3 ms·

A) The lab leak hypothesis is still unproven. There is no hard scientific data to support it, and many supposed proofs ("Chinese scientists fell ill first") are

by aredox 1y ago

A) The lab leak hypothesis is still unproven. There is no hard scientific data to support it, and many supposed proofs ("Chinese scientists fell ill first") are circular references without proof. B) Pseudoscientific grifters such as RFJ jr are far far less credible than the CDC, and yet here we are. He specifically said COVID-19 was a genetically engineered bioweapon that targets Black and white people but spared Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people. C) Do your own research and look at "The relativity of Wrong" recently submitted on this website.

dehrmann 1y ago
The lab leak theory is plausible. That's enough to not label it a conspiracy theory. It also meant there was never broader discourse on if gain of function research is a good idea.
- mindslight 1y ago
  The problem was that it mostly started being brought up for the purpose of political propaganda. Trump's only use for the pandemic was as fuel to rail against China in support of his predetermined agenda. So "lab leak" was used to focus attention on the external enemy to fight, instead of taking care of our own country or asking why Trump was so dead set against that. The whole time, it was obviously wrong to reject the lab leak theory out of hand. Yet people are stupid herd animals, and instead of tri-state "it is irrelevant in the current context" they argued that the theory was definitely wrong. That same fallibility applies to people working for institutions (see also the early CDC lie implying that masks weren't effective, based on wanting to keep the supply for the healthcare industry). Then after the dust settles, people stay dug in and the politically-colored battle lines never go away. I'd say this kind of establishment-clearly-wrong but dissent-with-nothing-productive underlies most of the energy fueling the destructionists.
- aredox 1y ago
  >there was never broader discourse on if gain of function research is a good idea. There has always been tons of discussions if GoF is a good idea, for years. You don't know anything about the topic you are commenting about, do you?
  - dehrmann 1y ago
    I've been seeing a lot of articles asking about AI on news sources like the NYT, but even during 2020-2021, I didn't see that level of articles of GoF. Maybe biotech is having these debates internally.

by aredox 1y ago

dehrmann 1y ago

The lab leak theory is plausible. That's enough to not label it a conspiracy theory. It also meant there was never broader discourse on if gain of function research is a good idea.

mindslight 1y ago
The problem was that it mostly started being brought up for the purpose of political propaganda. Trump's only use for the pandemic was as fuel to rail against China in support of his predetermined agenda. So "lab leak" was used to focus attention on the external enemy to fight, instead of taking care of our own country or asking why Trump was so dead set against that. The whole time, it was obviously wrong to reject the lab leak theory out of hand. Yet people are stupid herd animals, and instead of tri-state "it is irrelevant in the current context" they argued that the theory was definitely wrong. That same fallibility applies to people working for institutions (see also the early CDC lie implying that masks weren't effective, based on wanting to keep the supply for the healthcare industry). Then after the dust settles, people stay dug in and the politically-colored battle lines never go away. I'd say this kind of establishment-clearly-wrong but dissent-with-nothing-productive underlies most of the energy fueling the destructionists.
aredox 1y ago
>there was never broader discourse on if gain of function research is a good idea. There has always been tons of discussions if GoF is a good idea, for years. You don't know anything about the topic you are commenting about, do you?
- dehrmann 1y ago
  I've been seeing a lot of articles asking about AI on news sources like the NYT, but even during 2020-2021, I didn't see that level of articles of GoF. Maybe biotech is having these debates internally.