That itself would be a conspiracy theory, no?
Most weekdays when I am home I watch the BBC morning news.
For the first time I recall, the BBC is now reporting the Covid lab leak as a serious possibility. It was one of the lead stories on this morningâs televised news. So I checked the website:
Saying we should consider if there was a lab leak- good science.
Saying it was a lab leak based on only conjecture- conspiracy theory.
1 Like
Saying the lab leak is a debunked conspiracy theory â lie, likely part of a conspiracy to protect those who funded gain of function research overseen by the Chinese communists.
Saying it was a lab leak based only on conjecture â ignores the evidence for a lab leak.
conjectureâŚ
Based on evidence
And declaring it untrue is conjecture
When a âtop Chinese scientistâ (as described by the BBC) abandons the official story and lays out an option embarrassing to the regime, it is not just good science. It is phenomenal. And it has added credibilityâbecause the source has incentive not to make such a revelation.
From the article:
On the surface, Prof Gaoâs comments about not ruling out a lab leak appear seriously at odds with Chinaâs publicly stated position.
Risky even.
âThe so-called âlab leakâ is a lie created by anti-China forces. It is politically motivated and has no scientific basis,â reads a statement provided by the Chinese embassy in the UK.
Still true.
I understand, Dale, that mentioning the lab leak theory brings up an excellent example of media censorship.
The lab leak theory history highlights how that censorship and ridicule of proponents of the theory was both unscientific and inappropriate.
Since this thread is about conspiracy theories, the lab leak is perhaps the best example we have, since:
- the theory itself was not a conspiracy theory;
- the information about the possibility of a lab leak was suppressed aggressively; and,
- the most likely candidate for identification as a conspiracy is the suppression of the lab leak information.
One of the moderators here wrote that believing in the possibility of a lab leak was akin to believing the moon landing was faked. That is how effective the efforts to hide to possibility of a lab leak were.
The point is, weâve been over this and youâre not over it. Move on.
The point is, we had a new and major development on the news this morning.
Whatâs new, another opinion?
It is not news that they consider it a possibility. That was true from the beginning. From what the article stated, the official just confirmed that they investigated it. Duh. From the article you linked:
Itâs the first such acknowledgement that some kind of official investigation took place, but while Prof Gao says he has not seen the result, he has âheardâ that the lab was given a clean bill of health.
âI think their conclusion is that they are following all the protocols. They havenât found [any] wrongdoing.â
I still donât trust the Chinese to be forthcoming, either, so we are in agreement there.
2 Likes
That is . . . just bizarre!
I donât know if they still do it, but the meteorology department where I attended university used to put all the raw data out for anyone to access and propose their own forecasts. It kept them on their toes because a LOT of university students were just as good at crunching data as they were! But I wonder these days if it would get attacked as fake data, even though the policy was that anyone with additional and/or differing information could contribute that. Back then, perhaps the most common comment was that thermometers at banks and such places could deviate strongly from the other sources (which was a good thing because it prompted businesses in the area that had temperature information displayed for the public to check their thermometer locations to see if placement was the issue [it almost always was]).
From the above, though, Iâm not sure Iâd even want to check public comments on the raw data!
2 Likes
I have spoke tongue in cheek about âatheistic secular meteorologyâ when the plain reading of the Bible is clear about God controlling the weather, but may have to stop joking about it.
3 Likes
As if all opinions are created equal?
No, a top scientist of the Chinese Communist regime is taking a risk to raise a lab leak as a possibility.
And he is in a position to have more information, maybe some of the information that the Chinese government has been suppressing or deleting.
It is not just banks.
Official weather stations have indications of influence of thermometer placement.
In my many years as a utility planner, hourly weather data was very important to my work. I had decades of hourly weather data that allowed an analysis of changes.
The weather in Birmingham, Alabama, is very much like the weather in Atlanta. Plotting the two shows close tracking with a 1 degree or so shift in a single year in the early 1980s, with the gap changing between the two official airport weather stations.
The shift occur at the same time as the construction of an additional runway in Atlanta, possibly caused by more black asphalt closer to the weather station.
SARS-CoV-2 shows no evidence of being the product of gain of function modifications. All you have is an accusation without any evidence.
Like what???
Clutching at pearls does not make up for a complete lack of evidence for a lab leak. It also doesnât make the evidence for a zoonotic source go away.
Opinions are not evidence.
Whereâs the evidence???
3 Likes
Multiple agencies of the US government disagree with you.
And now even a top scientist (as identified by the BBC) doubt you.
Deleted by the communist Chinese who fear culpability.
But evidence still exists, hence the cover up by Fauci and coconspirators