5 ms·

His point still stands. Lack of evidence for one thing shouldn't be confused as evidence for something else. A man is home alone during a murder, and there is n

His point still stands. Lack of evidence for one thing shouldn't be confused as evidence for something else. A man is home alone during a murder, and there is no evidence for this, did he commit the murder?

dgfitz 5y ago
How do you know he was home?
dkersten 5y ago
No, but when the second hypothesis is the one that CCP has banned any investigation and news of, is not cooperating on the investigation and when there had been claims about the WIV safety and the WIV has openly stated that they were researching bat-borne SARS-like coronaviruses, then the lack of evidence for any other cause makes this one seem all the more likely. That's a lot of coincidences. If CCP are covering it up, then of course there will be a lack of direct evidence. The above doesn't prove it conclusively, but it does make it rather suspicious. Why would CCP be hampering the investigations if they have nothing to hide? It was over a year before they let the WHO have a look. Plenty of time to get rid of any actual evidence.
- austincheney 5y ago
  Using a conspiracy theory to qualify a clear example of a logical fallacy is pretty weak.
  - dkersten 5y ago
    Are you saying that the CCP did, in fact, let people talk about it? That they didn't cover it up for months before admitting that there was a pandemic, after it had already spread around the world? That they did, in fact, let the WHO investigate last year rather than a year later? That the WIV didn't research bat-borne SARS-like coronaviruses? There's also the reports about the leaked state department cables from 2018: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/14/state-department-cables-warned-safety-issues-wuhan-lab-studying-bat-coronaviruses/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/14/state-dep... But I couldn't actually figure out where to find them, so you can discount that one as "not enough evidence to verify". Those things aren't conspiracy theories. Yes, its not enough evidence to prove it either, but damn does it make them look shady.
    - austincheney 5y ago
      I am not providing any opinion as to the origins of the virus. You seem to believe otherwise due to poor objectivity. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory
      - dkersten 5y ago
        No, I'm saying that CCP's behaviour is suspect and the fact that WIV did, in fact, openly research the exact type of virus that caused the outbreak and that the first reports were from Wuhan is a pretty crazy coincidence. Couple those two things together and occam's razor would suggest this needs more attention.
unishark 5y ago
Suppose DNA was left at the scene and strong circumstantial evidence points to the man as the culprit, yet he refuses to let them compare his DNA to exonerate himself.

dgfitz 5y ago

How do you know he was home?

dkersten 5y ago

No, but when the second hypothesis is the one that CCP has banned any investigation and news of, is not cooperating on the investigation and when there had been claims about the WIV safety and the WIV has openly stated that they were researching bat-borne SARS-like coronaviruses, then the lack of evidence for any other cause makes this one seem all the more likely. That's a lot of coincidences. If CCP are covering it up, then of course there will be a lack of direct evidence. The above doesn't prove it conclusively, but it does make it rather suspicious. Why would CCP be hampering the investigations if they have nothing to hide? It was over a year before they let the WHO have a look. Plenty of time to get rid of any actual evidence.

austincheney 5y ago
Using a conspiracy theory to qualify a clear example of a logical fallacy is pretty weak.
- dkersten 5y ago
  Are you saying that the CCP did, in fact, let people talk about it? That they didn't cover it up for months before admitting that there was a pandemic, after it had already spread around the world? That they did, in fact, let the WHO investigate last year rather than a year later? That the WIV didn't research bat-borne SARS-like coronaviruses? There's also the reports about the leaked state department cables from 2018: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/14/state-department-cables-warned-safety-issues-wuhan-lab-studying-bat-coronaviruses/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/14/state-dep... But I couldn't actually figure out where to find them, so you can discount that one as "not enough evidence to verify". Those things aren't conspiracy theories. Yes, its not enough evidence to prove it either, but damn does it make them look shady.
  - austincheney 5y ago
    I am not providing any opinion as to the origins of the virus. You seem to believe otherwise due to poor objectivity. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory
    - dkersten 5y ago
      No, I'm saying that CCP's behaviour is suspect and the fact that WIV did, in fact, openly research the exact type of virus that caused the outbreak and that the first reports were from Wuhan is a pretty crazy coincidence. Couple those two things together and occam's razor would suggest this needs more attention.

unishark 5y ago

Suppose DNA was left at the scene and strong circumstantial evidence points to the man as the culprit, yet he refuses to let them compare his DNA to exonerate himself.