoThe Wikipedia source you liked to contradicts what you wrote. You write: 'knocking a whole train off of a bridge and killing everybody on board' Wikipedia writes: 'The two trains derailed each other, and four cars fell off the viaduct. 40 people were killed, at least 192 were injured, 12 of which were severe injuries.'
- Mizza 6y agoOkay, it killed 40 people and injured 192. It doesn't change my point. "Killing lots of people on board."
- dippersauce 6y agoIt doesn’t have to change your point to severely reduce a reader’s confidence in it. A kind reader would say that difference in detail is hyperbole with the intent to incite an emotional response. A less kind reader would call making up details to better suit your narrative a form of lying. Yes they covered up the train incident, and yes it was despicable and horrible they did so. That aspect is not my problem, it’s the deliberate choice of words to foster not discussion, but outrage. It makes me question your entire narrative and intent before I’ve even had a chance to consider it.
- Mizza 6y agoPart of the reason that I didn't know is that while it was unfolding, the state told news reporters not to cover it in detail - the implication was the everybody had died, and that it was not to be discussed any further. I had not looked at the case since. It is fortunate that more people were not harmed, given how many people were on the train. Truth is hard to come by in China.
- kipchak 6y agoLooking at the reconstruction, it's somewhat surprising there weren't more fatalities considering the size of the drop. https://youtu.be/PoX4dTM9qvo?t=112 https://youtu.be/PoX4dTM9qvo?t=112