4 ms·
You clearly didn't read the paper very closely. The authors spend multiple pages looking at possible pathways for the observed genetic features to have emerged
by jkhdigital 6y ago
You clearly didn't read the paper very closely. The authors spend multiple pages looking at possible pathways for the observed genetic features to have emerged naturally, and provide arguments against each of these scenarios. You may contest their arguments as weak or insufficient, but it is dishonest to characterize this as "disregard for alternative explanations".
> completely delusional crackpot pseudo-research
I find that the more adjectives and adverbs you need to make a statement, the more desperate your argument has become.
- SomeoneFromCA 6y agoThe thing is that I guess many people feel uncomfortable of seeing anti-Chinese rhetoric, which is considered right-wing agenda and such, yet they fail to realize that this is not about anti-China conspiracy, it is about issues of lab bio-safety on global scale. I mean, a good scientist should not be concerned about the political repercussions of finding the actual source, but only with what it really was. My personal belief is that you should should hide the truth, even for noble reasons, like it happened with N95 masks in March-April. No one gained anything from that.
- jkhdigital 6y agoYeah man, this entire comment thread is a trip. Mass downvoting of any comment that doesn't parrot the line that this is a politically-motivated conspiracy theory. I have faith that enough rational individuals can see through the chaff and decide for themselves, and hopefully the truth will eventually emerge.