There's plenty more only a google search away. Our tech for working with viruses is pretty primitive stuff all things considered. It leaves clear markers anyone with a bit of knowledge in the field can see.
You are arguing against a straw man. The claim is NOT that the virus was engineered.
The claim is that a naturally occurring virus was being studied at a lab with sloppy procedures and this naturally occurring virus escaped the lab. The CDC had warned about sloppy procedures at this lab before the COVID outbreak.
Sure, but irrelevant: none of the evidence points to a release from the lab and all the evidence point to a release from the wet market. How do you reconcile that?
The researchers saying their lab, very near to the wet market, is unsafe is not evidence?
"These researchers, the American officials learned, had found a population of bats from caves in Yunnan province that gave them insight into how SARS coronaviruses originated and spread. The researchers boasted that they may have found the cave where the original SARS coronavirus originated. But all the U.S. diplomats cared about was that these scientists had discovered three new viruses that had a unique characteris
No. I donâ(TM)t see that as evidence that the virus originated at the lab. I donâ(TM)t think you understand what the word âoeevidenceâ means.
The gap in understanding is yours. Circumstantial evidence such as the above warrants a proper investigation. We literally have staff at the Wuhan lab telling American diplomats that their lab is unsafe and they need help.
no, i understand just fine. you fail to provide any link between the two.
Sorry, but no you do not. The staff admitted the lab unsafe. They spoke of 3 very dangerous strains being worked on. They are near the wet market. All this circumstantial evidence makes a proper investigation paramount. Yet the government prevented such an investigation. This is the same government that jailed a doctor for warning other doctors in the region. All of these circumstances lead to attempts to dismiss the lab with "there is no evidence" being purely propaganda in nature. The situation is "no evidence" in the context of no proper search, not "no evidence" as in a proper search found nothing. Distinguishing between these two is where you fail.
again with the conspiracy theories. you have no proof, just a couple of coincidences. did you hear the earth is flat, too?
The geometry of the earth has had a proper investigation, unlike the initial transmission of covid. Letting the Chinese Communist Party control the investigation, directly or through their proxies, is pretty much like having a church of the Middle Ages investigate heliocentric.
Thank you for the analogy, the CCP investigation being about as fair as the Pope's investigation will be an easily understood analogy.
"Now here's something you're really going to like!"
-- Rocket J. Squirrel
'No Evidence' says Xi (Score:2, Insightful)
No evidence at all, says Xi, vigorously brushing his hands together while standing on a particularly lumpy rug.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
Pushing a counter-narrative doesn't change the reality!
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
Pushing a counter-narrative doesn't change the reality!
What reality? What is the proof of that reality? Hitchen's Razor people.
You can start with these: (Score:4, Informative)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 [nature.com]
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/coronavirus-origins-misinformation-yan-report-fact-check-cvd [nationalgeographic.com]
There's plenty more only a google search away. Our tech for working with viruses is pretty primitive stuff all things considered. It leaves clear markers anyone with a bit of knowledge in the field can see.
Meanwhile we've been warned for
You are arguing against a straw man (Score:2, Informative)
The claim is that a naturally occurring virus was being studied at a lab with sloppy procedures and this naturally occurring virus escaped the lab. The CDC had warned about sloppy procedures at this lab before the COVID outbreak.
Re: You are arguing against a straw man (Score:1)
Sure, but irrelevant: none of the evidence points to a release from the lab and all the evidence point to a release from the wet market.
How do you reconcile that?
Researchers said their lab was unsafe (Score:2)
Sure, but irrelevant: none of the evidence points to a release from the lab and all the evidence point to a release from the wet market. How do you reconcile that?
The researchers saying their lab, very near to the wet market, is unsafe is not evidence?
"These researchers, the American officials learned, had found a population of bats from caves in Yunnan province that gave them insight into how SARS coronaviruses originated and spread. The researchers boasted that they may have found the cave where the original SARS coronavirus originated. But all the U.S. diplomats cared about was that these scientists had discovered three new viruses that had a unique characteris
Re: Researchers said their lab was unsafe (Score:1)
No. I donâ(TM)t see that as evidence that the virus originated at the lab. I donâ(TM)t think you understand what the word âoeevidenceâ means.
Re: (Score:2)
No. I donâ(TM)t see that as evidence that the virus originated at the lab. I donâ(TM)t think you understand what the word âoeevidenceâ means.
The gap in understanding is yours. Circumstantial evidence such as the above warrants a proper investigation. We literally have staff at the Wuhan lab telling American diplomats that their lab is unsafe and they need help.
Re: (Score:1)
no, i understand just fine. you fail to provide any link between the two.
Re: Researchers said their lab was unsafe (Score:3)
no, i understand just fine. you fail to provide any link between the two.
Sorry, but no you do not. The staff admitted the lab unsafe. They spoke of 3 very dangerous strains being worked on. They are near the wet market. All this circumstantial evidence makes a proper investigation paramount. Yet the government prevented such an investigation. This is the same government that jailed a doctor for warning other doctors in the region. All of these circumstances lead to attempts to dismiss the lab with "there is no evidence" being purely propaganda in nature. The situation is "no evidence" in the context of no proper search, not "no evidence" as in a proper search found nothing. Distinguishing between these two is where you fail.
Re: (Score:2)
again with the conspiracy theories. you have no proof, just a couple of coincidences.
did you hear the earth is flat, too?
Re: (Score:2)
again with the conspiracy theories. you have no proof, just a couple of coincidences. did you hear the earth is flat, too?
The geometry of the earth has had a proper investigation, unlike the initial transmission of covid. Letting the Chinese Communist Party control the investigation, directly or through their proxies, is pretty much like having a church of the Middle Ages investigate heliocentric.
Thank you for the analogy, the CCP investigation being about as fair as the Pope's investigation will be an easily understood analogy.