17 ms·

"choosing" is the keyword here. You have to reason probabilistically. There was a point at which lot of people would have put 100% or 99% confidence that covid

"choosing" is the keyword here. You have to reason probabilistically. There was a point at which lot of people would have put 100% or 99% confidence that covid came from a lab leak. That's the conspiracy theory side. A lot of more reasonable people would have put 1% or 5% confidence on covid coming from a lab leak, saying roughly "It's unlikely, but hard to rule out because China isn't being transparent". And then ask for more investigation, which is exactly what happened. So at no point was it rationally worth a 99% probability estimate, but it was worth investigation.

ShinyLeftPad 8d ago
What validity do you put on earth being flat? So that's the validity some people put on covid lab leak theory. You may be surprised. Calling something a conspiracy theory means rejecting its validity for investigation out of hand. Maybe you don't use it like that but that's how most people apparently use it. > There was a point at which lot of people would have put 100% or 99% confidence that covid came from a lab leak Why was? Now it is a point at which a lot of people put 100% confidence that covid came from a lab leak. And a lot of other people put 100% confidence that it was Wuhan market bat. And that's the problem I tried to express.