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

Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

project-evidence.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 39 posts

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#21

Post by DoingIsLearning »

krageon wrote: post #16
DoingIsLearning wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue the same exercise could be made against the 'wet market theory', no? What direct evidence do we have for the 'wet market' theory that is currently most widely accepted? Looking from a distance, it appears that the volume of circunstancial evidence for this 'laboratory accident/negligence' theory is far larger.

Circumstantial evidence is what you use to support a theory you really want to be true but cannot prove. Direct evidence is what you use when you want to actually figure out what happened.

> What direct evidence do we have for the 'wet market' theory that is currently most widely accepted?

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#22

Post by rcnewrefcellnew »

aaron695 wrote: post #19

The alternative to me will be a rural farmer caught the disease through extensive farming. Contamination from a wild animal, directly or through livestock. It then kicked around for months in a rural location, a lower R perhaps, with better weather conditions and less networked people. People died and family's moved on. Until someone on a trip to the city passed it on. Perhaps selling at the markets or perhaps to fam…

I haven't attempted to verify this myself but one criticism that has been addressed against that theory is that the closest place which has these bats in the wild is 900 km from Wuhan, and that people are not generally in close contact with bats since that normally requires going deep into dark caves.

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#23

Post by downshun »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #18
krageon wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's just the fact that this theory perfectly aligns with the current west-based propaganda effort that seeks to demonise China? Dismissing information as a conspiracy is a common strategy of autocratic states, as is seeding the internet with lies that align with their own interests.

An extremely good point, we are all at risk of being vehicles of information wars. However, information spinners still need to spread info based on reality or partial truth in order to be effective in their spinning. To me the current volume of evidence for a 'lab accident/negligence' theory versus the volume of evidence for a 'wet market' theory sticks out like a sore thumb even if we account for information war eff…

I eagerly await for the James Bond movie sequel where instead of evil villain you have a control-freak trying to cover up their incompetence.

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#24

Post by jacquesm »

Hacker News has officially lost the plot. Instead of flagging this and moving on we are now debating not whether or not to ban project-evidence on sight but whether or not the release was intentional or not.

Can we all come to our senses please? What are the chances that you'd find out about this from some github.io pages instead of from all the intelligence services in the West who would have been on this like flies if it had a snowball's chance in hell of being true.

A large amount of evidence collected to make a certain narrative look plausible is not worth to be debated on its merits. There is evidence that Martians created our moon because gravity is real. Try refuting that.

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#25

Post by jacquesm »

Allezxandre wrote: post #13
nicolas_t wrote: post #3

Haven't read much yet. But the first point already doesn't inspire much confidence. "This market is less than 9 miles away from The Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences". 9 miles away means that it's at the opposite of the city. I mean, that text is trying to make it seem like they are close to each other when actually it just means that both are in the same city. 9 miles is not a small distance i…

It might be my fault as I linked to the conclusion, but you are reducing the whole article to a part of the 9 miles distance argument

You're a tool in someone else's toolbox. As long as you realize that.

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#26

Post by paypalcust83 »

jacquesm wrote: post #24

Hacker News has officially lost the plot. Instead of flagging this and moving on we are now debating not whether or not to ban project-evidence on sight but whether or not the release was intentional or not. Can we all come to our senses please? What are the chances that you'd find out about this from some github.io pages instead of from all the intelligence services in the West who would have been on this like flies…

When common sense and critical thinking skills break down, cult worship of dishonest charlatans, and pervasive dishonest, magical thinking and brutality overtake reason and decency, civilization is close to upheaval or on its way out.

I think HN needs filters to avoid conspiracy theory and hate sites, and suggest tags based on AI proofreading to if phrases, themes, or hate are present.

It's either that or create a nicer, saner HN that is vouched invite-only with almost identifiable identities and low-res face photo avatars (reduce cyberdisinhibitionism per BaseCamp's findings)... because this sort of content is as garbage as flat earth and chemtrails.

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#27

Post by tomohawk »

jacquesm wrote: post #24

Hacker News has officially lost the plot. Instead of flagging this and moving on we are now debating not whether or not to ban project-evidence on sight but whether or not the release was intentional or not. Can we all come to our senses please? What are the chances that you'd find out about this from some github.io pages instead of from all the intelligence services in the West who would have been on this like flies…

Are we really at the point where we know for certain how this pandemic came about? Is there really only one true view?

There's basically 3 theories that have been put out:

1: The US military developed it. This theory from some CCP higher ups was quickly discredited.

2: It originated in a wet market in Wuhan

This theory does not account for a few things, such as (a) how did the bats end up there? (b) Is there any proof that there were every any bats there? (c) What about the early patients who had no connection to the market?

3: It originated from a lab in Wuhan

The report shows that there are 2 labs in Wuhan, and both of these labs dealt with bats that have a high probability of having this virus. They show this through the published research from the labs as well as other items such as job announcements, etc.

This at least puts the bats (and virus) in Wuhan, explaining how they ended up being there from so far away.

The report goes to great pains to state that no conspiracy is needed, or tie in to bio weapons, or whatever. We simply have some labs dealing with these bats and viruses, in the location where the pandemic started, and there are many possible avenues as to how the virus could have got out.

I don't see how the report delves into conspiracy theories.

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#28

Post by DoingIsLearning »

jacquesm wrote: post #25
Allezxandre wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be my fault as I linked to the conclusion, but you are reducing the whole article to a part of the 9 miles distance argument

You're a tool in someone else's toolbox. As long as you realize that.

The whole information wars thing becomes 4d chess very quickly.

We could equally argue that dismissing this collection of facts (not just a theory), makes us a tool in someone else's toolbox as well.

> all the intelligence services in the West who would have been on this like flies

If I was trying to investigate this 'lab accident' theory, the last thing I want would be for the public to believe this.

In a hypothetical scenario of a cover-up that would make those institutions double down on the destruction of evidence. However if they believe the public and other nations are accepting of a 'wet-market' theory then there is a chance that those institution would become complacent and leave behind information crumbles.

edit: to me it's very telling that the US investigation looked at the 'wet-market' theory and the 'bio-engineer weapon' theory and completely ignored over the 'lab-accident' theory despite all the diplomatic cables discussion in the media, about concerns over lab safety and staff training

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#29

Post by jacquesm »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #21
krageon wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Circumstantial evidence is what you use to support a theory you really want to be true but cannot prove. Direct evidence is what you use when you want to actually figure out what happened.

> What direct evidence do we have for the 'wet market' theory that is currently most widely accepted?

A couple of million years of Zoonotic events should count as pretty good evidence that that is how these things happen.

Re: Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Emerged from a Biological Laboratory in Wuhan, China

#30

Post by rasz »

nicolas_t wrote: post #3

Haven't read much yet. But the first point already doesn't inspire much confidence. "This market is less than 9 miles away from The Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences". 9 miles away means that it's at the opposite of the city. I mean, that text is trying to make it seem like they are close to each other when actually it just means that both are in the same city. 9 miles is not a small distance i…

9 miles is a very close distance in a 60x50 mile city. Queens is next to the Statue of Liberty compared to Philadelphia.
Post reply on HN