This is a bizarre take. The evidence has stayed precisely the same - natural origin very likely, lab leak thus far entirely unproven and a very low chance The rest is mostly misconceptions caused by reading only sensationalist headlineshttps://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1397160688284536842 …
-
-
It is POSSIBLE that there was a lab leak and THIS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED, but it is also only a very SMALL possibility and certainly not more likely than a natural explanation
Show this thread -
The problem is when experts say that something is POSSIBLE the headlines scream that it is LIKELY, which leads to misconceptions such as the above
Show this thread -
For example, here is a paper by some pre-eminent researchers saying that the lab leak theory should be examined but noting that the WHO has so far classified the idea as "extremely unlikely"https://science.sciencemag.org/content/372/6543/694.1 …
Show this thread -
The problem is that we haven't investigated a lab leak enough to say with any certainty that it is not what happened, but that is ~not the same~ as making it more probable
Show this thread -
Some more excellent reading on the topichttps://twitter.com/MoNscience/status/1397696019933143040?s=19 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Again false, "some experts" think that others don't.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
1 starting off any argument by "poising the well, guilt by association and false comparison" By a "news editor" Doesn't bowed well for the likelihood of anything useful coming out of the thread. 2
-
This is demonstrable false as the "studies" were utterly flawed and should have been retracted months ago, leading you with 0 solid evidence on either side which would put them "on even footing" as at that points it's all speculation. One thing I think we can all agree on is a ppic.twitter.com/LhkahUvWWH
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
False! Time to take away ur PhD
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What do you mean by "experts"? If you are referring to published research, this claim is inaccurate. In fact, most of the research into the genetic structure do not support natural origin. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7435492/?fbclid=IwAR0kiLYeED72WMJyOXyEhJWyKtxLEhUse5GMc4f7DazvHH5mVl_vbuOSA8s#bies202000091-bib-0055 …pic.twitter.com/V2PgxNOAzV
-
It could have initially adapted in a smaller an sparser human population before eventually "spilling over" to a big city, right?
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.