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

The media's lab leak fiasco

slowboring.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 736 posts

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#91

Post by jjk166 »

dbt00 wrote: post #11
partiallypro wrote: post #4

To me what gives me credence to the "lab leak theory" more than anything, was China's behavior during and initially after the outbreak. Where they thwarted any investigations from WHO or anyone else and arrested journalists even attempting to cover it. Now we have additional information of lab workers being sick back in November...I genuinely wonder why people immediately jumped in to defend China's actions through t…

The problem with this thinking is assuming the government of China actually knows the truth and is acting to protect itself from a dangerous reveal. They might not have known then (or now!) and are simply acting based on some probability it could be true, default secrecy, and organizational fear.

It's also possible that there is something unrelated to the coronavirus outbreak that a thorough investigation might stumble upon which they are trying to keep secret. The WIV was china's first biosafety level-4 lab and has close ties to China's military.

from [0]:

> Despite the WIV presenting itself as a civilian institution, the United States has determined that the WIV has collaborated on publications and secret projects with China’s military. The WIV has engaged in classified research, including laboratory animal experiments, on behalf of the Chinese military since at least 2017.

If I had done some work in the past on biological weapons that I didn't want the world to know about, I'd be very concerned about letting a bunch of international investigators examine labs that might be literally right down the hall. Alternatively if I were a government hostile to china who knew damn well what china was doing down the hall but can't find a good way to call them out on it, the opportunity to send investigators in for an unrelated reason would be a godsend.

[0] https://2017-2021.state.gov/fact-sheet-activity-at-the-wuhan...

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#92

Post by cratermoon »

beaner wrote: post #82
cratermoon wrote: post #29

"If the question is “are both hypotheses possible?” the answer is yes. Both are possible. If the question is “are they equally likely?” the answer is absolutely not. One hypothesis requires a colossal cover-up and the silent, unswerving, leak-proof compliance of a vast network of scientists, civilians, and government officials for over a year. The other requires only for biology to behave as it always has, for a fami…

Why does it require a cover-up so vast? All you need to keep the secret is blocking access from international investigators and the silence of the very few people originally involved. There's tons of precedent of harsh and inhumane penalties for saying things the government doesn't want you to from within China. And international investigation is quite simple to decline, you just say no. I don't think it's as complic…

You vastly underestimate the number of people who would have to be silent or silenced. People are terrible at keeping secrets.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#93

Post by whydoibother »

cratermoon wrote: post #46
Leary wrote: post #14

The US has intelligence that three Wuhan virologists were hospitalized. China says nobody was sick. It's quite simple, the US should release the names of those who were sick.

They never will, because there is no such intelligence, it was reported as a statement from an unnamed intelligence official. It's garbage.

It is really a shame people fall for this garbage after Iraq.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#94

Post by sauwan »

cratermoon wrote: post #29

"If the question is “are both hypotheses possible?” the answer is yes. Both are possible. If the question is “are they equally likely?” the answer is absolutely not. One hypothesis requires a colossal cover-up and the silent, unswerving, leak-proof compliance of a vast network of scientists, civilians, and government officials for over a year. The other requires only for biology to behave as it always has, for a fami…

If the CCP didn't have such a startling surveillance system and tight grip over any international narrative, I'd be inclined to agree with you.

But they have done themselves no favors in their handling of the situation.

I'm not sure the coverup would require a vast network of people. Maybe 1-2 dozen in a lab, max, (depending on who knew which experiments were being done) and a bunch of CCP members who I would not be surprised are tight lipped.

The counter questions are equally as troubling.

- Why haven't we found the host species? Typically it takes a few months, but we're going on 1.5 years. You'd think the CCP would have it very high on their priority list to find.

- How did this virus mutate a series of genetic sequences, none of which are found in other corona viruses? The series of mutations in SARS-COV2 seems very unlikely to have been a natural fluke.

There's a lot of questions here on both sides.

For me, I'd still put it at 50-50. I will not be surprised if a smoking gun is found one way or the other.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#95

Post by johncena33 »

cratermoon wrote: post #92
beaner wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it require a cover-up so vast? All you need to keep the secret is blocking access from international investigators and the silence of the very few people originally involved. There's tons of precedent of harsh and inhumane penalties for saying things the government doesn't want you to from within China. And international investigation is quite simple to decline, you just say no. I don't think it's as complic…

You vastly underestimate the number of people who would have to be silent or silenced. People are terrible at keeping secrets.

> People are terrible at keeping secrets.

Not unless their lives are at risk. You do understand that we are talking about CCP?

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#96

Post by tomjen3 »

greedo wrote: post #60
908B64B197 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting how media coverage completely changed. Under the previous administration it was considered racist to even mention the theory and it's proponents were considered racists or conspiracy theorists. Why such a sudden change? China certainly didn't change its position on the issue...

There's a world of difference in considering this theory, and with calling it the "Asian Flu" or "Kung Flu" etc. One act addressed what happened, the other tars entire nations/cultures/regions with a wide brush.

Current the major concern is the Indian mutation.

But we are not allowed to call it the Chinese or Wuhan virus.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#97

Post by cratermoon »

zdragnar wrote: post #80
cratermoon wrote: post #29

"If the question is “are both hypotheses possible?” the answer is yes. Both are possible. If the question is “are they equally likely?” the answer is absolutely not. One hypothesis requires a colossal cover-up and the silent, unswerving, leak-proof compliance of a vast network of scientists, civilians, and government officials for over a year. The other requires only for biology to behave as it always has, for a fami…

The cover up didn't need to be colossal, just for everyone to point to occams razor and call anyone with a hint of curiosity a racist. The fact that the origin of the outbreak appears to be in the same vicinity as a lab that experiments on similar viruses alone is sufficient reason to want a thorough investigation. Otherwise, the odds that nature produced such a virus, in such a location, make for a crazy coincidence…

Have you considered the possibility that it first appeared in the vicinity of a lab that experiments on similar viruses is because if it had appeared elsewhere, there would have been no sufficiently-equipped lab to isolate it? This is the streetlight effect: you find things where you (are able to) look for them.

In other words, it couldn't have appeared somewhere far from a properly-equipped lab, because there would be no properly-equipped lab to detect it.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#98

Post by ratsmack »

dylan604 wrote: post #63
ratsmack wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm generally in favour of the actions taken against misinformation... Who would be the one to determine what is misinformation and what is not?

The evidence?

Speculation and conjecture is not always evident, but is many times useful in determining the evidence. But this type of discussion was axed from many forums as "misinformation".

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#99

Post by tomp »

cratermoon wrote: post #92
beaner wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it require a cover-up so vast? All you need to keep the secret is blocking access from international investigators and the silence of the very few people originally involved. There's tons of precedent of harsh and inhumane penalties for saying things the government doesn't want you to from within China. And international investigation is quite simple to decline, you just say no. I don't think it's as complic…

You vastly underestimate the number of people who would have to be silent or silenced. People are terrible at keeping secrets.

Maybe people are terrible at keeping secrets, but also everyone who spills the secret is immediately branded a conspiracy theorist and deplatformed, the end result is the same...

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#100

Post by bsder »

wombatmobile wrote: post #69
bsder wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that this is Standard Operating Procedure(tm) for China for anything which might upset the hoi-polloi. Trying to predict what China will execute people for is like reading entrails.

> The problem is that this is Standard Operating Procedure(tm) for China When you say "China", do you mean the Department of Health, or the Department of Defense, or the Department of Trade, or the Chinese government, or the Chinese people, or some Chinese guy? It makes as much sense to attribute a Standard Operating Procedure to "China" as it does to attribute something like that to "America", or to say "Americans t…

> When you say "China", do you mean the Department of Health, or the Department of Defense, or the Department of Trade, or the Chinese government, or the Chinese people, or some Chinese guy?

We call this deflecting. And it's a rhetorical device used when you are on the wrong side of the argument.

And the answer is "All Of The Above". All parts of the Chinese government leaders see very little problem with executing those who might upset their status quo.

Post reply on HN