17 ms·
The scientist in question believes there is a 50% chance of it being a lab leak, according to the article text (down a bit from their initial estimate). The sci
by mcflibbles 5y ago
The scientist in question believes there is a 50% chance of it being a lab leak, according to the article text (down a bit from their initial estimate). The scientists didn't believe focusing on a debate over this possibility was worthwhile, knowing many would focus on this possibility instead of discussing actual action. Just as predicted, Trump, Fox, and the UK equivalent, the Telegraph, duly focus on the possibility of a lab leak and consistently argue against action. They say over and over again it will soon be over, it won't really do much harm, etc. Trump, Fox and the Telegraph are consistently proved wrong over and over again. Hacker news libertarian crypto idiots lap it up, and literally use the word "sheeple" to discuss everyone who's not part of their bizarre cult.
- klabb3 5y agoThe problem with lying isn't that your lie won't work, it will work to some extent. Heck it can even do good! I'm sure in this case it did turn down the temperature momentarily, which may or may not have been good, depending on who you ask. But no, the real problem is that lying spends trust very quickly, trust that you need later, for instance when there is a vaccine on the horizon. Most humans have a baked in BS detector, that stops taking repeat liars seriously. This is a good thing.