4 ms·

Candidly, I think that this comment is actually the one rewriting history. There absolutely, 100% was complete denial, all originating on the political left, th

by baumy 3y ago

Candidly, I think that this comment is actually the one rewriting history. There absolutely, 100% was complete denial, all originating on the political left, that a leak from a lab in China was a possibility. No confusion about intentional vs accidental - total denial of the possibility in any way shape or form. Suggesting it was possible, much less plausible or even likely, was labeled racist. Attempts were made (with limited success) to suppress discussion about it, by removing the topic from social media feed recommendations and what not. Someone else can look up sources for all of this if they want, but I don't feel the need to. It was just a couple years ago, and I remember it perfectly. I presume you just spend your time consuming healthier discourse than I do, which probably means you make some better choices in your free time than I do, so I'm not accusing you personally of this - but the walking back of all the effort made to deny and suppress discussion about this issue and pretend it never happened feels a lot like gaslighting.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
SoftTalker 3y ago
Yeah that's what I remember too. Pelosi made a big statement about going to eat in Chinatown in response, and in general it was quickly an issue that the left pounced on so they could say Trump was an idiot and a racist.
- metamet 3y ago
  > it was quickly an issue that the left pounced on so they could say Trump was an idiot and a racist. Trump did that to himself with his response by trying to stir xenophobic hate by calling it "The China Virus".
metamet 3y ago
Odd, I remember it perfectly well, too. > There absolutely, 100% was complete denial, all originating on the political left, that a leak from a lab in China was a possibility. Well, that's just patently wrong. There was not "complete denial" by any means, as the majority of scientists were open to any and all possibility of origin. As such, the left--who was following those scientists--maintained the same position. Saying that "there is no evidence that it was leaked" is not blanket denial. It is just that--there is no evidence, thus the possibility remains open but shouldn't be entertained as decisive. Yet many politicians on the right, despite there being no evidence, dug their feet into the ground, convinced it was. Not sure how you got the impression that not having evidence of something equates to "complete denial", but it's incorrect. > Suggesting it was possible, much less plausible or even likely, was labeled racist. We knew the virus originated in the Wuhan region of China. Don't pretend that suppression occurred because of simple discussion of the topic--it was predominantly due to politicians raging xenophobic wars by trying to rename it "The China Virus".
try_the_bass 3y ago
My recollection is closer to GP's than to yours, fwiw. Not exactly the same, but I do recall that a lot of the pushback from the left was because every publication on the right was busy hitching the "it originated as a lab-modified virus" motte to the "it was intentionally released/it was a bioweapon" bailey.
k_roy 3y ago
> There absolutely, 100% was complete denial, all originating on the political left, that a leak from a lab in China was a possibility. No confusion about intentional vs accidental - total denial of the possibility in any way shape or form. Suggesting it was possible, much less plausible or even likely, was labeled racist. You are ignoring a few simple facts here. 1. The left doesn't congregate and worship at the cult of personality like the right does. 2. The first cases were in Wuhan. The right/Trumpets immediately blamed China. And this blame had exactly zero to do with any facts at the time. And in blaming China, hate crimes against all Asians increased dramatically, not even just Chinese. 3. It wasn't being called racist just saying it. It was racist being racists. Most people admitted it was a possibility, but definitely not confirmed in any way The fact of the matter is it was turned into a political talking point. The right says "IT IS THIS WAY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE AND IF YOU DON'T AGREE YOU ARE RADICAL LEFT" The left says "We can't say that yet" Learn the definition of gaslighting
- mionhe 3y ago
  Er, both sides are saying the same kinds of things: "it is this way, I believe the science says so, and if you don't agree with me you are xxxxx, yyyyy & maybe zzzzz."
  - metamet 3y ago
    This isn't a both sides situation. There was no science indicating that the virus was leaked from a lab. One side said "the virus was leaked from a lab! we should call it Kung Flu or The China Virus!" and the other side said "there is no evidence that the virus was leaked from a lab". They're not equal and opposite positions. One was kneejerk and unsubstantiated, the other was scientific. I'm certain there were some people out there who took the lack of evidence as proof that it wasn't, but those people were wrong and unscientific as well.
- ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
  The "wet market" theory that was pushed oddly hard at the start is probably the most racist theory. If you strive to be the least racist you would have to go with "engineered in collaboration with west lab leak".
Klinky 3y ago
Trump did use the terms "Kung Flu" & "China Virus". That kinda sums up his capacity to handle the crisis. It felt very much like the initial solution was to just blame China so much it'd magically go away by Easter. This rhetoric did have a negative impact on Asian communities. Reality is there is still no definitive evidence of a lab leak and China is never going to admit to it. Trump's racist finger pointing didn't actually tangibly help US citizens. Even if he did prove it was China's fault, what was he going to do? Go to war with China? Cutoff trade our economy is inextricably tied to? It felt very much like a dog chasing a car. The dog has no clue what it'd do if it actually caught the car.
booleandilemma 3y ago
You're right, and it's not even hard to verify it, just look at this comment from December 2020: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25587409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25587409 In the US, it's because this claim, or rejection of it, is strongly tied to political identity. Because the US is highly polarized right now, once political identity comes into play, you've left the realm of rationality and entered the realm of tribalism.
- userbinator 3y ago
  Ther rest of the comments there are worth reading too, if for nothing other than to see what the discussion was like at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25585833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25585833
- Klinky 3y ago
  Your cited comment doesn't back what the commenter you're replying to is saying. It's just making a generic political statement. It does not have an opinion on the claims they're making.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
InvaderFizz 3y ago
This is exactly how I remember things. My stance has always been that Lab Leak required the least number of assumptions. Intent was never factored in, just that it seems awfully strange to so vehemently deny even the possibility of it being a lab leak and not want to investigate. Could it have been the wet market? Sure, but it seems less likely. There may be some interesting reckoning happening in a few years, but probably not. Like safe and effective vaccines. It turns out, that if you did a RCT with two placebos and only called the people with placebo A vaccinated after two weeks, and called them unvaccinated if the got COVID in those two weeks. Placebo A would have the same efficacy numbers as the vaccines they rolled out. I also thought RFK Jr was full of shit when he said the current childhood vaccines have not been tested against placebo. I was wrong there. Turns out they only test against previous versions of the vaccines, some of which are known to have serious side effects, and most of the time the previous version goes back to a time when they didn't do much testing either.
Glyptodon 3y ago
My memory was that it was being called a "genetically engineered" virus in a way that made it sound like the focus wasn't a lab leak (accident) but an intentional weaponization.
- zarzavat 3y ago
  There’s indeed a spectrum of four possibilities: 1) wild virus, no lab involvement 2) wild virus, accidentally released from a lab 3) modified virus, accidentally released from lab 4) modified virus, intentional release At the start of the pandemic, the conspiracy nuts embraced option 4, and the left by reflex embraced option 1 and accused anybody who believe in 2 or 3 of believing in 4. Only later did options 2 and 3 gain more acceptance
  - Glyptodon 3y ago
    I think with the modified virus you don't just have the intentional vs accidental release dichotomy, but two additional items: (1) was the intent of the research plainly scientific or oriented towards weaponization, and (2) whether changes in virus traits are due to "genetic engineering" or not. Because there are ways in which both of these can have answers less satisfying than a law of nature, they add another degree or yelling past each other to at least the range of 3 to 4.

by baumy 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

SoftTalker 3y ago

Yeah that's what I remember too. Pelosi made a big statement about going to eat in Chinatown in response, and in general it was quickly an issue that the left pounced on so they could say Trump was an idiot and a racist.

metamet 3y ago
> it was quickly an issue that the left pounced on so they could say Trump was an idiot and a racist. Trump did that to himself with his response by trying to stir xenophobic hate by calling it "The China Virus".

metamet 3y ago

Odd, I remember it perfectly well, too. > There absolutely, 100% was complete denial, all originating on the political left, that a leak from a lab in China was a possibility. Well, that's just patently wrong. There was not "complete denial" by any means, as the majority of scientists were open to any and all possibility of origin. As such, the left--who was following those scientists--maintained the same position. Saying that "there is no evidence that it was leaked" is not blanket denial. It is just that--there is no evidence, thus the possibility remains open but shouldn't be entertained as decisive. Yet many politicians on the right, despite there being no evidence, dug their feet into the ground, convinced it was. Not sure how you got the impression that not having evidence of something equates to "complete denial", but it's incorrect. > Suggesting it was possible, much less plausible or even likely, was labeled racist. We knew the virus originated in the Wuhan region of China. Don't pretend that suppression occurred because of simple discussion of the topic--it was predominantly due to politicians raging xenophobic wars by trying to rename it "The China Virus".

try_the_bass 3y ago

My recollection is closer to GP's than to yours, fwiw. Not exactly the same, but I do recall that a lot of the pushback from the left was because every publication on the right was busy hitching the "it originated as a lab-modified virus" motte to the "it was intentionally released/it was a bioweapon" bailey.

k_roy 3y ago

> There absolutely, 100% was complete denial, all originating on the political left, that a leak from a lab in China was a possibility. No confusion about intentional vs accidental - total denial of the possibility in any way shape or form. Suggesting it was possible, much less plausible or even likely, was labeled racist. You are ignoring a few simple facts here. 1. The left doesn't congregate and worship at the cult of personality like the right does. 2. The first cases were in Wuhan. The right/Trumpets immediately blamed China. And this blame had exactly zero to do with any facts at the time. And in blaming China, hate crimes against all Asians increased dramatically, not even just Chinese. 3. It wasn't being called racist just saying it. It was racist being racists. Most people admitted it was a possibility, but definitely not confirmed in any way The fact of the matter is it was turned into a political talking point. The right says "IT IS THIS WAY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE AND IF YOU DON'T AGREE YOU ARE RADICAL LEFT" The left says "We can't say that yet" Learn the definition of gaslighting

mionhe 3y ago
Er, both sides are saying the same kinds of things: "it is this way, I believe the science says so, and if you don't agree with me you are xxxxx, yyyyy & maybe zzzzz."
- metamet 3y ago
  This isn't a both sides situation. There was no science indicating that the virus was leaked from a lab. One side said "the virus was leaked from a lab! we should call it Kung Flu or The China Virus!" and the other side said "there is no evidence that the virus was leaked from a lab". They're not equal and opposite positions. One was kneejerk and unsubstantiated, the other was scientific. I'm certain there were some people out there who took the lack of evidence as proof that it wasn't, but those people were wrong and unscientific as well.
ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
The "wet market" theory that was pushed oddly hard at the start is probably the most racist theory. If you strive to be the least racist you would have to go with "engineered in collaboration with west lab leak".

Klinky 3y ago

Trump did use the terms "Kung Flu" & "China Virus". That kinda sums up his capacity to handle the crisis. It felt very much like the initial solution was to just blame China so much it'd magically go away by Easter. This rhetoric did have a negative impact on Asian communities. Reality is there is still no definitive evidence of a lab leak and China is never going to admit to it. Trump's racist finger pointing didn't actually tangibly help US citizens. Even if he did prove it was China's fault, what was he going to do? Go to war with China? Cutoff trade our economy is inextricably tied to? It felt very much like a dog chasing a car. The dog has no clue what it'd do if it actually caught the car.

booleandilemma 3y ago

You're right, and it's not even hard to verify it, just look at this comment from December 2020: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25587409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25587409 In the US, it's because this claim, or rejection of it, is strongly tied to political identity. Because the US is highly polarized right now, once political identity comes into play, you've left the realm of rationality and entered the realm of tribalism.

userbinator 3y ago
Ther rest of the comments there are worth reading too, if for nothing other than to see what the discussion was like at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25585833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25585833
Klinky 3y ago
Your cited comment doesn't back what the commenter you're replying to is saying. It's just making a generic political statement. It does not have an opinion on the claims they're making.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

InvaderFizz 3y ago

This is exactly how I remember things. My stance has always been that Lab Leak required the least number of assumptions. Intent was never factored in, just that it seems awfully strange to so vehemently deny even the possibility of it being a lab leak and not want to investigate. Could it have been the wet market? Sure, but it seems less likely. There may be some interesting reckoning happening in a few years, but probably not. Like safe and effective vaccines. It turns out, that if you did a RCT with two placebos and only called the people with placebo A vaccinated after two weeks, and called them unvaccinated if the got COVID in those two weeks. Placebo A would have the same efficacy numbers as the vaccines they rolled out. I also thought RFK Jr was full of shit when he said the current childhood vaccines have not been tested against placebo. I was wrong there. Turns out they only test against previous versions of the vaccines, some of which are known to have serious side effects, and most of the time the previous version goes back to a time when they didn't do much testing either.

Glyptodon 3y ago

My memory was that it was being called a "genetically engineered" virus in a way that made it sound like the focus wasn't a lab leak (accident) but an intentional weaponization.

zarzavat 3y ago
There’s indeed a spectrum of four possibilities: 1) wild virus, no lab involvement 2) wild virus, accidentally released from a lab 3) modified virus, accidentally released from lab 4) modified virus, intentional release At the start of the pandemic, the conspiracy nuts embraced option 4, and the left by reflex embraced option 1 and accused anybody who believe in 2 or 3 of believing in 4. Only later did options 2 and 3 gain more acceptance
- Glyptodon 3y ago
  I think with the modified virus you don't just have the intentional vs accidental release dichotomy, but two additional items: (1) was the intent of the research plainly scientific or oriented towards weaponization, and (2) whether changes in virus traits are due to "genetic engineering" or not. Because there are ways in which both of these can have answers less satisfying than a law of nature, they add another degree or yelling past each other to at least the range of 3 to 4.