Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

eu.usatoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 1001 posts

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#211

Post by koheripbal »

pageandrew wrote: post #172
hayst4ck wrote: post #154

https://project-evidence.github.io/ I found this to be an extremely engaging read and compelling story. TLDR; The likelihood of it being lab related is high. The likelihood of it being directly malicious low. My Take form reading it: The lab in question needed to collect bats for research. A person who collected the bats did so with insufficient safety and is likely patient 0.

I agree that the leak was likely accidental. That said, I think you gloss over the fact that Gain of Function Research (artificial selection) was certainly taking place inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and that US intelligence has concluded that the WIV was engaging in classified research for the Chinese military, unbeknownst to the rest of the world. So, its not quite as simple as a collection mistake.

...and importantly, there was specifically Coronavirus bat research in that specific facility.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#212

Post by soperj »

crx07 wrote: post #21

This has honestly been my unbiased opinion since essentially day 1. I believe that the release was almost certainly a complete accident, but there's just no realistic chance a novel virus coincidentally originates in the same isolated place as a lab that specializes in that exact same type of virus. The denialists, including the WHO and CDC and everyone else, need to get real and own up to what happened and figure ou…

I'm confused, do you think SARS was also escaped from the lab, or just COVID?

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#213

Post by enchiridion »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #197
temp8964 wrote: post #140

Wow. Why every comment questioned your argument is downvoted or even dead? > is-ought 34 minutes ago [dead] [–] > Can you link to something that proves this is the criteria used for lab placement? How is this even dead? It's only asking for a reference.

This is, unfortunately, one of the issues that's been extraordinarily moralized. I've encountered more than a few people who argue that questions about the lab leak theory are inherently bad faith.

Maybe, I'm more inclined to believe it's some classic astroturfing.

HN will normally answer questions in good faith, even controversial ones.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#214

Post by tehjoker »

varjag wrote: post #192
tehjoker wrote: post #161

Pretty incredible how far the US media will go to deflect attention from how bad the US response to the pandemic was to China. "Let me be clear: Labs in Wuhan might not have played any role in the origin of the pandemic. But a year later, no source has been found, and the world deserves a thorough, unbiased investigation of all plausible theories that is conducted without fear or favor." Okay. So basically this autho…

No, the evidence is there's a relevant viral research lab in the epicentre with known history of safety issues and no animal transmission link have been confirmed.

There's evidence that many things are possible. Conspiracies are possible, but they are primarily a diagnosis of exclusion OR if there is specific evidence pointing in that direction.

The US media has made an art out of turning speculation into exciting narratives that large fractions of the population believe that turned out to be completely fabricated but retain adherents for years or generations after.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#215

Post by [deleted] »

goatinaboat wrote: post #78
Ancapistani wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's just no realistic chance a novel virus coincidentally originates in the same isolated place as a lab that specializes in that exact same type of virus. I think that it is at least somewhat likely that it was the result of the lab's activities, but your assertion here has a huge dose of selection bias. If the virology labs studying coronaviruses were placed randomly around the world, you'd be correct - but t…

were placed randomly around the world, you'd be correct - but they're not. They're placed near locations The world’s foremost institute for tropical medicine is in London, England. So that debunks that idea.

[deleted]

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#216

Post by carols10cents »

pageandrew wrote: post #156
pnathan wrote: post #143

I have three perspectives here I want to share. (1) Let's address the glass windows in our own house first and tighten the US policies and culture. Secrecy is not a good idea here. Without even reflecting on Covid, it is clear the author has been dealing with this a while, and the US needs to improve. I am reminded of discussions on the old '50s/'60s nuclear culture... (2) A year later, it may not be possible for the…

1. The virus did not originate in our own house. Seems like a deflection to say we should focus on ourselves when we're starting at evidence that Chinese missteps could have caused a global pandemic that has killed millions and upended life for billions. 2. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try. We should also acknowledge that an investigation much earlier on could have happened if it were not for Chinese government obstruct…

1. Even if this particular virus didn't originate in our own house, if we want to demand openness and security from other countries, we in the US should start by being open with records of accidents and enhanced measures to prevent future accidents.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#217

Post by autokad »

crx07 wrote: post #21

This has honestly been my unbiased opinion since essentially day 1. I believe that the release was almost certainly a complete accident, but there's just no realistic chance a novel virus coincidentally originates in the same isolated place as a lab that specializes in that exact same type of virus. The denialists, including the WHO and CDC and everyone else, need to get real and own up to what happened and figure ou…

The other thing to note is this virus hops to new species super fast. its already in pretty much every mammal we interact with now. You going to tell me this super fast spreading - super species hoping virus was waiting in a cave somewhere and never spread?

not buying it.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#219

Post by autokad »

Ancapistani wrote: post #24
crx07 wrote: post #21

This has honestly been my unbiased opinion since essentially day 1. I believe that the release was almost certainly a complete accident, but there's just no realistic chance a novel virus coincidentally originates in the same isolated place as a lab that specializes in that exact same type of virus. The denialists, including the WHO and CDC and everyone else, need to get real and own up to what happened and figure ou…

> there's just no realistic chance a novel virus coincidentally originates in the same isolated place as a lab that specializes in that exact same type of virus. I think that it is at least somewhat likely that it was the result of the lab's activities, but your assertion here has a huge dose of selection bias. If the virology labs studying coronaviruses were placed randomly around the world, you'd be correct - but t…

china has 100 cities with over a million people in them. Only one has a lab specializing in corona virus research.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#220

Post by bootlooped »

stonogo wrote: post #149
bootlooped wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we prove that accused people are not guilty of crimes then?

In the US courts system, we do not. People are presumed innocent, and the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

True. Maybe it was a poor analogy.

In a bizarre world where you were presumed guilty, could you do anything? If you submitted evidence that you were on another continent at the time of the crime, doesn't that prove you didn't do it? (Assuming the crime is something you must be physically present to do)

Post reply on HN