Jipsah
Blood Drinker
- Aug 17, 2005
- 12,436
- 3,717
- 70
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
So of course they told the truth about that.They would absolutely lie, just as they lied about whether live animals were being sold at the market. However, they'd previously made public the viruses they were working on.
Right.
Since they had no way of knowing that this one would escape, they would have had no reason not to include it as well.
"yeah, we're doing GOF research on a corona virus fo the US government, but they won't mind us telling everyone about it."
Right.
That hardly settles the matter, but it does mean that we evidence for one lie and not for the other, so we should look at other evidence before leaping to conclusions.
The "evidence" coming from... the utterly unimpeachable CCP. Got it.
Actual evidence being whatever the Chinese gummint says.Generally, going by the actual evidence rather than what you imagine is a better route
And your "evidence" is based on your trust of CCP sources.to sound conclusions. At this point, you're not using Occam's Razor: you're trying to argue away evidence that disagrees with your preferred conclusion.
Right -- falling back on conspiracy theorizing
Nice try, but as you'll recall I suggested a far more prosaic source - the most powerful motivator for any government, government agency, or government employee - CYA. That's especially true in paces where talking out of school can get you imprisoned and/or shot. "Oops, we dropped the flask of virus, first priority is to cover it up as quickly as possible.
Technician Chan stands to become permanently missing if he makes his superiors look bad, so Tech Chan doesn't tell them if it's at all avoidable. No conspiracies necessary, just plain old human instincts for self preservation.
s just you applying Occam's Razor.
It still works. Bats? Seriously?
Besides being offensive
To whom?
, your response is also irrelevant: independent of what they say to the public, most people in the field (including me) have concluded that the weight of evidence strongly favors an origin in the market.
Except the ones that don't.
They were just kinda hanging out there, or what?As far as I know, no bats were being sold at the market -
Sure, why not.- the concern has always been about the sale of potential intermediate host animals that could carry coronaviruses, not with the sale of bats.
No, raccoon dogs, masked palm civets, Amur hedgehogs, Malayan porcupines, or hoary bamboo rats, all of which are known to have been present at that market. Probably others were there as well.
Were there any gerbils? I've always though they were suspicious.
Upvote
0