4 ms·

Could you elaborate on why it's sad? I'd like to know the answer. I always knew the bat-soup hypothesis was little more than guesswork, but I never got the news

Could you elaborate on why it's sad? I'd like to know the answer. I always knew the bat-soup hypothesis was little more than guesswork, but I never got the news of a more recent, more accepted hypothesis with solid evidence. Is there one? Maybe we're interpreting "official" differently.

freetime2 6y ago
I think the parent was saying it’s a reasonable thing to ask. What’s sad is that there is so much misinformation out there, and most of us are only familiar with the speculations of politicians and pundits with no scientific basis. And “official” seems to have lost a lot of its meaning in recent times.
georgeecollins 6y ago
I am not the original poster, but I think the problem is "official theory" implies that a theory from experts is one to be skeptical of. When I was a kid, lots of people had bumper stickers that said "Question Authority." That makes sense in a free society. But we have learned that in matters of public safety, everyone coming up with their own idea of what is safe and healthy is probably not as good of an idea as everyone doing what experts recommend, even knowing that the experts or the consensus is sometimes wrong or partly wrong. People ask me, if there is a vaccine for COVID-19 would you take it right away, or wait, or not take it? My answer is that I am going to do what my doctor recommends. I still question authority. But I have learned that there are limits to my knowledge and judgement that aren't always obvious to me.
- philwelch 6y ago
  The problem is when both real and self-appointed experts combine the following behaviors: 1. Going out of their way to promote the narrative that we should listen to the “experts”. 2. Lying to us for our own good—for instance, about masks early on. “Question authority” sounds a lot more appealing when the alternative is, “shut up and do as you’re told, dummy”.
philwelch 6y ago
The context of the NYT article seems to be that the bat-eating theory is now classified as “misinformation” by the NYT. This is confusing to me because that theory was widely discussed in the early months of the pandemic; implicitly classifying it as “misinformation” implies that it’s been discredited. That alone is news to me. The primary alternative to this theory, which I’ve definitely seen classified as “misinformation”, would be that the virus somehow escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. By “official theory” I meant the narrative that NYT and similar establishments are going with now. Infer from that what you will.

freetime2 6y ago

I think the parent was saying it’s a reasonable thing to ask. What’s sad is that there is so much misinformation out there, and most of us are only familiar with the speculations of politicians and pundits with no scientific basis. And “official” seems to have lost a lot of its meaning in recent times.

georgeecollins 6y ago

I am not the original poster, but I think the problem is "official theory" implies that a theory from experts is one to be skeptical of. When I was a kid, lots of people had bumper stickers that said "Question Authority." That makes sense in a free society. But we have learned that in matters of public safety, everyone coming up with their own idea of what is safe and healthy is probably not as good of an idea as everyone doing what experts recommend, even knowing that the experts or the consensus is sometimes wrong or partly wrong. People ask me, if there is a vaccine for COVID-19 would you take it right away, or wait, or not take it? My answer is that I am going to do what my doctor recommends. I still question authority. But I have learned that there are limits to my knowledge and judgement that aren't always obvious to me.

philwelch 6y ago
The problem is when both real and self-appointed experts combine the following behaviors: 1. Going out of their way to promote the narrative that we should listen to the “experts”. 2. Lying to us for our own good—for instance, about masks early on. “Question authority” sounds a lot more appealing when the alternative is, “shut up and do as you’re told, dummy”.

philwelch 6y ago

The context of the NYT article seems to be that the bat-eating theory is now classified as “misinformation” by the NYT. This is confusing to me because that theory was widely discussed in the early months of the pandemic; implicitly classifying it as “misinformation” implies that it’s been discredited. That alone is news to me. The primary alternative to this theory, which I’ve definitely seen classified as “misinformation”, would be that the virus somehow escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. By “official theory” I meant the narrative that NYT and similar establishments are going with now. Infer from that what you will.