3 ms·

I'm not here to support conspiracy theories but you're falling into the same trap: you're trying to prove a negative. In this cause you're arguing it is "not ve

I'm not here to support conspiracy theories but you're falling into the same trap: you're trying to prove a negative. In this cause you're arguing it is "not very lethal" and thus not the result of a military weapon experiment. Guess what? The military and humanity at large make things that suck all the time. Just because something is ineffective doesn't prohibit it from being a military weapon. If that was the case we'd never have boondoggles where military spending runs amok and never produces anything useful.

acdha 4y ago
> you're trying to prove a negative. In this cause you're arguing it is "not very lethal". Not quite: I’m saying that it wasn’t new, notably more virulent or resistant to treatment, or different from earlier samples. I’d really recommend reading the full WaPo article and especially some of the links as they help understand how there just isn’t any reason to believe this claim. In particular, notice how this sounds: > If you draw a circle around early Lyme Disease cases, it just happens to be in the middle of that circle. Every part of that is wrong: those weren’t the earliest cases (unless Wisconsin moved while I wasn’t looking) and the distribution is all over. Once you remove the known untrue portions, we’re left with the far less exciting version: > A cluster of cases was detected in an area similar to where other clusters were detected. The cases were not unusual in impact or spread, nor especially close to a base which had switched roles decades before. This is a classic conspiracy theory: there’s no evidence but we’re asked to believe that something with minimal value was attempted, failed completely at its goals but not before leaking, but then was hushed up perfectly for decades by the same group which is supremely good at hiding their traces … except that nobody thought about the possibility civilian medical reports from an escaped bioweapon? There are an infinite number of similar probability scenarios you could dream up but it’s not scientific.

acdha 4y ago

> you're trying to prove a negative. In this cause you're arguing it is "not very lethal". Not quite: I’m saying that it wasn’t new, notably more virulent or resistant to treatment, or different from earlier samples. I’d really recommend reading the full WaPo article and especially some of the links as they help understand how there just isn’t any reason to believe this claim. In particular, notice how this sounds: > If you draw a circle around early Lyme Disease cases, it just happens to be in the middle of that circle. Every part of that is wrong: those weren’t the earliest cases (unless Wisconsin moved while I wasn’t looking) and the distribution is all over. Once you remove the known untrue portions, we’re left with the far less exciting version: > A cluster of cases was detected in an area similar to where other clusters were detected. The cases were not unusual in impact or spread, nor especially close to a base which had switched roles decades before. This is a classic conspiracy theory: there’s no evidence but we’re asked to believe that something with minimal value was attempted, failed completely at its goals but not before leaking, but then was hushed up perfectly for decades by the same group which is supremely good at hiding their traces … except that nobody thought about the possibility civilian medical reports from an escaped bioweapon? There are an infinite number of similar probability scenarios you could dream up but it’s not scientific.