5 ms·

If you have no evidence, "no clue" is the correct conclusion.

• failwhaleshark 5y ago
  Yep, and it doesn't matter now. Closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.
  • jimbokun 5y ago
    It matters a lot for determining what kind of controls we need to place on virology research going forward.
    • failwhaleshark 5y ago
      Nope, not one bit. All pathogen research and engineering should be treated as a proliferation issue similar to nuclear weapons with international oversight. It's actually much, much worse because of independent biohacking and not needing rare enriched materials, which isn't a valid reason (chicken-little excuse) to not regulate it strongly globally.
• jollybean 5y ago
  No, if we have some evidence, it can inform outcomes and we can act. This isn't a Judicial Trial, it's an investigation and pragmatic response. If we're 85% sure it came from the lab, that's materially actionable. But there's a 100% that China is obfuscating the situation on purpose and at very minimum they must be removed from the WHO. It's unthinkable that they could be a part of an organization and act directly against it at the same time. They'll do as they please (in this and other things), without consequence, because there are simply not cost to their actions. The issue is not Science, it's China. Given the existential consequences of COVID, the response to their intransigence should be existential, far beyond being removed from the WHO.
• tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
  Exactly. What I'm criticizing is that they said "no clue except for the lab leak theory, that one definitely can't be it"