With the publication of the Science letter, the Overton window for discussion of "lab leak" hypothesis has shifted dramatically. We now have mainstream scientific opinions that largely range between "lab leak can be dismissed" and "both zoonosis and lab leak are viable". 1/8
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @trvrb
My challenge with the lab leak hypothesis is that much of the "evidence" presented in the media simply isn't evidence of any kind. We're just relitigating the same arguments from February 2020 with new headlines
6 replies 4 retweets 67 likes -
What is the evidence of natural zoonosis? The wet market has already been disproven. Zero serological evidence of prior circulation in Wuhan. Zero serological evidence of anyone in wuhan being infected by batcovs before the Dec. 2019 outbreak...
4 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @M1tchRosenthal @trvrb
As
@trvrb pointed out, it happens often and the evidence is very consistent with a zoonotic outbreak driven by one of many potential sources2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
One thing I've been interested in for a while is the fact that people see a novel virus identified near a famous lab and assume this must be causal, even though, well, where would we expect people to identify a novel virus most quickly?
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
But this lab was creating novel batcovs and was testing new combinations of backbones & spike proteins for infectivity. It was also researching ratg13, the closest known relative of cov2. It also had safety warnings back in 2017. Nearest natural reservoir is thousands of km away
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
It's a prosecutor's fallacy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Following evidence is a fallacy? If you have a theory, back it up. There is no direct evidence for natural zoonosis or lab leak, which is why both theories are viable. And there are many examples of natural zoonoses and lab leaks in the past (as Gottlieb points out)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This is why these arguments are tedious - you've posted a dozen or so points that aren't evidence of any kind, and then argued that it is now on us to prove that they AREN'T proof. Not really how this works
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I asked you to share evidence and you shared nothing... then I shared the circumstantial evidence in support of the lab leak theory, which you had no response to
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Ofc I did. You've basically just presented the same tedious arguments that people have been replying to since Feb 2020, most of them just boringly off-topic
-
-
Let's review. I asked you for evidence of natural zoonosis and you shared nothing. I shared w you circumstantial evidence of lab leak and you called it boring and tedious. Not sure if this is how you intended the discussion to go, but doesn't seem you are being genuine.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @M1tchRosenthal @GidMK and
You seem to have a problem w using arguments from early 2020, yet you did not share any new arguments/evidence for natural zoonosis
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 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.