5 ms·

As pointed out on HN yesterday, it’s the Republicans in the Senate. It’s political. When will we learn? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33365683 https:/

As pointed out on HN yesterday, it’s the Republicans in the Senate. It’s political. When will we learn? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33365683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33365683

0xy 4y ago
Joe Biden ordered a report into this and the intelligence community concluded lab leak was a viable possibility, so I don't see how this is political. Both parties agree lab leak is a possibility (well, now they do, after Democrats called it racist).
roenxi 4y ago
Wholehearted agreement, but that leaves two interesting questions: 1) Is the report substantially correct? 2) Why do the Republicans think that this message will help them politically? Bonus points to anyone who gets through that minefield insulting the intelligence of their political opposition.
- melling 4y ago
  They covered all the bases so it’s impossible to be wrong. “More likely than not..” “More information is needed…” “As noted by the WHO Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens, the COVID- 19 Lancet Commission, and the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence 90-Day Assessment on the COVID-19 Origins, more information is needed to arrive at a more precise, if not a definitive, understanding of the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and how the COVID-19 pandemic began”
- jrootabega 4y ago
  I'll try to answer #2 in good faith - people have a limited amount of anger and hostility, and a limited memory. This could get people riled up against China, and against anyone who had been skeptical of a lab leak, two weeks before midterm elections.
peteradio 4y ago
Ad hominem fallacy.
origin_path 4y ago
You could also easily claim the inverse: the lack of Democrats shows that the refusal to contemplate a lab leak is political. Besides, since when is something being political a problem? You'd expect the party in opposition to investigate the wrongdoings of the government, that's part of their job.
- melling 4y ago
  It’s easy to offer innuendo. “The voting machines are rigged…” I like Bill Barr’s answer: “It’s all bullshit” Going from one BS story to the next, seeing what sticks then saying “see we were right” is growing old. How about providing evidence with each new theory. Now did China engineer the virus, or was it one that they were studying and it escaped? I’m having a hard time keeping up.
  - origin_path 4y ago
    You demand evidence, but the report is a review of the evidence, so they're doing exactly what you ask. Are you sure you're not the one who is offering innuendo here? You were insinuating and now outright stating that the entire theory is politically motivated bullshit, but that's not true. There have been people around the world, unaffiliated with US politics, digging up evidence for this for the last two years, always being shouted down by people who don't seem to want to face the possibility that "science", "expertise" and the state science bureaucracy were directly responsible for COVID. "Now did China engineer the virus, or was it one that they were studying and it escaped? I’m having a hard time keeping up." Why not read the report and let us know what it says on that question? Those two possibilities aren't mutually exclusive after all.
    - melling 4y ago
      The report is noise: “More likely than not..” “More information is needed…”
throwoutway 4y ago
Regardless of their political party, the potential that it was created from researchers/labs has been discussed here, and I recall the evidence slightly suggests that it could be true (if not coincidental). So completely dismissing a report just because it “might” be politically motivated or came from 1 party shows your bias. HN usually dismisses the content of a report, not the author’s affiliations. When will we learn to stop picking sides?
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Don't you need two examples in order to confirm political bias?
  - throwoutway 4y ago
    No. You could just say “I’m biased in favor of the Green Party” or “against the Pirate Party”
taolegal 4y ago
> It’s political. When will we learn? Since most of academia is liberal, aren't practically all the byproducts of that sphere inherently majorly biased? And no, the Stephen Colbert "reality has a liberal bias" line is a cheap and slimy holier-than-thou cop-out. If we use any of the standards that left-leaning people cleaved to for the entire pandemic and even before, i.e. how society is systemically (evil from) X or Y, how is that the most powerful institutions completely ignore their own flagrant systemic bias?
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  > Since most of academia is liberal, aren't practically all the byproducts of that sphere inherently majorly biased? This assumes that most people let their ideology drive their science. And also, what is the source of the claim that most of academia is in fact liberal? Any hypothesis why? Liberals ganging up and pushing out conservatives, or voluntary non-participation by conservatives, or what?
  - taolegal 4y ago
    Again I'm just saying that by the standards of most people at a college campus, student, faculty or otherwise, they love the idea of implicit, systemic bias, etc. > And also, what is the source of the claim that most of academia is in fact liberal? Primary source: my own experience. And any data I've come across. [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/02/conservative-faculty-appear-influence-their-students-more-than-liberal-professors-do/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/02/conservat...
readthenotes1 4y ago
Well, there's some article out there from pre pandemic where Fauci asays that the risk if a pandemic is acceptable in studying gain of function. It's not like He is a trustworthy advocate. Or would you trust the Chinese government? Everything is political when you're trying to figure out why this disease was encouraged (Torturing those who warn us of it is encouraging spread, no? Ignoring warnings from competent authorities is encouraging spread, no? Twitting out that there's no evidence of human to human spread while not verifying the claim is encouraging spread, no? I mean, it was such a shitshow by the 10s of thousands of public officials whose job is to safeguard us from such an outcome that there's no way CYA isn't going to be the dominant motivation from those officials and they're superiors)
- abracadaniel 4y ago
  Ironically, my distrust of China is why I don’t think it was a lab leak. If it were, they’d have every ancestor strain logged and could trivially infect a wild animal and present it as proof that it was a wild strain. If you think they’re willing to lie to avoid blame, the fact that they haven’t done this, suggests that they can’t.

As pointed out on HN yesterday, it’s the Republicans in the Senate. It’s political. When will we learn? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33365683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33365683

0xy 4y ago

Joe Biden ordered a report into this and the intelligence community concluded lab leak was a viable possibility, so I don't see how this is political. Both parties agree lab leak is a possibility (well, now they do, after Democrats called it racist).

roenxi 4y ago

Wholehearted agreement, but that leaves two interesting questions: 1) Is the report substantially correct? 2) Why do the Republicans think that this message will help them politically? Bonus points to anyone who gets through that minefield insulting the intelligence of their political opposition.

melling 4y ago
They covered all the bases so it’s impossible to be wrong. “More likely than not..” “More information is needed…” “As noted by the WHO Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens, the COVID- 19 Lancet Commission, and the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence 90-Day Assessment on the COVID-19 Origins, more information is needed to arrive at a more precise, if not a definitive, understanding of the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and how the COVID-19 pandemic began”
jrootabega 4y ago
I'll try to answer #2 in good faith - people have a limited amount of anger and hostility, and a limited memory. This could get people riled up against China, and against anyone who had been skeptical of a lab leak, two weeks before midterm elections.

peteradio 4y ago

Ad hominem fallacy.

origin_path 4y ago

You could also easily claim the inverse: the lack of Democrats shows that the refusal to contemplate a lab leak is political. Besides, since when is something being political a problem? You'd expect the party in opposition to investigate the wrongdoings of the government, that's part of their job.

melling 4y ago
It’s easy to offer innuendo. “The voting machines are rigged…” I like Bill Barr’s answer: “It’s all bullshit” Going from one BS story to the next, seeing what sticks then saying “see we were right” is growing old. How about providing evidence with each new theory. Now did China engineer the virus, or was it one that they were studying and it escaped? I’m having a hard time keeping up.
- origin_path 4y ago
  You demand evidence, but the report is a review of the evidence, so they're doing exactly what you ask. Are you sure you're not the one who is offering innuendo here? You were insinuating and now outright stating that the entire theory is politically motivated bullshit, but that's not true. There have been people around the world, unaffiliated with US politics, digging up evidence for this for the last two years, always being shouted down by people who don't seem to want to face the possibility that "science", "expertise" and the state science bureaucracy were directly responsible for COVID. "Now did China engineer the virus, or was it one that they were studying and it escaped? I’m having a hard time keeping up." Why not read the report and let us know what it says on that question? Those two possibilities aren't mutually exclusive after all.
  - melling 4y ago
    The report is noise: “More likely than not..” “More information is needed…”

throwoutway 4y ago

Regardless of their political party, the potential that it was created from researchers/labs has been discussed here, and I recall the evidence slightly suggests that it could be true (if not coincidental). So completely dismissing a report just because it “might” be politically motivated or came from 1 party shows your bias. HN usually dismisses the content of a report, not the author’s affiliations. When will we learn to stop picking sides?

paulryanrogers 4y ago
Don't you need two examples in order to confirm political bias?
- throwoutway 4y ago
  No. You could just say “I’m biased in favor of the Green Party” or “against the Pirate Party”

taolegal 4y ago

> It’s political. When will we learn? Since most of academia is liberal, aren't practically all the byproducts of that sphere inherently majorly biased? And no, the Stephen Colbert "reality has a liberal bias" line is a cheap and slimy holier-than-thou cop-out. If we use any of the standards that left-leaning people cleaved to for the entire pandemic and even before, i.e. how society is systemically (evil from) X or Y, how is that the most powerful institutions completely ignore their own flagrant systemic bias?

rootusrootus 4y ago
> Since most of academia is liberal, aren't practically all the byproducts of that sphere inherently majorly biased? This assumes that most people let their ideology drive their science. And also, what is the source of the claim that most of academia is in fact liberal? Any hypothesis why? Liberals ganging up and pushing out conservatives, or voluntary non-participation by conservatives, or what?
- taolegal 4y ago
  Again I'm just saying that by the standards of most people at a college campus, student, faculty or otherwise, they love the idea of implicit, systemic bias, etc. > And also, what is the source of the claim that most of academia is in fact liberal? Primary source: my own experience. And any data I've come across. [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/02/conservative-faculty-appear-influence-their-students-more-than-liberal-professors-do/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/02/conservat...

readthenotes1 4y ago

Well, there's some article out there from pre pandemic where Fauci asays that the risk if a pandemic is acceptable in studying gain of function. It's not like He is a trustworthy advocate. Or would you trust the Chinese government? Everything is political when you're trying to figure out why this disease was encouraged (Torturing those who warn us of it is encouraging spread, no? Ignoring warnings from competent authorities is encouraging spread, no? Twitting out that there's no evidence of human to human spread while not verifying the claim is encouraging spread, no? I mean, it was such a shitshow by the 10s of thousands of public officials whose job is to safeguard us from such an outcome that there's no way CYA isn't going to be the dominant motivation from those officials and they're superiors)

abracadaniel 4y ago
Ironically, my distrust of China is why I don’t think it was a lab leak. If it were, they’d have every ancestor strain logged and could trivially infect a wild animal and present it as proof that it was a wild strain. If you think they’re willing to lie to avoid blame, the fact that they haven’t done this, suggests that they can’t.