3 ms·

Absolutely sounds plausible, but it seems odd to leave out another competing reasonable theory if the intent is to survey the various theories. Certainly they k

• jjulius 5y ago
  >Absolutely sounds plausible, but it seems odd to leave out another competing reasonable theory if the intent is to survey the various theories. To be fair, even the article suggests that "whichever idea a researcher favours 'often comes down to gut feeling rather than any sort of principled argument'", that "they are all fair game" and "everyone has their favourite hypothesis." So there are a lot of reasonable theories out there; at what point do they stop adding other theories to the article without upsetting someone that certain theories were ommitted? >Certainly they know stuff I don’t, though. Maybe that's why they had the "gall" to not mention it?
  • natch 5y ago
    > Maybe that's why they had the "gall" to not mention it? Maybe. Could be other reasons as well, like circling the wagons to protect their preferred work approaches and their colleagues. It’s not like this isn’t a known phenomenon in virology.