I agree with your first part, but I don't think theory needs to be kill-on-sight. Despite the huge political ramifications, the origin of the virus is still fundamentally a scientific question, and that entails considering every possibility that's scientifically plausible. We just have to be careful about how we integrate those facts into our worldview and discourse.
For example, consider a hypothetical racist who argues that the fact that the AIDS virus originated in Africa is somehow evidence of the inferiority of black culture. The right way to argue against logic isn't to push back against the proximal history of the virus, it's to point out the absurdity of using that fact to denigrate an entire group of people.
I don't know if you've seen this thread : https://hexbear.net/post/114586 but I feel like it's a very good one with great discussions.
It doesn't matter if it's "possible", this is not in the realm of a scientific question because this is happening in the media. The media isn't scientific, the media has agendas and interests, and there's a clear pivot and realignment with the american libs/democrats/biden behind this. Even acknowledging it's possible is giving them ground, because there is not even any reason to ENTERTAIN the idea. Nothing has emerged, no evidence point to it, the few things that the media is focusing on is either entirely (and provably) made-up, or has as a sole source the US state.
This isn't the discussion that is happening in the scientific sphere, a discussion that ALREADY happened and was already thoroughly looked into because yes, it is important for the scientific community. What's happening is entirely in the media sphere, not in the scientific one. This is media trench-warfare, entertaining this as a "possibility" is giving ground, it will be followed by more, and more, and more, and more, to push into the new cold war agenda and justify specific actions. The truth doesn't matter to them, and I don't want us to get played.
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
In this case, it's a difficult dance. Because if it can, any kind of discussion/concern/acknowledgment will be used to further the media narrative, regardless of the original intention.
I realize that any public calls for investigations related to China would be fraught and simply used as cover for imperial meddling, which is why I would tread carefully if I was an authority figure with any kind of broad public audience, and would probably avoid the world altogether.
I was speaking hypothetically/philosophically about the necessity for looking down all avenues. The reason I entertain these ideas personally is because I'm very curious about the virus. I'm a scientist, I can't help myself.
There's a difference between acknowledging the possibility that it came from a lab and asserting that as a fact. Probably the best way to do the former while countering the propaganda angle is to say that when you mean it might have come from a lab, you're talking about a U.S. lab.
Bonus points if you mention that incredulously, in the style of "well of course we're talking about a U.S. lab, we're naturally the ones most likely to do something this shitty."
I agree with your first part, but I don't think theory needs to be kill-on-sight. Despite the huge political ramifications, the origin of the virus is still fundamentally a scientific question, and that entails considering every possibility that's scientifically plausible. We just have to be careful about how we integrate those facts into our worldview and discourse.
For example, consider a hypothetical racist who argues that the fact that the AIDS virus originated in Africa is somehow evidence of the inferiority of black culture. The right way to argue against logic isn't to push back against the proximal history of the virus, it's to point out the absurdity of using that fact to denigrate an entire group of people.
I don't know if you've seen this thread : https://hexbear.net/post/114586 but I feel like it's a very good one with great discussions.
It doesn't matter if it's "possible", this is not in the realm of a scientific question because this is happening in the media. The media isn't scientific, the media has agendas and interests, and there's a clear pivot and realignment with the american libs/democrats/biden behind this. Even acknowledging it's possible is giving them ground, because there is not even any reason to ENTERTAIN the idea. Nothing has emerged, no evidence point to it, the few things that the media is focusing on is either entirely (and provably) made-up, or has as a sole source the US state.
This isn't the discussion that is happening in the scientific sphere, a discussion that ALREADY happened and was already thoroughly looked into because yes, it is important for the scientific community. What's happening is entirely in the media sphere, not in the scientific one. This is media trench-warfare, entertaining this as a "possibility" is giving ground, it will be followed by more, and more, and more, and more, to push into the new cold war agenda and justify specific actions. The truth doesn't matter to them, and I don't want us to get played.
I'm aware of that bogus intel/media dump based on the supposed hospitalization rate in Wuhan or whatever.
I'm talking about the scientific discussion I alluded to here, which predates that story by a few months.
Interesting, thanks for sharing. In this case, it's a difficult dance. Because if it can, any kind of discussion/concern/acknowledgment will be used to further the media narrative, regardless of the original intention.
Agreed. I would push back against the narrative certain contexts.
Why are you even entertaining this stuff man?
Because the origin of the virus is still unknown, and learning the truth requires entertaining possibilities and investigating them.
You realize it's going to be the United States "intelligence community" doing this investigating right, like practically speaking
I realize that any public calls for investigations related to China would be fraught and simply used as cover for imperial meddling, which is why I would tread carefully if I was an authority figure with any kind of broad public audience, and would probably avoid the world altogether.
I was speaking hypothetically/philosophically about the necessity for looking down all avenues. The reason I entertain these ideas personally is because I'm very curious about the virus. I'm a scientist, I can't help myself.
deleted by creator
I agree, except because we don't yet know the truth, asserting that it came from a lab at this point is bold.
There's a difference between acknowledging the possibility that it came from a lab and asserting that as a fact. Probably the best way to do the former while countering the propaganda angle is to say that when you mean it might have come from a lab, you're talking about a U.S. lab.
deleted by creator
:sicko-hair:
Bonus points if you mention that incredulously, in the style of "well of course we're talking about a U.S. lab, we're naturally the ones most likely to do something this shitty."
Yes, I love it! :sicko-speeeeen:
Did they say it was fact, or a possibility that we shouldn't poo poo (pig poo?)
Sounds like hysterics to me. Everything so far points to this being a spillover from an animal and animalistic in its entire origin.
Unless some credible source says otherwise I’m not going to worry about any other small possible point of origin.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I'm sorry, it was a rude comment. I apologize.