12 ms·

Did someone come up with a good explanation of why Peter Daszak and various affiliates of EcoHealth alliance were involved in nearly all the media "coverage" (d

Did someone come up with a good explanation of why Peter Daszak and various affiliates of EcoHealth alliance were involved in nearly all the media "coverage" (dismissals) of the lab leak hypothesis when it first popped up? And why The Lancet published the initial letter dismissing lab leak, clearly coordinated by EcoHealth alliance? And why Daszak also was on the WHO investigation team? And why to this day no one apologized, let alone got fired for this? If you don't admit these (now-obvious) facts, you are not discussing the lab leak hypothesis in good faith.

albertop 4y ago
Also it is good to keep in mind the following [0] from Matt Ridley. 0- https://twitter.com/mattwridley/status/1565242836710309891 https://twitter.com/mattwridley/status/1565242836710309891
kurupt213 4y ago
Fauci was all over this. This is his program.
BeetleB 4y ago
> Did someone come up with a good explanation of why Peter Daszak and various affiliates of EcoHealth alliance were involved in nearly all the media "coverage" (dismissals) of the lab leak hypothesis when it first popped up? No idea. > And why The Lancet published the initial letter dismissing lab leak, clearly coordinated by EcoHealth alliance? No idea. > And why Daszak also was on the WHO investigation team? No idea. > And why to this day no one apologized, let alone got fired for this? No idea. I am not better informed as a result of your comment. Asking questions is not a proper way to educate or inform people. That I don't have answers to your questions doesn't lead to any conclusion, nor does it make me doubt anything. As a general rule: If you want to know if X is true, look for "positive" evidence. Not absence of evidence. Asking questions almost always is merely saying "Hey, I don't have all the answers" - not "Hey, there's no good answer so the answer must be Y".
jokowueu 4y ago
This explains the entire issue well https://youtu.be/8cBNyyAGETU https://youtu.be/8cBNyyAGETU
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
initplus 4y ago
This is only evidence of Daszak/EcoHealth being unethical. I doubt he has access to a secret "smoking gun" conclusively proving lab leak vs zoonotic. If there is a chance you are responsible, why not cover it up and muddy the waters, just in case?
zamadatix 4y ago
I'm not saying I disagree with any of these, to be honest I don't know enough to say one way or the other, but there is some irony in posing an argument for good faith discussion by posting a list of questions you've already determined only have one true answer.
- 0x445442 4y ago
  Your speculation of the poster’s positions on said questions is not in good faith either. Even if your assumptions were correct, they’re entirely irrelevant as the questions stand on their own.
  - zamadatix 4y ago
    It's not their ultimate positions on the questions I'm referring to rather the order of what's question, fact, and required to be taken to be discussion in good faith.
  - vidro3 4y ago
    these questions are basically copy pasta amongst the lab-leak crowd. that doesn't mean they aren't valid but I think it make sense to question the motivation in this instance.
    - 0x445442 4y ago
      > but I think it make sense to question the motivation in this instance. By this logic it's equally valid to question the motivation of someone hand waving the questions away as "copy pasta" rather than just answering them. The Socratic method is a perfectly valid way to further an argument.
    - gfodor 4y ago
      What’s the best way to raise these facts - are you supposed to just list them out since writing them in the form of a question is misleading or something?
      - 4y ago

albertop 4y ago

Also it is good to keep in mind the following [0] from Matt Ridley. 0- https://twitter.com/mattwridley/status/1565242836710309891 https://twitter.com/mattwridley/status/1565242836710309891

kurupt213 4y ago

Fauci was all over this. This is his program.

BeetleB 4y ago

> Did someone come up with a good explanation of why Peter Daszak and various affiliates of EcoHealth alliance were involved in nearly all the media "coverage" (dismissals) of the lab leak hypothesis when it first popped up? No idea. > And why The Lancet published the initial letter dismissing lab leak, clearly coordinated by EcoHealth alliance? No idea. > And why Daszak also was on the WHO investigation team? No idea. > And why to this day no one apologized, let alone got fired for this? No idea. I am not better informed as a result of your comment. Asking questions is not a proper way to educate or inform people. That I don't have answers to your questions doesn't lead to any conclusion, nor does it make me doubt anything. As a general rule: If you want to know if X is true, look for "positive" evidence. Not absence of evidence. Asking questions almost always is merely saying "Hey, I don't have all the answers" - not "Hey, there's no good answer so the answer must be Y".

jokowueu 4y ago

This explains the entire issue well https://youtu.be/8cBNyyAGETU https://youtu.be/8cBNyyAGETU

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

initplus 4y ago

This is only evidence of Daszak/EcoHealth being unethical. I doubt he has access to a secret "smoking gun" conclusively proving lab leak vs zoonotic. If there is a chance you are responsible, why not cover it up and muddy the waters, just in case?

zamadatix 4y ago

I'm not saying I disagree with any of these, to be honest I don't know enough to say one way or the other, but there is some irony in posing an argument for good faith discussion by posting a list of questions you've already determined only have one true answer.

0x445442 4y ago
Your speculation of the poster’s positions on said questions is not in good faith either. Even if your assumptions were correct, they’re entirely irrelevant as the questions stand on their own.
- zamadatix 4y ago
  It's not their ultimate positions on the questions I'm referring to rather the order of what's question, fact, and required to be taken to be discussion in good faith.
- vidro3 4y ago
  these questions are basically copy pasta amongst the lab-leak crowd. that doesn't mean they aren't valid but I think it make sense to question the motivation in this instance.
  - 0x445442 4y ago
    > but I think it make sense to question the motivation in this instance. By this logic it's equally valid to question the motivation of someone hand waving the questions away as "copy pasta" rather than just answering them. The Socratic method is a perfectly valid way to further an argument.
  - gfodor 4y ago
    What’s the best way to raise these facts - are you supposed to just list them out since writing them in the form of a question is misleading or something?
    - 4y ago