The concept of the Burden of Proof exists for a reason, because anyone can make any claim and then point to "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" invoking the Argument from Ignorance where their claim is supposedly more credible until it has been disproved.
If you make the claim that the virus originated from a lab, then back it up by evidence. If you can't then the only thing that left is to believe in it or not. And that's where we enter the territory of religion.
That's what is called Shifting the Burden of Proof, and is usually considered a fallacy if it is meant to lend the original assertion more credibility.
It's like asking the defendant in a court of law to prove beyond any doubt that they didn't do what they're accused of.
That's called Proving a Negative. While not impossible a notoriously difficult task that philosophy, natural science, and jurisprudence agreed upon to be too prone to being abused towards a 'bad' outcome to be encouraged.
You don't think the fact they suppressed information isn't reason enough to believe they'd cover-up other things? I for one absolutely feel they not only wanted this to happen but did everything to ensure there was a cover-up. This is regime that will use it's own citizens as pawns without a second thought. They don't consider their own citizens as human beings and I have to assume they don't consider the rest of the world human.
This should be a wakeup call that we have to eliminate this communist danger from the planet before we literally find ourselves unable to fight them.
The problem is I refuse to believe a communist regime like the CCP would do *anything* except lie.
Personally, no I don't think that the fact they suppressed information is sufficient evidence towards this.
That's just the modus operandi of virtually any authoritarian or dictatorial regime that we've seen throughout history.
They want to maintain the strong-man image. So they tend not to admit anything bad happening under their watch, which would undermine the power they claim to have to keep their people safe from harm, trying to keep the facade of being infallible as long as possible (despite many people knowing otherwise). And they do it until it becomes undeniable that something happened at which point they start to shift blame on others.
Reasonable doubt for me at least to not believe the suppressing to be sufficient evidence of a lab-grown virus.
Yes, they would have suppressed information in that case as well. But since suppression of evidence would have happened in any case, whether it was a weaponized virus unleashed on the world on purpose, a weaponized virus escaped from a lab by accident, some non weaponized but still artificially modified virus escaped from a lab by accident, some non weaponized naturally occurring virus that has been studied in a lab and escaped by accident, some naturally occurring virus that hasn't seen the inside of a lab before it was isolated in a human (list not exhaustive), this does not work as an implication.
In practice, outside of courts, the burden of proof falls on "the person who cares." Everyone else just gives up.
If you want to prove that there are flying unicorns, or mammals with duck bills, or whatever, the burden is on you, because I've given up. I'm satisfied that there are no flying unicorns, and I'm definitely not going to go looking for them.
Something else to consider is that exactly the same thing happened during the first SARS outbreak in 2003. They kept on saying "Nope, no problem here" until it got so big that denial was no longer an option. And it's hardly just the Chinese who did it. Many leaders around the world downplayed and denied the issue for as long as possible. You know who they are.
Then, when you consider MERS as well, you realize that there is a history of corona viruses mutating in the wild and causing outbreaks in places with
But people don't want to hear "Close the wet markets." They don't want to hear "Stop traveling so much." They don't want to hear "more preparedness". They absolutely don't want to change anything they're doing, so it's easier to yell about Communism some more, and dive into conspiracy theories about "Chinavirus."
Or maybe they weigh those risks against the costs and rewards of living in a bubble which is what you seem to propose. It is often the case that if you expose yourself to more different situations, it helps you grow, strengthen and mature whether that be your immune system getting stronger or you being exposed to more experiences that allow you to better understand people and the world. Avoidance of risk can sometimes be the thing that creates a worse threat.
Since we're creating strawmen, why do you hate sanitation, stockpiling PPE, diversifying the economy and strengthening the social safety net so that closing restaurants for a couple months doesn't completely tank the economy and cause mass homelessness?
"But when you believe that nobody saw it coming, it becomes easier to believe that there was some sort of human activity besides fucking around with bats and pangolins that caused it."
The problem with your argument is that scientists have been warning for years that gain-of-function research where a lab "helps" a virus infect human tissue could eventually lead to a global pandemic. It's more like scientists didn't want to hear: don't experiment with viruses that can cause global pandemics.
Personally, no I don't think that the fact they suppressed information is sufficient evidence towards this.
That's just the modus operandi of virtually any authoritarian or dictatorial regime that we've seen throughout history.
Oh, you mean like what's happening now on the southern US border,where the authoritarian for dictatorial administration is suppressing all news regarding the conditions in government facilities?
The issue here is there are multiple levels of incompetence going on in the CCP here. Beijing told the local government in Wuhan to eradicate the wet markets after the first sars outbreak there. They did. However corruption in the local government led to the wet markets opening again and avoiding closure. Whether or not Beijing knew about this, or if the people whose responsibility to act on this were bribed or not is under debate, but the fact is that an outbreak from these supposedly illegal markets was
"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)
If you make the claim that the virus originated from a lab, then back it up by evidence. If you can't then the only thing that left is to believe in it or not. And that's where we enter the territory of religion.
Re: (Score:-1)
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
It's like asking the defendant in a court of law to prove beyond any doubt that they didn't do what they're accused of.
That's called Proving a Negative. While not impossible a notoriously difficult task that philosophy, natural science, and jurisprudence agreed upon to be too prone to being abused towards a 'bad' outcome to be encouraged.
At this point I
Re:'No Evidence' says Xi (Score:0, Flamebait)
You don't think the fact they suppressed information isn't reason enough to believe they'd cover-up other things? I for one absolutely feel they not only wanted this to happen but did everything to ensure there was a cover-up. This is regime that will use it's own citizens as pawns without a second thought. They don't consider their own citizens as human beings and I have to assume they don't consider the rest of the world human.
This should be a wakeup call that we have to eliminate this communist danger from the planet before we literally find ourselves unable to fight them.
The problem is I refuse to believe a communist regime like the CCP would do *anything* except lie.
Re:'No Evidence' says Xi (Score:4, Insightful)
That's just the modus operandi of virtually any authoritarian or dictatorial regime that we've seen throughout history.
They want to maintain the strong-man image. So they tend not to admit anything bad happening under their watch, which would undermine the power they claim to have to keep their people safe from harm, trying to keep the facade of being infallible as long as possible (despite many people knowing otherwise). And they do it until it becomes undeniable that something happened at which point they start to shift blame on others.
Reasonable doubt for me at least to not believe the suppressing to be sufficient evidence of a lab-grown virus.
Yes, they would have suppressed information in that case as well. But since suppression of evidence would have happened in any case, whether it was a weaponized virus unleashed on the world on purpose, a weaponized virus escaped from a lab by accident, some non weaponized but still artificially modified virus escaped from a lab by accident, some non weaponized naturally occurring virus that has been studied in a lab and escaped by accident, some naturally occurring virus that hasn't seen the inside of a lab before it was isolated in a human (list not exhaustive), this does not work as an implication.
Re: (Score:2)
In practice, outside of courts, the burden of proof falls on "the person who cares." Everyone else just gives up.
If you want to prove that there are flying unicorns, or mammals with duck bills, or whatever, the burden is on you, because I've given up. I'm satisfied that there are no flying unicorns, and I'm definitely not going to go looking for them.
Science is a "do-ocracy."
Re: (Score:2)
Something else to consider is that exactly the same thing happened during the first SARS outbreak in 2003. They kept on saying "Nope, no problem here" until it got so big that denial was no longer an option. And it's hardly just the Chinese who did it. Many leaders around the world downplayed and denied the issue for as long as possible. You know who they are.
Then, when you consider MERS as well, you realize that there is a history of corona viruses mutating in the wild and causing outbreaks in places with
Re: (Score:2)
But people don't want to hear "Close the wet markets." They don't want to hear "Stop traveling so much." They don't want to hear "more preparedness". They absolutely don't want to change anything they're doing, so it's easier to yell about Communism some more, and dive into conspiracy theories about "Chinavirus."
Or maybe they weigh those risks against the costs and rewards of living in a bubble which is what you seem to propose. It is often the case that if you expose yourself to more different situations, it helps you grow, strengthen and mature whether that be your immune system getting stronger or you being exposed to more experiences that allow you to better understand people and the world. Avoidance of risk can sometimes be the thing that creates a worse threat.
Re: (Score:2)
Since we're creating strawmen, why do you hate sanitation, stockpiling PPE, diversifying the economy and strengthening the social safety net so that closing restaurants for a couple months doesn't completely tank the economy and cause mass homelessness?
Re: (Score:3)
"But when you believe that nobody saw it coming, it becomes easier to believe that there was some sort of human activity besides fucking around with bats and pangolins that caused it."
The problem with your argument is that scientists have been warning for years that gain-of-function research where a lab "helps" a virus infect human tissue could eventually lead to a global pandemic. It's more like scientists didn't want to hear: don't experiment with viruses that can cause global pandemics.
2014: "Although in
Re: 'No Evidence' says Xi (Score:2)
Personally, no I don't think that the fact they suppressed information is sufficient evidence towards this.
That's just the modus operandi of virtually any authoritarian or dictatorial regime that we've seen throughout history.
Oh, you mean like what's happening now on the southern US border,where the authoritarian for dictatorial administration is suppressing all news regarding the conditions in government facilities?
Got it.
Re: 'No Evidence' says Xi (Score:2)
The issue here is there are multiple levels of incompetence going on in the CCP here. Beijing told the local government in Wuhan to eradicate the wet markets after the first sars outbreak there. They did. However corruption in the local government led to the wet markets opening again and avoiding closure. Whether or not Beijing knew about this, or if the people whose responsibility to act on this were bribed or not is under debate, but the fact is that an outbreak from these supposedly illegal markets was