4 ms·

The scientific orthodoxy rejected the Covid-19 “lab leak conspiracy theory” as crazy, based on no evidence whatsoever. Trump supported it, therefore it must be

The scientific orthodoxy rejected the Covid-19 “lab leak conspiracy theory” as crazy, based on no evidence whatsoever. Trump supported it, therefore it must be wrong. It’s not looking so crazy anymore.

epgui 5y ago
Oftentimes the best we can do is make "educated guesses". Most domain experts, myself included, think it less likely that SARS-CoV-2 originated in a lab. This is not a unanimous position, and most scientists probably don't have a "dogmatic" view of this. Rather, we seek first to find and understand the consensus position, and then to test it. That you or anyone else might disagree, or might not be able to imagine what type of mental model would lead to such an "educated guess", neither reverses the burden of the proof, nor eliminates the presumption of good faith, nor Occam's razor. Taking the position that it came from a lab requires more assumptions and more unsubstantiated beliefs than not taking this position. It's just like Russel's teapot.
- Gustomaximus 5y ago
  > Taking the position that it came from a lab requires more assumptions and more unsubstantiated beliefs than not taking this position. Does it? One view is it came from a lab. The other common view is it came from a wet market. There seems to be evidence the lab was studying covid. While the wet market was seafood focused and I'm yet to see anything showing wildlife meat, let alone bats, while respecting media not showing this doesn't mean they weren't there. Both are possible but it seems to me more likely a lab studying COVID (confirmed or likely?) plus has a history of multiple virus escapes has as good likelyhood and assumptions as an unproven a bat meat section at a seafood market from a bat that would have been likely had to have been transported over 1500km to reach the market if taken from the wild. Personally, I dont think we will ever know the truth and don't claim any answer is correct, but there seems less of a leap of faith on the lab than the wet market to me.
- Mindless2112 5y ago
  "lab leak" does not necessarily imply "originated in a lab". The lab can bring in a virus from the wild to study and then have a leak.
  - epgui 5y ago
    That's exactly what I meant in this specific context: I was not talking about a synthetic origin.
- mensetmanusman 5y ago
  Roll a dice with as many sides as there are possible human/bat interactions in the world. How many land within stones throw of a lab that collects these from a multi-thousand mile radius. Occam’s razor seems to point…

epgui 5y ago

Oftentimes the best we can do is make "educated guesses". Most domain experts, myself included, think it less likely that SARS-CoV-2 originated in a lab. This is not a unanimous position, and most scientists probably don't have a "dogmatic" view of this. Rather, we seek first to find and understand the consensus position, and then to test it. That you or anyone else might disagree, or might not be able to imagine what type of mental model would lead to such an "educated guess", neither reverses the burden of the proof, nor eliminates the presumption of good faith, nor Occam's razor. Taking the position that it came from a lab requires more assumptions and more unsubstantiated beliefs than not taking this position. It's just like Russel's teapot.

Gustomaximus 5y ago
> Taking the position that it came from a lab requires more assumptions and more unsubstantiated beliefs than not taking this position. Does it? One view is it came from a lab. The other common view is it came from a wet market. There seems to be evidence the lab was studying covid. While the wet market was seafood focused and I'm yet to see anything showing wildlife meat, let alone bats, while respecting media not showing this doesn't mean they weren't there. Both are possible but it seems to me more likely a lab studying COVID (confirmed or likely?) plus has a history of multiple virus escapes has as good likelyhood and assumptions as an unproven a bat meat section at a seafood market from a bat that would have been likely had to have been transported over 1500km to reach the market if taken from the wild. Personally, I dont think we will ever know the truth and don't claim any answer is correct, but there seems less of a leap of faith on the lab than the wet market to me.
Mindless2112 5y ago
"lab leak" does not necessarily imply "originated in a lab". The lab can bring in a virus from the wild to study and then have a leak.
- epgui 5y ago
  That's exactly what I meant in this specific context: I was not talking about a synthetic origin.
mensetmanusman 5y ago
Roll a dice with as many sides as there are possible human/bat interactions in the world. How many land within stones throw of a lab that collects these from a multi-thousand mile radius. Occam’s razor seems to point…