3 ms·
> It should matter, a lot, that even a group of scientists who believed a lab leak idea was plausible couldn't muster up an argument that would hold up under pe
by slibhb 3y ago
> It should matter, a lot, that even a group of scientists who believed a lab leak idea was plausible couldn't muster up an argument that would hold up under peer review.
"We can't say what we actually think because it'll never pass peer review" sounds like an argument against peer review...
- wolverine876 3y agoIt's an argument against sharing whatever comes out of your a_. People ignore that argument all the time and thus we live in the Post-Truth era. Perception is reality, whatever you think or feel is true, etc. The great innovation of the Enlightenment and science is that such things are not reliable at all. If you want reliable information, you need publicly verifiable facts and peer review.
- slibhb 3y agoIf these scientists considered lab leak plausible that raises the question of why. I doubt it was just "feelings". Also, "the Enlightenment was all about peer review" is an odd statement.