7 ms·
Other than the second tweet in the thread (which source is questionable, see edit below), no sources are provided. Does anyone have a list of sources for the cl
by samwillis 4y ago
Other than the second tweet in the thread (which source is questionable, see edit below), no sources are provided. Does anyone have a list of sources for the claims in the remaining eight tweets?
It's a compelling list of "facts" but without sources and an understanding of the science it's difficult to ascertain whether this is a genuinely strong argument by a "blue check mark" academic.
Edit:
This is the Nature editors note on the only sources provided:
"Editors’ note, March 2020 We are aware that this story is being used as the basis for unverified theories that the novel coronavirus causing COVID-19 was engineered. There is no evidence that this is true; scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus."
- blast 4y agoEbright has since posted sources: https://twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/1567569831586861056 https://twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/1567569831586861056.
- johndfsgdgdfg 4y ago
- mensetmanusman 4y ago‘Lab-origin’ and ‘engineered’ are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
- masklinn 4y agoDid you mean “inclusive”? I’d assume the average covid truther would think of lab-origin and engineered as causal if not identical.
- kazinator 4y agoA lab can accidentally leak a virus that was gathered from the wild, such that all of that virus' attributes, like how infectious it is and all that, are of natural origin.
- zeven7 4y agoI find a note added by Nature's editors in March 2020 to be the least trustworthy part.
- hef19898 4y agoWhy?
- WithinReason 4y agoYou mean it makes the lab leak hypothesis less trustworthy through appeal to authority, or it makes Nature less trustworthy because they made the comment instead of letting the reader make up their own minds based on the paper only?
- PraetorianGourd 4y agoI think it is most likely because the note is almost 3 years old. A lot has changed in our understanding of the virus. But much like most opinions regarding COVID, new data can’t seem to dislodge our first takes.
- WithinReason 4y ago>There is no evidence that this is true; scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus. Well, 2 things: 1. An animal could be the source of the virus which could be leaked from a lab. Even with the lab leak hypothesis an animal is part of the chain, just not the last step. 2. There is also no evidence that the epidemic had no lab involvement. COVID was never found in any animal from the Huanan market.
- igouy 4y ago> … no evidence that the epidemic had no lab involvement… "So you simply cannot prove general claims that are negative claims -- one cannot prove that ghosts do not exist; one cannot prove that leprechauns too do not exist. One simply cannot prove a negative and general claim." https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/phil_of_religion_text/CHAPTER_5_ARGUMENTS_EXPERIENCE/Burden-of-Proof.htm#:~:text=You%20can%20prove%20a%20specific,top%20drawer%20of%20the%20desk https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/phil_of_re.... What would you accept as evidence of "no lab involvement"?
- WithinReason 4y ago> What would you accept as evidence of "no lab involvement"? Read the last sentence.
- nradov 4y agoI recommend reading the Office of the Director of National Intelligence unclassified summary of the assessment on COVID-19 origins. It's over a year old but the analysis hasn't changed much and they do explain how they reached their conclusions. Some sort of lab origin is possible but unproven (and I doubt we'll ever know for sure). https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2021/item/2236-unclassified-summary-of-assessment-on-covid-19-origins https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/...
- tehjoker 4y agoIf you ever take something intelligence says seriously that isn't independently verifiable, you're getting your crank yanked. They are professional liars and manipulators.