Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
This isnt just lab leak from gain of function research though. This claims that parts of the virus are not found in nature a claim which has been quite well debunked.
This does not appear to be a move toward a rational position.
|
Nothing about having a concrete opinion on the origin of the virus is really a rational position given the evidence so far. There are reasons to believe that it could be natural origin or that it could be a lab leak, but neither has enough evidence behind it to really draw a firm conclusion.
The big difference is that the missing evidence from the natural origin hypothesis is pretty normal in these kinds of situations. It took 15 years for them to determine where SARS came from and they still haven't really figured out the source of Ebola.
Whereas with the lab leak theory, there are just some things that aren't easily explained based on current info. For instance, I've still never seen a satisfactory explanation of how there would be two separate lineages of the virus present at the wet market if it was a lab leak. That would require two separate leaks (a person can't be infected with different lineages) that both ended up in the same market. Whereas with natural origin, it would be pretty easily explained by it circulating in animals for a period of time and mutating into different lineages before spreading to humans in Wuhan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Lime
Since the beginning, it was really stretching Occam's Razor to think that the virus started in a wet market, that basically is down the street and serves as a defacto cafeteria for a biolab that works directly on coronavirus.
|
No offense, but you might want to view your information sources a bit more critically. The Huanan market is about a 30 minute drive from the Wuhan Institute of Virology; they're not close to one another at all.