Science is not an appropriate epistemic tool to answer an historical question.
[deleted]
Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
31–40 of 64 posts
Re: Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
#32I don't think anyone should be absolutely sure one way or another, but China is a pretty big place and the country only has two labs at that level. Coincidences happen, yes, but this one seems pretty unlikely.
On the other hand where does it make sense to build a lab that studies a pathogen? As far away as possible from pathogen's natural reservoir or close by?
Re: Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
#33so you're telling me for the past 1.5 years, ppl haven't been using science?
Re: Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
#34Awhile back there was an article on the front page of HN which seemed to support the lab leak hypothesis. This was before that hypothesis gained traction. I checked back shortly thereafter and it was gone. I went through the history (scrolled through pages) and couldn't find it. Maybe it was a BS / questionable article. I don't know. But it seems we were eager to squash that line of thinking early on, whereas now it'…
imagine the bullshit people submit when there's no moderation.
Re: Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
#35Can someone substantiate this idea that it's improbable for a virus to surmount these two evolutionary obstacles highlighted below? I'll copy the quote for the idea I've seen circulating, the bold part is the idea I'd like to hear challenged and would like to learn more about what its foundation is predicated upon. For ultimately, in order to create a human pandemic, an animal virus has to accomplish **two very diffi…
It's rare in the global sense, but really nasty infections are sort of known for jumping from another mammalian species. AIDS, original SARS, Ebola, etc. all fit that pattern.
When it comes to odds in mammalian species, you can't but help be reminded of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem
Re: Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
#36> Careful and transparent collection of scientific information is essential
Sure, I agree. But they make it sound like this is a global issue. But that is not true, and they know it. Nothing and nobody stops these scientists to check blood samples/animals/whatnot all over the world.
The only country in the world that does not allow an open and transparent research into the origin of the pandemic is China - and yet these scientists are afraid to call the Chinese government out for it. I find this very disingenuous.
Re: Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
#37"It is time to turn down the heat of the rhetoric and turn up the light of scientific inquiry if we are to be better prepared to stem the next pandemic, whenever it comes and wherever it begins. "
This statement sounds very disingenuous. Science should look at all aspects of the virus and consider if it leaked from a laboratory, in addition to other means of transmission. Dismissing one as simply "rhetoric" is antithetical to science.
Re: Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
#38Awhile back there was an article on the front page of HN which seemed to support the lab leak hypothesis. This was before that hypothesis gained traction. I checked back shortly thereafter and it was gone. I went through the history (scrolled through pages) and couldn't find it. Maybe it was a BS / questionable article. I don't know. But it seems we were eager to squash that line of thinking early on, whereas now it'…
imagine the bullshit people submit when there's no moderation.
That's also true, and that's the problem that has yet to be solved IMO. How do you separate the wheat from the chaff? As far as I can tell it currently involves a lot of personal opinion and prejudice, and that may be unavoidable at the moment.
Re: Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
#39Science is not an appropriate epistemic tool to answer an historical question.
> Science is not an appropriate epistemic tool to answer an historical question.
But it is used to validate, and without validation you would not have history, only opinions.
Re: Science is needed to find how sars-cov2 reached humans
#40Science is not an appropriate epistemic tool to answer an historical question.
> Science is not an appropriate epistemic tool to answer an historical question.
Historical questions are questions of material fact, science is an appropriate epistemic tool to answer questions of material fact, and, so, I disagree.
Some historical questions may not be convenient to investigate scientifically given available tools, but that's a different issue.