4 ms·

Indeed, "government ain't people". If that lab full of globalized woke scientists really knew that this was a specimin of theirs you really don't think someone

Indeed, "government ain't people". If that lab full of globalized woke scientists really knew that this was a specimin of theirs you really don't think someone would have smuggled out a copy of a document by now? You really don't think that existing intelligence agencies who have eyes on the facility wouldn't have leaked what they know via the politicians they report to? Your whole theory relies on the idea of China being a monolithic evil entity able to contain reporting of what would be the most important work of journalism in the last half century. So demanding that it must be true because China is a monolithic evil entity seems a bit circular. Evidence. Go get some evidence. Then put the tinfoil on your head.

Quarrelsome 5y ago
I'm happy to hold every possible outcome as being open. You're the one wanting to close doors, you're the one trying to realise an unknown into your own personal biases. Due to our lack of evidence everything remains open and to avoid people betting on the coinky-doink of their lab we need to obtain evidence. Evidence that as of yet isn't there, which is why people still look at the lab.
- newacct583 5y ago
  > I'm happy to hold every possible outcome as being open And once more: this is the hallmark of a conspiracy nut. Serious evaluation of evidence and estimates of probabilities isn't "closing doors", it's merely applying reason and logic. I'm not saying that improbable or unfounded things are impossible. I'm saying that your demand that we treat "Questions!" about them as "Important!" in the absence of likelihood or evidence is bad logic, and will lead you (and, likely, has led you) to bad decisions.
  - Quarrelsome 5y ago
    I just don't think its an entirely zero chance that the virus has any relation to the nearby lab that is researching something relatively close to what the virus is. > And once more: this is the hallmark of a conspiracy nut. We are done here mate, you didn't need to dress me up as your shower argument, that's obnoxious.

Quarrelsome 5y ago

I'm happy to hold every possible outcome as being open. You're the one wanting to close doors, you're the one trying to realise an unknown into your own personal biases. Due to our lack of evidence everything remains open and to avoid people betting on the coinky-doink of their lab we need to obtain evidence. Evidence that as of yet isn't there, which is why people still look at the lab.

newacct583 5y ago
> I'm happy to hold every possible outcome as being open And once more: this is the hallmark of a conspiracy nut. Serious evaluation of evidence and estimates of probabilities isn't "closing doors", it's merely applying reason and logic. I'm not saying that improbable or unfounded things are impossible. I'm saying that your demand that we treat "Questions!" about them as "Important!" in the absence of likelihood or evidence is bad logic, and will lead you (and, likely, has led you) to bad decisions.
- Quarrelsome 5y ago
  I just don't think its an entirely zero chance that the virus has any relation to the nearby lab that is researching something relatively close to what the virus is. > And once more: this is the hallmark of a conspiracy nut. We are done here mate, you didn't need to dress me up as your shower argument, that's obnoxious.