If you've got a Bayesian bone in your body, this should make you go hmmmhttps://twitter.com/mattwridley/status/1348549780717383680 …
-
-
Show this thread
-
4/ No one huge thing, just details piling up and up and up, all on one side of the ledger. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-escape-theory.html …https://twitter.com/psychiel/status/1348599290411823104?s=19 …
Show this thread -
5/ NP! I try to always base my opinions and guesses on facts, and update as new facts come to light.https://twitter.com/psychiel/status/1348603189789138945?s=19 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
>90% is pretty huge, esp. from a Bayesian perspective (my initial prior was below 10%, maybe too naive). Were there a couple silver bullets that did it for you; in particular, things not attributable to the "oh fuck" response institutions often have w.r.t such things?
-
I found this article compelling: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-escape-theory.html …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm pretty confident you're going to be owing me that bottle of scotch before too much longer.
-
What was our bet?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don’t *necessarily* believe it was a deliberate release. But “someone screwed up badly in the lab” seems to me an entirely rational suspicion. Can I empirically prove it? Nah. But suggesting that even the mere suspicion is crazy beyond the pale is lulz.
-
My "most plausible scenario" has always been that the dude who was supposed to incinerate the test animals sold them at the market.
- 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.