3 ms·

Has the Covid lab leak been proven true? As for the Hunter Biden laptop story, what's the issue? I just want to know specifically.

_-david-_ 4y ago
Lab leak hasn't been proven true, but hasn't been proven false. People were told they were spreading misinformation and xenophobia / racism if they talked about it. Some portions of Hunter Biden laptop have been proven true (the emails on the laptop are legit) but people were banned for spreading hacked content (deapite it not being hacked) and spreading Russian disinformation.
- jandrese 4y ago
  - sintaxi 4y ago
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      > Pretty sure the theory is that COVID was used to change the course of the 2020 election I mean, sure, that seems to have been attempted, but by the US GOP: https://www.businessinsider.com/kushner-covid-19-plan-maybe-axed-for-political-reasons-report-2020-7 https://www.businessinsider.com/kushner-covid-19-plan-maybe-...
- gaganyaan 4y ago
  What exactly do you mean by emails? I ask, because AFAIK there's exactly one email that's been validated: https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim/blob/main/Meeting%20for%20coffee.eml https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim/blob/main/M... Have all of the emails on the laptop been verified, or is it still just that one?
  - _-david-_ 4y ago
    The NYT article seemed to indicate emails along with a cache of files were authenticated. I am not sure if only one was actually authenticated and people are assuming all of them were or not.
- technothrasher 4y ago
  > Lab leak hasn't been proven true, but hasn't been proven false. That’s a lazy argument from ignorance, and can be dismissed out of hand by Hitchens’s Razor. (See “philosophical burden of proof”)
  - _-david-_ 4y ago
    The problem is the theory was just discounted right off the bat without any real reason other than conservatives said it. That is not an intellectually good argument. We should not be banning plausible theories unless we have actual evidence.
    - kenjackson 4y ago
      Was the theory discounted for no reason? I thought it was discounted because the evidence was weak at the time. Especially in comparison to how vigorously it was being pushed by politicos in power. For example, if someone killed a bunch of people and the head of the FBI said, "A black guy is doing it!" with no real evidence then I think banning it might be more justified. Now it may turn out that a black guy is the one doing the killing, but that doesn't make the pronouncements of the FBI head justified (although I'm sure the FBI head would feel justified).
      - _-david-_ 4y ago
        Who cares if the evidence is / was weak? They were censored for misinformation not because the evidence is weak. By that logic your post should be censored since your evidence that it was censored for being weak is in fact weak evidence. We are not talking about the head of the FBI. If the head of the CDC said something like this you may be have a better comparison. Even if the CDC said something like this it wouldn't impact health so it probably shouldn't even count as harmful content.
        alphabettsy 4y ago
        Who was censored regarding the lab leak theory?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

_-david-_ 4y ago

Lab leak hasn't been proven true, but hasn't been proven false. People were told they were spreading misinformation and xenophobia / racism if they talked about it. Some portions of Hunter Biden laptop have been proven true (the emails on the laptop are legit) but people were banned for spreading hacked content (deapite it not being hacked) and spreading Russian disinformation.

jandrese 4y ago
- sintaxi 4y ago
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Pretty sure the theory is that COVID was used to change the course of the 2020 election I mean, sure, that seems to have been attempted, but by the US GOP: https://www.businessinsider.com/kushner-covid-19-plan-maybe-axed-for-political-reasons-report-2020-7 https://www.businessinsider.com/kushner-covid-19-plan-maybe-...
gaganyaan 4y ago
What exactly do you mean by emails? I ask, because AFAIK there's exactly one email that's been validated: https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim/blob/main/Meeting%20for%20coffee.eml https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim/blob/main/M... Have all of the emails on the laptop been verified, or is it still just that one?
- _-david-_ 4y ago
  The NYT article seemed to indicate emails along with a cache of files were authenticated. I am not sure if only one was actually authenticated and people are assuming all of them were or not.
technothrasher 4y ago
> Lab leak hasn't been proven true, but hasn't been proven false. That’s a lazy argument from ignorance, and can be dismissed out of hand by Hitchens’s Razor. (See “philosophical burden of proof”)
- _-david-_ 4y ago
  The problem is the theory was just discounted right off the bat without any real reason other than conservatives said it. That is not an intellectually good argument. We should not be banning plausible theories unless we have actual evidence.
  - kenjackson 4y ago
    Was the theory discounted for no reason? I thought it was discounted because the evidence was weak at the time. Especially in comparison to how vigorously it was being pushed by politicos in power. For example, if someone killed a bunch of people and the head of the FBI said, "A black guy is doing it!" with no real evidence then I think banning it might be more justified. Now it may turn out that a black guy is the one doing the killing, but that doesn't make the pronouncements of the FBI head justified (although I'm sure the FBI head would feel justified).
    - _-david-_ 4y ago
      Who cares if the evidence is / was weak? They were censored for misinformation not because the evidence is weak. By that logic your post should be censored since your evidence that it was censored for being weak is in fact weak evidence. We are not talking about the head of the FBI. If the head of the CDC said something like this you may be have a better comparison. Even if the CDC said something like this it wouldn't impact health so it probably shouldn't even count as harmful content.
      - alphabettsy 4y ago
        Who was censored regarding the lab leak theory?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]