Comment by kennywinker
21 hours ago
> And I always felt like this.
Hence you looked for evidence that matched and dismissed evidence that doesn't match.
Unless you can tell me that the majority of virologists agree it was a lab leak, I'm going to go with their majority opinion - which last I checked was that it couldn't possibly be a lab leak for specific genetic reasons.
> I'm going to go with their majority opinion
It seems like which of these two is the majority opinion heavily depends on the language/country you read information in and also whether there are still in service or not.
Please, send a google translate link where the majority of virologists in a country/language say the genetic evidence points to a lab leak.
I have no idea what “ whether there are still in service or not.” means
I don't have resources, to conduct studies, this was just an impression from reading Wikipedia pages and random websearch. Major news publishers in my language seem to convey the image, that intelligence agency generally agree on the lab hypothesis. Not just as side topic, but as the settled mainstream opinion. (The links were already shared here, that's how I read them in the first place.)
Yet the comments here seem to indicate, that that would be not the case from an US-centric perspective even if the publishers in my language claim it comes from the US intelligence agencies. And indeed that seems to be the tenor to a larger percentage in English publications.
> I have no idea what “ whether there are still in service or not.” means
Officials that are still in office seem to it's fringe to say it comes out of a lab, while does that are retired seem to claim, that it is obvious. Even if these are the identical person at different times.
1 reply →
Just read the wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lab_leak_theory
The summary does not mention lab leak of a natural virus at all but the body of the article says it's perfectly consistent with the best independent evidence / investigation:
> The leader of the WHO investigatory team, Peter Ben Embarek, said "An employee of the lab gets infected while working in a bat cave collecting samples. Such a scenario, while being a lab leak, would also fit our first hypothesis of direct transmission of the virus from bat to human."[114]
Seems a little dishonest, no? Pretending that lab leak == bioweapon conspiracy is just deliberate distraction.
There's simply no hard evidence one way or the other - it's a natural bat coronavirus, but we don't know how it got to Wuhan (a city with a world class coronavirus laboratory which just so happens to be the only institute on the planet which worked on isolating, sequencing, and culturing novel SARS-like bat coronaviruses from field samples - literally the only one.).