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

121–130 of 736 posts

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#121

Post by adolph »

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 zoonotic spillover doesn't seem to address geography. Why would the virus first appear in a city near a virology institute instead of out in the country near bat habitats? The speculation from scientists like Dr. Daszak is that someone ate an infected live bat from "southern China."

I've seen the studies about air flows in restaurants and buffets and none seem to indicate that Covid is food borne. So we have someone in the wet market about to bite into some delicious live bat and they give it a big sniff right as the bat expels some of its last little virus contaminated breaths. "Squee, squee" says the bat. "Hmm-mm finger licking good" says the world's unluckiest connoisseur of things that flutter in the night.

Alternatively, someone was careless in a lab studying the same family of bats and viruses. In the sense that one need not attribute to malice that which is explained by incompetence, the leaked virus need not have been some "biowarfare" effort, maybe just something a bit entrepreneurial or a side experiment to see if something could work.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/who-report-says-covid-orig...

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#122

Post by ximeng »

byset wrote: post #109
fsckboy wrote: post #83

Not just the media, folks, also the rest of our "sense making apparatus". Wikipedia has been suppressing lab leak discussion, and still to this moment will not allow the old Lab Leak Hypothesis page back. It still redirects to a declared "Misinformation!" page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COVID-19_lab_leak... And guess where else lab leak was suppressed? Here on HN. Yes, dang, you suppressed discussion…

"And guess where else lab leak was suppressed? Here on HN." And maybe is still getting suppressed? This post was #1 on HN one minute, and then, less than an hour later, it's down on page 3, ranked #88. Does the HN ranking algorithm really bury stuff that quickly?

Yes it does bury stuff very quickly if it is flagged by sufficient numbers of users. I’m not sure it’s a good thing but it is a thing.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#123

Post by HappySweeney »

imwillofficial wrote: post #56
HappySweeney wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think, like me, many dismissed the lab-leak theory because it sounded like yet-another attempt to push the blame for all the unnecessary death from Trump to China, as well as the cavalcade of doctors stating that the DNA of the virus was clearly not artificially constructed.

So you’re saying you formed an important opinion on a impactful topic without reviewing the evidence? Maybe you should change that

The only conclusion I came to was that the virus was not artificial in origin. I did suspect it was not a lab-leak, though, due to the purported difficulty of a virus escaping a level 4 facility.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#124

Post by generalizations »

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…

> silent, unswerving, leak-proof compliance of a vast network of scientists, civilians, and government officials for over a year

I was watching translated videos early last year made by chinese scientists trying to get the word out, at the risk of their lives. Compliance is simple: you talk, you "disappear".

The Great Firewall blocks in both directions, and is very good. Additionally, the West had already decided that it was politically expedient to ignore lab leak possibility. That meant the primary avenue for such leaks were more underground sources, like 4chan.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#125

Post by lamontcg »

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…

We had SARS-1 crop up in Guangdong in 2003 when the nearest known related virus has been found in Yunnan some ~700 miles away.

There just wasn't a lab there to leak from.

This time it popped up about ~700 miles away again, but where there was a lab.

The actual chances of that happening are probably about 1-in-10 / 1-in-20 if we understood the movement of people and animals within China that produced both outbreaks. That isn't actually that crazy of a coincidence.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#126

Post by Vaslo »

chowells wrote: post #101

This article correctly notices at the very start that asking this question is of no value in resolving the current situation. Then the author seems to think they've uncovered a massive secret instead of continuing the thought. Who wants this question in the public's mind? What are their goals in constantly pushing it, even though it does nothing to improve people's lives? What are the actual effects of pushing this q…

So we should hide information because it might cause people to have a negative view towards the country of China? How about this - let all information, whether it goes with your far left anti-racist view or not, be put freely out to the public and let the public decide how they want to react. Of course some people will take it to the extreme, but that doesn’t mean we aren’t entitled to this info. Anyone who lost a loved one, had their livelihoods reduced, or fell ill absolutely deserve to know what was done and what steps we are going to take to never allow it to happen again.

I never need censorship of any information by anyone, no matter how noble or misguided their deed.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#127

Post by calvano915 »

908B64B197 wrote: post #43
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…

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...

Because there's not a daily sh*tshow occurring in the White House any more so the media need something that bleeds to lead. There's no losing in covering the issue regardless of outcome/findings, and in the mean time ratings will benefit from the eyeballs.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#128

Post by generalizations »

tomjen3 wrote: post #105
generalizations wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we accept that taking action against misinformation is good, then this sort of mistake will inevitably happen. If you're in favor of taking action against misinformation, then you should be willing to accept this situation as an acceptable failure. I'm not willing to accept that.

That assumes a binary situation, but it can be a sliding scale. A system that prevents only Holocaust denial and flat earth theories is unlikely to ban anything that is actually true.

The current situation was justified with examples like yours.

A year ago, most people in favor of banning misinformation would have classed the lab leak hypothesis in the same obviously-false bucket with your examples.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#129

Post by [deleted] »

Spooky23 wrote: post #17
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…

I think given the demagogue POTUS and the mob of crazy followers, it was in the public interest to avoid agitating the mob. Even Facebook had the sense to realize that. As it stands, asian people are getting targeted for attacks in the street by deranged individuals.

[deleted]

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#130

Post by FillardMillmore »

ximeng wrote: post #122
byset wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"And guess where else lab leak was suppressed? Here on HN." And maybe is still getting suppressed? This post was #1 on HN one minute, and then, less than an hour later, it's down on page 3, ranked #88. Does the HN ranking algorithm really bury stuff that quickly?

Yes it does bury stuff very quickly if it is flagged by sufficient numbers of users. I’m not sure it’s a good thing but it is a thing.

Well it looks like this one got flagged. But why?
Post reply on HN