That's some pretty selective excerpts from the slack messages.
Read the whole Slack messages. Kristian Andersen starts saying lab leak being the most likely. They all discuss it openly. Then, as they discuss more evidence over months and learn new things, they discuss the change in their thinking. If you don't just take snippets, it's literally just scientists discussing things over months and allow their priors to change based on evidence. This is all getting ridiculous. Seriously, read the whole slack. That video uses some pretty strong biased language.
You can download the whole slack thread. If you do, you'll see very smart reasonable scientists discussing things and even discussing how their priors might be right or wrong. Why would they discuss the hundreds of different data points in a very clear and earnest way, if not to actually discover the origin? Andersen repeatedly says early that due to the lab being right there it just seems most likely. Then they discuss protein and genetic differences and bounce back and forth. They discuss other viruses and how they evolved, how far these viruses travelled on distance within the limits of the evolution from the closest known virus. They then go back and forth and discuss time of new emerging data finally solidifying around a finding that lab leak cannot be ruled out, but does not seem likely based on the evidence at hand.
The absolute click bait nonsense in that video in infuriating
|