Definitive Proof the Pandemic began in nature, not the lab

Faith & Science Conversation
82

It took quite a few posts to get that recognized, but it is progress!

83

I never denied it.

1 Like
84

By whom? I have looked at the links you provided. The only thing in them that counted as an attempt at evidence was the nonsense from the WSJ.

Not just ‘a market’ but the kind of market that has been the center of concern for years because of their potential for coronavirus spillover, the kind that the Chinese government had supposedly shut down for that reason. There were two likely places for a coronavirus outbreak to start in a Chinese city: a viral lab working on that virus and a wet market. As far as we know, there were no labs working on the particular virus in question, and the virus did start spreading at a wet market. So yes, that’s strong evidence for a zoonotic origin.

Not counting the first three posts that made up the original posting, it took ten posts.

6 Likes
85

Yes, the perfect scapegoat for a lab leak, a lab with a $600 million air handling problem.

It gives them “plausible denial,” a valuable cover. I didn’t spend long as an officer in military intelligence, but I spent long enough to understand that.

And how would we know, since the Chinese government has stonewalled, deleting or keeping data secret?

So you agree that the opening post is wrong, that the article presented is not definitive proof?

If so, how do we convince Jay?

86

Jay’s already been all over this, speaking of probabilities in posts above which you should know if you’d read them. So you don’t like his title. Tough. He’s already well aware of the probabilities involved, and quite satisfied that those weigh much more definitively in his favor and warranting his language rather than yours.

1 Like
87

Mervin, so your opinion is that Jay does not believe the headline he selected for the thread?

Really?

Accusing someone of such deceitfulness is a serious charge, and I would be reluctant to do such a thing.

Is he incapable of editing it to correct the error? Maybe a moderator can fix it so it is no longer inaccurate.

It is certainly an inconvenient truth that the title is wrong, but can’t it be corrected so people aren’t misled — especially if the creator knows it is wrong?

88

I’m accusing you of ignoring what Jay already wrote above. He already knows how justified his claim is. You’re the only one trying to turn it all into word games here, since that’s all you seem to have.

89

Jay wrote “Definitive Proof.” You say he doesn’t believe what he wrote. Yet he has not edited it. And it is the title!

Words have meaning. Definitive proof means definitive proof. How is that a “word game?”

Don’t people coming to this forum deserve truth?

90

Maybe the Intelligent Designer created the virus in his Area 51 Lab.

1 Like
91

Comic relief is an excellent way to pause contentious situations, although I am not sure this post was an appropriate use of it.