|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 12, 2022 11:21:10 GMT -6
Lot going on in here, rhetorically .
I’ll just point out that there’s a world of difference between “having a bias” and getting caught faking things over and over.
When a known fraud tells you something, it doesn’t mean you know it’s false, it just means you don’t know it’s true.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Jan 12, 2022 11:34:09 GMT -6
Lot going on in here, rhetorically . I’ll just point out that there’s a world of difference between “having a bias” and getting caught faking things over and over. When a known fraud tells you something, it doesn’t mean you know it’s false, it just means you don’t know it’s true. Sure, your point is well taken. Just seems weird that I’ve pointed to many other news sites saying the same thing. Pointed out the actual sources, pointed to documents released by the NIH itself etc, but thething everyone is hung up on is that “PV is a fraud”. Which is basically irrelevant to bigger point. But I guess it doesn’t matter to most. I’m retiring from this thread for a while. Doesn’t seem there’s any point to it. Hope you stay safe and in good health. Peace. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 12, 2022 11:56:53 GMT -6
Lot going on in here, rhetorically . I’ll just point out that there’s a world of difference between “having a bias” and getting caught faking things over and over. When a known fraud tells you something, it doesn’t mean you know it’s false, it just means you don’t know it’s true. Sure, your point is well taken. Just seems weird that I’ve pointed to many other news sites saying the same thing. Pointed out the actual sources, pointed to documents released by the NIH itself etc, but thething everyone is hung up on is that “PV is a fraud”. Which is basically irrelevant to bigger point. But I guess it doesn’t matter to most. I’m retiring from this thread for a while. Doesn’t seem there’s any point to it. Hope you stay safe and in good health. Peace. Well said. That was my point, it doesn't matter that the links supplied in the articles are from reputable sources, people will use any excuse to avoid data that doesn't support their biases. I should also retire from the thread again. I see it's not much further along than when I stopped looking at it last time. Supply factual data and get a resounding "nuh uh". |
|
|
|
Post by bradd on Jan 12, 2022 12:04:07 GMT -6
Some senators are already trying, but it's being labeled as an anti-science witch-hunt by the usual suspects and the safe bet is that it'll go nowhere because the status-quo citizen doesn't want to know that their government is at fault because an egomaniacal politician was left unchecked to wreck the world. You show your bias and lose all sense of objectivity/credibility with this last sentence. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 12, 2022 12:09:17 GMT -6
My favorite part of this mess is the constantly changing "science" and political about faces.
Now CEO of Pfizer is saying that the 2 Dose vaccine "offers very limited protection". And the 3 dose only offers "reasonable protection" against hospitalization and deaths. But a new 4th Booster ready in March. (Unfortunately after Omicron has essentially run its course.....)
And to boot HE'S A VETERNARIAN. LOL. I found that particularly ironic after some of our earlier discussions. [Dr. Bourla received his veterinary degree and a doctorate in the biotechnology of reproduction from Aristotle University of Thessaloniki School of Veterinary Medicine in Greece. He joined Pfizer in 1993 in its former Animal Health Division as technical director of Greece.]
Sorry, gotta find some kind of humor in this mess......
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 12, 2022 12:14:29 GMT -6
svart That’s not what’s happening. The “factual data” is largely the same as it’s been for months. A portion of a subcontract from NIH supported what some scientists see as “gain of function” and others don’t. From there, known bad faith actors like Project Veritas make a giant leap to “Fauci caused the pandemic”, with purported secret documents. Again, the people who have been caught faking things over and over. Then from there we get the scorching hot takes coming in and riling up the thread again. Then, as usual, when we take it back down to what is actually known from credible sources, it’s far less sexy. From the Intercept article posted: “Although the experiments demonstrate a lack of oversight and present dangers to public health, according to several scientists contacted by The Intercept, none of the viruses involved in the work are related closely enough to SARS-CoV-2 to have sparked the pandemic.” I dunno, it’s just odd to watch over and over. Getting frothed up over the salacious, sketchy stuff from dodgy sources, then citing less dodgy sources that don’t say the salacious, sketchy stuff…as a reason we should believe the dodgy sources? This feels like identity stuff, not truth-seeking.
|
|
|
|
Post by seawell on Jan 12, 2022 16:08:25 GMT -6
This isn't just a redux of the previous Fauci email leak getting stirred up again. If you thought so, I can see why this wouldn't make much sense. It's also not just the project veritas stuff which may or may not turn out to be legit. I know no source is perfect but The Hill has been one of the more neutral sources I keep track of. If you haven't seen what's new from the latest emails you can check it out here:
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 12, 2022 16:29:12 GMT -6
This isn't just a redux of the previous Fauci email leak getting stirred up again. If you thought so, I can see why this wouldn't make much sense. It's also not just the project veritas stuff which may or may not turn out to be legit. I know no source is perfect but The Hill has been one of the more neutral sources I keep track of. If you haven't seen what's new from the latest emails you can check it out here: Watched a few minutes. I’ve never had any trouble with the “lab leak” theory. Why would I claim to know that it’s not that? Or that it is, for that matter? Let the chips fall where they may. Re: the Hill clip, there is a lot of guesswork about what is or isn’t in the parts of those communications that we don’t have access to, even in just the few minutes of that clip that I watched (which the guy fairly admits). But this is all parallel to the phenomena I was talking about before, where knowingly sketchy claims are embraced and amp’d. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 12, 2022 16:58:30 GMT -6
And, it should go without saying, if damning stuff comes out *for real* about Fauci, then so be it. Just because a bunch of false claims have been made about the guy doesn’t mean there isn’t anything bad to know.
The conservative media juggernaut sent up the bat signal a couple of years ago that Fauci was The Villain and everyone from Fox prime time to the Edgy Bro Podcast world down to the darkest corners of the alt right web has been marching in messaging lockstep since. Just because most of that has been total nonsense doesn’t mean the guy is infallible. I got no dog in the fight. The truth matters. Who it makes look good and who it makes look bad isn’t my main concern.
Any good faith effort to get to the truth of a matter is welcomed by me. The tribalism/identity stuff…I can’t hack.
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 12, 2022 17:03:28 GMT -6
This media drive sword cuts both directions. Just sayin'..... It's the nature of "news journalism" (and I use that term very loosely) in a social media / internet / cable news 24/7/365 world.
|
|
|
|
Post by seawell on Jan 12, 2022 17:11:57 GMT -6
This isn't just a redux of the previous Fauci email leak getting stirred up again. If you thought so, I can see why this wouldn't make much sense. It's also not just the project veritas stuff which may or may not turn out to be legit. I know no source is perfect but The Hill has been one of the more neutral sources I keep track of. If you haven't seen what's new from the latest emails you can check it out here: Watched a few minutes. I’ve never had any trouble with the “lab leak” theory. Why would I claim to know that it’s not that? Or that it is, for that matter? Let the chips fall where they may. Re: the Hill clip, there is a lot of guesswork about what is or isn’t in the parts of those communications that we don’t have access to, even in just the few minutes of that clip that I watched (which the guy fairly admits). But this is all parallel to the phenomena I was talking about before, where knowingly sketchy claims are embraced and amp’d. I get what you're saying for sure. Most all of us here have come in a little hot at times just blasting something out of frustration, I know I certainly have. I was just hoping to bring some context to this particular part of the argument because it seemed like some people weren't aware there is actual new information and it's not just another round of "get Fauci." These emails came from senators(not veritas) so even though there are more documents yet to be revealed, there's enough meat on the bone here to at least raise some serious questions that I hope we can get an answer to(that doesn't involve another round of Rand Paul vs Dr. Fauci 🤦🏻♂️ ). I think getting to the origin of this pandemic is the most crucial issue above any of the other things we've debated here. Not to get Fauci, but to do everything we can to prevent it from happening again. I understand nature is what it is and we're going to have challenges like this from time to time but I hope we can all agree we don't have the capacity to throw in some of our own design in between(if that turns out to be what happened). This isn't directed at you in particular ragan but I think the term "conspiracy theory" has gotten overused so much in the past 2 years that it almost has no meaning anymore. I get it, there are times things are pretty far out there but this isn't that(even though it was called such for a long time). It's also not the only thing within the last 2 weeks that seems to now be acceptable to talk about that was just a short time called conspiracy theory. This conversation right here is case in point: I can't speak for svart or anyone else but if I had to guess, I'd say it's little frustrating to watch the narrative take a complete 180. Especially if you said things months ago, were blasted for it, and now Jake Tapper is saying them 😂. Anyway...I hate we're here again but hopefully we can find a way to safely land this thing again for while at some point 🤞🏼 |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 12, 2022 17:26:24 GMT -6
Watched a few minutes. I’ve never had any trouble with the “lab leak” theory. Why would I claim to know that it’s not that? Or that it is, for that matter? Let the chips fall where they may. Re: the Hill clip, there is a lot of guesswork about what is or isn’t in the parts of those communications that we don’t have access to, even in just the few minutes of that clip that I watched (which the guy fairly admits). But this is all parallel to the phenomena I was talking about before, where knowingly sketchy claims are embraced and amp’d. I get what you're saying for sure. Most all of us here have come in a little hot at times just blasting something out of frustration, I know I certainly have. I was just hoping to bring some context to this particular part of the argument because it seemed like some people weren't aware there is actual new information and it's not just another round of "get Fauci." These emails came from senators(not veritas) so even though there are more documents yet to be revealed, there's enough meat on the bone here to at least raise some serious questions that I hope we can get an answer to(that doesn't involve another round of Rand Paul vs Dr. Fauci 🤦🏻♂️ ). I think getting to the origin of this pandemic is the most crucial issue above any of the other things we've debated here. Not to get Fauci, but to do everything we can to prevent it from happening again. I understand nature is what it is and we're going to have challenges like this from time to time but I hope we can all agree we don't have the capacity to throw in some of our own design in between(if that turns out to be what happened). This isn't directed at you in particular ragan but I think the term "conspiracy theory" has gotten overused so much in the past 2 years that it almost has no meaning anymore. I get it, there are times things are pretty far out there but this isn't that(even though it was called such for a long time). It's also not the only thing within the last 2 weeks that seems to now be acceptable to talk about that was just a short time called conspiracy theory. This conversation right here is case in point: I can't speak for svart or anyone else but if I had to guess, I'd say it's little frustrating to watch the narrative take a complete 180. Especially is you said things months ago, were blasted for it, and now Jake Tapper is saying them 😂. Anyway...I hate we're here again but hopefully we can find a way to safely land this thing again for while at some point 🤞🏼 I get what you mean and I think I agree with a lot of where you’re coming from. But it’s tricky. Some of the stuff propagated a couple years ago about hospital classifications was, in fact, conspiratorial nonsense. Just because someone has a valid gripe about it a couple years later doesn’t make the previous conspiratorial nonsense become retroactively valid, ya know? Same point put another way: if in early 2020 I believed the Lab Leak theory because someone with demonstrably bad motives made a YouTube video about it featuring a bunch of faked documents, I was in fact engaging in conspiratorial nonsense. If in 2022, real, valid info comes out supporting the Lab Leak theory, it doesn’t absolve me of my 2020 gullibility. I was still wrong to believe it at that time. As with anything, I think truth, motives and nuances matter. |
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Jan 12, 2022 17:34:32 GMT -6
<<but I think the term "conspiracy theory" has gotten overused so much in the past 2 years that it almost has no meaning anymore.>> "Conspiracy theorist" has certainly become a catch all term. But the relentless cry of "Wolf!," usually riddled with assertions that are misleading and/or downright false, sometimes to the point of being ridiculous, make those supposed sources deserving of the moniker. |
|
|
|
Post by seawell on Jan 12, 2022 17:42:45 GMT -6
I get what you're saying for sure. Most all of us here have come in a little hot at times just blasting something out of frustration, I know I certainly have. I was just hoping to bring some context to this particular part of the argument because it seemed like some people weren't aware there is actual new information and it's not just another round of "get Fauci." These emails came from senators(not veritas) so even though there are more documents yet to be revealed, there's enough meat on the bone here to at least raise some serious questions that I hope we can get an answer to(that doesn't involve another round of Rand Paul vs Dr. Fauci 🤦🏻♂️ ). I think getting to the origin of this pandemic is the most crucial issue above any of the other things we've debated here. Not to get Fauci, but to do everything we can to prevent it from happening again. I understand nature is what it is and we're going to have challenges like this from time to time but I hope we can all agree we don't have the capacity to throw in some of our own design in between(if that turns out to be what happened). This isn't directed at you in particular ragan but I think the term "conspiracy theory" has gotten overused so much in the past 2 years that it almost has no meaning anymore. I get it, there are times things are pretty far out there but this isn't that(even though it was called such for a long time). It's also not the only thing within the last 2 weeks that seems to now be acceptable to talk about that was just a short time called conspiracy theory. This conversation right here is case in point: I can't speak for svart or anyone else but if I had to guess, I'd say it's little frustrating to watch the narrative take a complete 180. Especially is you said things months ago, were blasted for it, and now Jake Tapper is saying them 😂. Anyway...I hate we're here again but hopefully we can find a way to safely land this thing again for while at some point 🤞🏼 I get what you mean and I think I agree with a lot of where you’re coming from. But it’s tricky. Some of the stuff propagated a couple years ago about hospital classifications was, in fact, conspiratorial nonsense. Just because someone has a valid gripe about it a couple years later doesn’t make the previous conspiratorial nonsense become retroactively valid, ya know? Same point put another way: if in early 2020 I believed the Lab Leak theory because someone with demonstrably bad motives made a YouTube video about it featuring a bunch of faked documents, I was in fact engaging in conspiratorial nonsense. If in 2022, real, valid info comes out supporting the Lab Leak theory, it doesn’t absolve me of my 2020 gullibility. I was still wrong to believe it at that time. As with anything, I think truth, motives and nuances matter. I don't know man, if there was a bunch of conspiratorial stuff shared here with fake documents, I missed it. I saw a lot legitimate questions get raised that were called conspiratorial, but unjustly so in my opinion. As a matter of fact I think sources significantly improved over the course of this thread but yet were never given a fair shake by one side of the aisle. I think that is probably the greatest source of frustration. If I remember correctly it sort of went like this: Hey here's an intersting video from a virologist "nah..that guy is a vet"...ok here's an evolutionary biologist "nope, he's no good either", ok how about this ER doctor that has successfully treated thousands of Covid patients ..."yawn." Ok, ok...how about this cardiologist that has been published more than anyone else in his field? "He's no good either." Very rarely if ever, disputing the actual information being shared, always attacking the person or the source of the link. That is incredibly frustrating, particularly when these leaked emails from Fauci seem to imply that the narrative that many on this thread have stood on was deliberately and deceitfully crafted. Again, I don't have a particular bone to pick with you at all, quite the opposite actually but I do hope to shed some light on some of the frustrations that are being voiced here. |
|
|
|
Post by seawell on Jan 12, 2022 17:44:28 GMT -6
<<but I think the term "conspiracy theory" has gotten overused so much in the past 2 years that it almost has no meaning anymore.>> "Conspiracy theorist" has certainly become a catch all term. But the relentless cry of "Wolf!," usually riddled with assertions that are misleading and/or downright false, sometimes to the point of being ridiculous, make those supposed sources deserving of the moniker. Ok, so let's save it for those actual times so that it doesn't lose its meaning. The information shared here in the past couple of days does not fall into that category. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 12, 2022 17:49:52 GMT -6
I get what you mean and I think I agree with a lot of where you’re coming from. But it’s tricky. Some of the stuff propagated a couple years ago about hospital classifications was, in fact, conspiratorial nonsense. Just because someone has a valid gripe about it a couple years later doesn’t make the previous conspiratorial nonsense become retroactively valid, ya know? Same point put another way: if in early 2020 I believed the Lab Leak theory because someone with demonstrably bad motives made a YouTube video about it featuring a bunch of faked documents, I was in fact engaging in conspiratorial nonsense. If in 2022, real, valid info comes out supporting the Lab Leak theory, it doesn’t absolve me of my 2020 gullibility. I was still wrong to believe it at that time. As with anything, I think truth, motives and nuances matter. I don't know man, if there was a bunch of conspiratorial stuff shared here with fake documents, I missed it. I saw a lot legitimate questions get raised that were called conspiratorial, but unjustly so in my opinion. As a matter of fact I think sources significantly improved over the course of this thread but yet were never given a fair shake by one side of the aisle. I think that is probably the greatest source of frustration. If I remember correctly it sort of went like this: Hey here's an intersting video from a virologist "nah..that guy is a vet"...ok here's an evolutionary biologist "nope, he's no good either", ok how about this ER doctor that has successfully treated thousands of Covid patients ..."yawn." Ok, ok...how about this cardiologist that has been published more than anyone else in his field? "He's no good either." Very rarely if ever, disputing the actual information being shared, always attacking the person or the source of the link. That is incredibly frustrating, particularly when these leaked emails from Fauci seem to imply that the narrative that many on this thread have stood on was deliberately and deceitfully crafted. Again, I don't have a particular bone to pick with you at all, quite the opposite actually but I do hope to shed some light on some of the frustrations that are being voiced here. No, sorry, I meant that in general. Buddies of mine, family members, the culture at large. There has been plenty of dodgy stuff shared here, but I wasn’t thinking of any of that specifically in making that last point. I don’t agree with your characterization of how stuff has been treated in this thread, but that’s neither here nor there. Just clarifying that I wasn’t thinking of this thread in pointing out that valid info coming to light later doesn’t retroactively make previous, bad info become good. That’s just a general point that makes it tricky when people want to take victory laps on new info. |
|
|
|
Post by seawell on Jan 12, 2022 18:00:13 GMT -6
I don't know man, if there was a bunch of conspiratorial stuff shared here with fake documents, I missed it. I saw a lot legitimate questions get raised that were called conspiratorial, but unjustly so in my opinion. As a matter of fact I think sources significantly improved over the course of this thread but yet were never given a fair shake by one side of the aisle. I think that is probably the greatest source of frustration. If I remember correctly it sort of went like this: Hey here's an intersting video from a virologist "nah..that guy is a vet"...ok here's an evolutionary biologist "nope, he's no good either", ok how about this ER doctor that has successfully treated thousands of Covid patients ..."yawn." Ok, ok...how about this cardiologist that has been published more than anyone else in his field? "He's no good either." Very rarely if ever, disputing the actual information being shared, always attacking the person or the source of the link. That is incredibly frustrating, particularly when these leaked emails from Fauci seem to imply that the narrative that many on this thread have stood on was deliberately and deceitfully crafted. Again, I don't have a particular bone to pick with you at all, quite the opposite actually but I do hope to shed some light on some of the frustrations that are being voiced here. No, sorry, I meant that in general. Buddies of mine, family members, the culture at large. There has been plenty of dodgy stuff shared here, but I wasn’t thinking of any of that specifically in making that last point. I don’t agree with your characterization of how stuff has been treated in this thread, but that’s neither here nor there. Just clarifying that I wasn’t thinking of this thread in pointing out that valid info coming to light later doesn’t retroactively make previous, bad info become good. That’s just a general point that makes it tricky when people want to take victory laps on new info. So we were talking about two different groups really, all good! I think it would be more productive though if we stick to what is actually being said here so that we aren't placing our frustrations with family members, co-workers, etc.. on other forum members. I figured you wouldn't agree with the characterization of how things have been shared and shot down in this thread but I can say that is certainly what it has felt like to quite a few people here. I completely agree with you, victory laps from either side are never going to go over well here. This whole situation sucks...nobody is winning. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 13, 2022 8:09:27 GMT -6
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/11/scientists-believed-covid-leaked-wuhan-lab-feared-debate-could/Fauci and company knew it was leaked from Wuhan, but were afraid that it would damage international relations and "science" in general if they didn't cover it up. I really don't know how to articulate how simple this all is if you just look at it. The head-in-sand around the whole thing is astonishing. I get it though, it would upset so many people's world views and destroy their feeling of safety to know that this kind of thing is one tiny mistake away at any moment in time.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 13, 2022 8:37:09 GMT -6
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/11/scientists-believed-covid-leaked-wuhan-lab-feared-debate-could/Fauci and company knew it was leaked from Wuhan, but were afraid that it would damage international relations and "science" in general if they didn't cover it up. I really don't know how to articulate how simple this all is if you just look at it. The head-in-sand around the whole thing is astonishing. I get it though, it would upset so many people's world views and destroy their feeling of safety to know that this kind of thing is one tiny mistake away at any moment in time. I don't know how to stress this any more: I don't care about Upset World Views or any nonsense like that. As I've said, if/when real info comes out, let the chips fall where they may. This latest thing you guys are talking about may prove to be the bombshell you believe it is, it may not. There's too much guesswork to say yet. It's one thing if the natural succession theory really is/was considered to be more likely and they poo-poo'd the lab leak theory. It's another if they thought the lab leak was actually more likely and still poo-poo'd it. We don't know that from these partial email snippets. It's clear you really, really want to believe it's the sexy version, and that's fine. My dude, you may end up being right. But you can't post Project Veritas stuff in one breath [along with a lot of pearl clutching about a Madman Destorying The World(!)] and then legit stuff in another and be shocked when you get different responses to them. If one sexy news story turns out to be true, it doesn't somehow make other false, sexy stories also become true. Multiple things can be true at the same time. There can be a thriving industry of conspiratorial B.S. flooding certain segments of the landscape AND there can be serious wrongdoing by government agencies. As always, it doesn't matter whether someone desperately wants their conspiratorial worldview confirmed or someone else desperately wants that conspiratorial worldview diminished, there is some factual reality. And getting at it involves nuance and patience and not getting ahead of our skis claiming we know stuff that we don't. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 13, 2022 9:02:55 GMT -6
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/11/scientists-believed-covid-leaked-wuhan-lab-feared-debate-could/Fauci and company knew it was leaked from Wuhan, but were afraid that it would damage international relations and "science" in general if they didn't cover it up. I really don't know how to articulate how simple this all is if you just look at it. The head-in-sand around the whole thing is astonishing. I get it though, it would upset so many people's world views and destroy their feeling of safety to know that this kind of thing is one tiny mistake away at any moment in time. I don't know how to stress this any more: I don't care about Upset World Views or any nonsense like that. As I've said, if/when real info comes out, let the chips fall where they may. This latest thing you guys are talking about may prove to be the bombshell you believe it is, it may not. There's too much guesswork to say yet. It's one thing if the natural succession theory really is/was considered to be more likely and they poo-poo'd the lab leak theory. It's another if they thought the lab leak was actually more likely and still poo-poo'd it. We don't know that from these partial email snippets. It's clear you really, really want to believe it's the sexy version, and that's fine. My dude, you may end up being right. But you can't post Project Veritas stuff in one breath [along with a lot of pearl clutching about a Madman Destorying The World(!)] and then legit stuff in another and be shocked when you get different responses to them. If one sexy news story turns out to be true, it doesn't somehow make other false, sexy stories also become true. Multiple things can be true at the same time. There can be a thriving industry of conspiratorial B.S. flooding certain segments of the landscape AND there can be serious wrongdoing by government agencies. As always, it doesn't matter whether someone desperately wants their conspiratorial worldview confirmed or someone else desperately wants that conspiratorial worldview diminished, there is some factual reality. And getting at it involves nuance and patience and not getting ahead of our skis claiming we know stuff that we don't. I just know how these things are. People don't want to feel scared that their lives are always on the hairy edge of destruction so they always tend to believe the safer narratives. The government and media know this. All they have to do is keep the truth murky and people will ignore the rest using "but you're just chasing the sexy story, you conspiracy theorist!" hand waving. Denial is natural, but we simply cannot leave these stone unturned and we have to fight the natural penchant for people to look away from the scary parts until nobody cares. Unfortunately that's exactly what's happening, and it's happening because the man who caused it all is the one in charge of delivering the official policy. It's the purest conflict of interest I've ever seen and nobody seems to think it's a problem. And your goalposts for "real info" are misguided. I've seen it all before though, goalposts placed at a hard to reach distance so that no contrary evidence can ever change minds. However, court cases aren't won by "facts" alone, they are won by overwhelming amounts of evidence, which includes facts as well as circumstances. |
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Jan 13, 2022 9:06:53 GMT -6
Funny thing is I’d contend people would feel safer knowing the virus was man made, and leaked by human error, rather than the random chaos of nature producing a society-crushing pandemic. It’s why conspiratorial thinking is so attractive: it lends order to a chaotic and callous universe.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 13, 2022 9:16:38 GMT -6
Funny thing is I’d contend people would feel safer knowing the virus was man made, and leaked by human error, rather than the random chaos of nature producing a society-crushing pandemic. It’s why conspiratorial thinking is so attractive: it lends order to a chaotic and callous universe. I can see where you're coming from, but I'd contend the opposite based on what I've heard from people. I know some really, really covid-phobic folks and they simply won't accept that it might have been man-made. Deeper discussions reveal that it's more comforting to them believing that it was just pure chance. If it's "just chance" then they don't have to question their faith in humanity or the government. It seems the idea that the lab-leak theory opens up the possibility of this happening again and again as well as the knowledge that humans are doing this to ourselves and that the next time could wipe out humanity. Most of these folks didn't have any clue that the last few SARS outbreaks in china were directly related to mishaps at the same facility that SARS-COV-2 was being worked on. Once they knew that, their paranoia quotient increased based on the new knowledge that these have happened with scary regularity. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 13, 2022 10:10:33 GMT -6
I don't know how to stress this any more: I don't care about Upset World Views or any nonsense like that. As I've said, if/when real info comes out, let the chips fall where they may. This latest thing you guys are talking about may prove to be the bombshell you believe it is, it may not. There's too much guesswork to say yet. It's one thing if the natural succession theory really is/was considered to be more likely and they poo-poo'd the lab leak theory. It's another if they thought the lab leak was actually more likely and still poo-poo'd it. We don't know that from these partial email snippets. It's clear you really, really want to believe it's the sexy version, and that's fine. My dude, you may end up being right. But you can't post Project Veritas stuff in one breath [along with a lot of pearl clutching about a Madman Destorying The World(!)] and then legit stuff in another and be shocked when you get different responses to them. If one sexy news story turns out to be true, it doesn't somehow make other false, sexy stories also become true. Multiple things can be true at the same time. There can be a thriving industry of conspiratorial B.S. flooding certain segments of the landscape AND there can be serious wrongdoing by government agencies. As always, it doesn't matter whether someone desperately wants their conspiratorial worldview confirmed or someone else desperately wants that conspiratorial worldview diminished, there is some factual reality. And getting at it involves nuance and patience and not getting ahead of our skis claiming we know stuff that we don't. I just know how these things are. People don't want to feel scared that their lives are always on the hairy edge of destruction so they always tend to believe the safer narratives. The government and media know this. All they have to do is keep the truth murky and people will ignore the rest using "but you're just chasing the sexy story, you conspiracy theorist!" hand waving. Denial is natural, but we simply cannot leave these stone unturned and we have to fight the natural penchant for people to look away from the scary parts until nobody cares. Unfortunately that's exactly what's happening, and it's happening because the man who caused it all is the one in charge of delivering the official policy. It's the purest conflict of interest I've ever seen and nobody seems to think it's a problem. And your goalposts for "real info" are misguided. I've seen it all before though, goalposts placed at a hard to reach distance so that no contrary evidence can ever change minds. However, court cases aren't won by "facts" alone, they are won by overwhelming amounts of evidence, which includes facts as well as circumstances. Ok, well it’s clear you have a lot of conviction in your beliefs about this, which is totally fine, of course. But you must realize that arguments like “I just know how things are” aren’t gonna carry a lot of weight for someone who doesn’t subscribe to your faith. Personally, I think seeing some cohesive, overarching explanation, all the better if it’s exciting and it vindicates one’s identity, is far more alluring to human nature than dealing with the messy, chaotic, mundane realities that are often present. But either way, these are just our respective defaults. They don’t say anything one way or another about the facts in a given circumstance. And as for all the pandemic/NIH stuff, it’s illusory to think we know everything about it. Exhilarating, but illusory. |
|
|
|
Post by narxist on Jan 18, 2022 12:53:33 GMT -6
There are many smart people here with strong opinions and I find myself wishing they were being expressed in a clear enough way that I could understand them.
If there is new fact-based evidence that Fauci literally caused this pandemic, then I would love to see it. Or perhaps more to the point, I would truly love to understand how and why other people are interpreting the available evidence to mean that. Sincerely - not wanting a debate - wanting to understand.
Clearly, there's a strong possibility it started with a lab leak in Wuhan, and that's been clear from early in the pandemic to anyone paying even a little bit of attention, no? What's new here that isn't speculation? Asking sincerely.
|
|
|
|
Post by narxist on Jan 18, 2022 12:56:35 GMT -6
Getting frothed up over the salacious, sketchy stuff from dodgy sources, then citing less dodgy sources that don’t say the salacious, sketchy stuff…as a reason we should believe the dodgy sources? This is certainly how it looks from the outside of this conversation. But, again, I think there are pretty smart people engaged in what appears to be that here, so I'd really be appreciative if they'd make it a little clearer that this isn't what they're doing by exlpaining their thinking more clearly. |
|
