5 ms·
This is garbage appeal to authority designed to make people embarrassed to hold an opposite view. I learned nothing from your comment and was simply told to tru
by mw888 4y ago
This is garbage appeal to authority designed to make people embarrassed to hold an opposite view. I learned nothing from your comment and was simply told to trust this source you hid any arguments behind. It’s not fostering discussion and it’s strawmanning those you disagree with.
- dekhn 4y agoThe fundamental premise here is that most people who are arguing about COVID origins simply don't understand enough about known factual biology to make informed arguments. The appeal to authority is important because, in the case where we're not particularly knowledgeable, we should use authorities as guidance on how to reason. I agree with what the parent said although I wouldn't say the evidence is "overwhelming". The important point is: China's government is so secretive we can't tell if they were intentionally covering something up, or just destroying all the evidence without any knowledge of what it said, to avoid people speculating from the documents.
- dariusj18 4y agoAnother important fact. China has everything to lose from cooperation and nothing to gain. An unfortunate reality in geopolitics is to give no control to other countries of your own fate. If they were to grant access and attempt to be completely forthcoming, how are they to know that some group wouldn't attempt to fabricate evidence or muddy the waters further.
- tootie 4y agoThere's also a bias in the other direction that people have a natural inclination to desire something to blame for misfortune. Covid being a natural disaster is so distasteful and unsettling because it means there's nothing we can do about it. It's the same rationale people use to try to blame the president for high gas prices or personal tragedy on god's will. It's comforting to have an explanation. China already has a bad reputation for safety and honesty that they are an easy target.
- peteradio 4y agoA layman can have explained the pieces at play and how they should work together, that allows the layman to point out logical inconsistencies while taking for granted they do not understand all the low level bits and pieces.
- dekhn 4y agoNot in medical biology. It doesn't work that way.
- peteradio 4y agoIn anything that is true, if you can't describe it to funders what you are hoping to accomplish in laymans terms then you will not get funded. Funders understand that particle physics searches for new particles no need to understand the nitty gritty, they can even ask interesting questions "can a new particle cause us any sort of worry that we might destroy ourselves?" etc. You apparently argue that we can't even string together high level concepts into causal sequences when we enter the realm of medical biology. How is that even a science?
- dekhn 4y agoI don't want to argue with you; you can choose to ignore what I said. but the funders who pay for molecular biology typically are scientists who understand, or wealthy people who hire people who understand, that medical biology, while scientific, is not like the highly quantitative physical sciences, nor is it easily appreciated by novices. Everything about causation in biology works differently than in other sciences.
- peteradio 4y agoUnfortunately I must resort to novice assertions to get any understanding. I'm not really sure I understand how causation in biology is fundamentally different. Apart from that you can certainly encapsulate biological events into some sort of locality and apply normal causative analysis to rule out specific scenarios, really that is what I am talking about here. I think we can agree that there are infectious molecules tumbling through space and time and work from there or is that not how molecular biology works?
- LeafItAlone 4y agoThis is garbage appeal to ignorance designed to make people embarrassed to hold an opposite view. I learned nothing from your comment and was simply told to ignore expert opinion. It’s not fostering discussion and it’s strawmanning those you disagree with.