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

The WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 227 posts

Re: The WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus

#11

Post by incrudible »

whiddershins wrote: post #9
tyingq wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accidental lab escape, or premeditated lab escape? Edit: Because the former doesn't sound like much of a conspiracy, aside from a cover-up afterwards.

What’s odd is how infrequent it is for people to point out this distinction can never be known for sure. From there, the only safe bet is to act as if it were intentional. This is a controversial concept, but it is the rational choice. Never assume that someone who harms you is doing it accidentally. Even though it is more often than not the case, you still have to protect yourself with the possibility of malice in m…

Taken to the extreme, there's a pathology for that line of reasoning:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecutory_delusion

Re: The WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus

#12

Post by Touche »

incrudible wrote: post #10
Touche wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost as if the motivation for a claim matters.

[flagged]

We don't know if it's true, there's still no evidence even today.

Motivation affects how we react to a theory with no evidence, when coming from Tom Cotton vs. a former CDC director.

Btw, Tom Cotton's claim was that it was a government biochemical weapon's lab, that's not Redfield's theory.

Re: The WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus

#13

Post by mattacular »

incrudible wrote: post #5

It's interesting to see that with Donald Trump out of office, the "lab escape" hypothesis is not roundly dismissed as a right-wing conspiracy theory anymore.

We'd like to go to war with China now that the right people are positioned to profit from it. US doing a land war still requires public support so now it's ok to drum up.

Re: The WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus

#14

Post by incrudible »

Touche wrote: post #12
incrudible wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

We don't know if it's true, there's still no evidence even today. Motivation affects how we react to a theory with no evidence, when coming from Tom Cotton vs. a former CDC director. Btw, Tom Cotton's claim was that it was a government biochemical weapon's lab, that's not Redfield's theory.

> We don't know if it's true, there's still no evidence even today.

I have edited my comment to reflect that.

> Motivation affects how we react to a theory with no evidence, when coming from Tom Cotton vs. a former CDC director.

There's another fallacy for that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

Re: The WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus

#15

Post by atoav »

incrudible wrote: post #5

It's interesting to see that with Donald Trump out of office, the "lab escape" hypothesis is not roundly dismissed as a right-wing conspiracy theory anymore.

Donald Trump would have used any present ambiguity to spin it into a conspiracy myth, like he has demonstrated e.g. in the last US election [1]. Unsurprisingly this practise doesn't really create a climate in which curiosity and open speculation will thrive.

Understandably, there are few researchers who would like their scientific speculation to become part the often colourful narratives Donald Trump and his followers tell each others.

Edit: edited to reduce snarkiness and polemic phrases

[1] For an example of Trump trying to find "material" that he can use for the stories he tells his following, see this transcript of Trumps call to the Georgia election official at the bottom of the page: https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-tr...

Re: The WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus

#16

Post by mrkramer »

tyingq wrote: post #6
incrudible wrote: post #5

It's interesting to see that with Donald Trump out of office, the "lab escape" hypothesis is not roundly dismissed as a right-wing conspiracy theory anymore.

Accidental lab escape, or premeditated lab escape? Edit: Because the former doesn't sound like much of a conspiracy, aside from a cover-up afterwards.

Most likely accidental if it was premeditated all out global bio-weapon war would happen.

Just like assassination of Austro-Hungarian heir Archduke Franz Ferdinand brought domino effect and caused First World war the same would happen now.

Re: The WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus

#17

Post by Touche »

incrudible wrote: post #14
Touche wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't know if it's true, there's still no evidence even today. Motivation affects how we react to a theory with no evidence, when coming from Tom Cotton vs. a former CDC director. Btw, Tom Cotton's claim was that it was a government biochemical weapon's lab, that's not Redfield's theory.

> We don't know if it's true, there's still no evidence even today. I have edited my comment to reflect that. > Motivation affects how we react to a theory with no evidence, when coming from Tom Cotton vs. a former CDC director. There's another fallacy for that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

I took logic in college too. I didn't say that motivation affects whether something is true or not, just how much skepticism we apply to it. It's perfectly normal and good that we believe things experts say (when we ourselves do not have expertise) over a guy shouting on a street corner.

Re: The WHO-China search for the origins of the coronavirus

#19

Post by melling »

incrudible wrote: post #10
Touche wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost as if the motivation for a claim matters.

[flagged]

If a claim is made and no evidence is provided, then should anyone give it much credibility?

The news prints these stories then they become the truth in the minds of many people.

Post reply on HN