4 ms·
> Now that the scientific consensus is settling and lab leak does indeed seem to be true That is absolutely not the scientific consensus > It had an enormous
by shlant 5y ago
> Now that the scientific consensus is settling and lab leak does indeed seem to be true
That is absolutely not the scientific consensus
> It had an enormous amount of evidence
I've been following this since the beginning. No it didn't
> This paper was publicly available in March 2020
did you read the paper? it does not conclude what you insinuate it does.
- greenwich26 5y agoI realize this is difficult and embarrassing for you, but you cannot remain in denial much longer. And your feeble attempt to be cavalier and aloof by omitting punctuation fools no one. It just makes you look like a haughty fool. The paper may "conclude" nothing but it provides strong evidence for the lab leak theory, if you understand it. As did many other things back then, some of which are alluded in the OP article. Indeed, the pure prior probability, based simply on the emergence of a novel coronavirus in the one city with the biggest coronavirus research center, is significant enough to make the hypothesis very credible.