4 ms·

I personally really need to know the purpose of life, the origin of the Universe and so on, but I don't get to. The origin of COVID-19 will never be known for

by slver 6y ago

I personally really need to know the purpose of life, the origin of the Universe and so on, but I don't get to. The origin of COVID-19 will never be known for certain for logistical, factual, and most of all political/diplomatic reasons. What I know for sure though is the media will chew that topic and spin soft-conspiracies around it for years to come. It's a TV pundit dream to have a topic like this. No one knows for sure, which means their opinions can boldly go into speculation and science-fiction and nobody could claim otherwise for sure.

BoorishBears 6y ago
Yeah I've said before, there is not falsifiability to the claim a lab released this virus, so all of these conversations come across as insincere. As a thought experiment, imagine that outbreak did start from a lab accident. Say they collected a sample originated from nature, then had an a accident with it. - Now how do you prove that this didn't happen? The virus will have no indication of being man-made (it's not) so you get to wave off scientists who are telling you it's not man-made. The lab will never admit that there was an accident because of how many layers of pressure there are to never admit this (not just from a high level, but from individuals who don't want to be "responsible" for a global pandemic). So you get to wave off their claims of innocence too. - You're essentially saying you don't accept proof this didn't happen, but you want proof it did... without falsifiability that "proof" will never be anything scientifically sound. It's like if a child says you have cooties (the imaginary ones, not a louse). You can't prove them wrong because cooties don't exist and the definition is in their hands (you: I can check with a microscope; child: They're completely invisible and too small for that). No logic will ever counter their claim, the only responses are emotional. Accepting that you do have them and move on, or stoically choosing not to engage.
- SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
  Do we call this Russel's Lab Accident?

by slver 6y ago

BoorishBears 6y ago

Yeah I've said before, there is not falsifiability to the claim a lab released this virus, so all of these conversations come across as insincere. As a thought experiment, imagine that outbreak did start from a lab accident. Say they collected a sample originated from nature, then had an a accident with it. - Now how do you prove that this didn't happen? The virus will have no indication of being man-made (it's not) so you get to wave off scientists who are telling you it's not man-made. The lab will never admit that there was an accident because of how many layers of pressure there are to never admit this (not just from a high level, but from individuals who don't want to be "responsible" for a global pandemic). So you get to wave off their claims of innocence too. - You're essentially saying you don't accept proof this didn't happen, but you want proof it did... without falsifiability that "proof" will never be anything scientifically sound. It's like if a child says you have cooties (the imaginary ones, not a louse). You can't prove them wrong because cooties don't exist and the definition is in their hands (you: I can check with a microscope; child: They're completely invisible and too small for that). No logic will ever counter their claim, the only responses are emotional. Accepting that you do have them and move on, or stoically choosing not to engage.

SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
Do we call this Russel's Lab Accident?