That’s just wild. The one silver lining to T2 is that I’m not shocked by anything anymore. It’s still outrageous, but the surprise is gone.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      24 hours ago

      This nature article has the title

      Wuhan lab samples hold no close relatives to virus behind COVID

      But you previously claimed

      All sequence data, wild type virus, and previous research history clearly show this virus existed in nature

      Which is it?

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Both. “All sequence data, wild type virus, and previous research history” refers to the disease causing virus and wild type relatives. The Wuhan research viruses are unrelated to SARS-CoV-2.

          • rusticus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Good lord you’re dense. What does this even mean and what relevance is it? The nature article and your articles say this wasn’t created in a lab yet you insist on keeping the tinfoil hat on. Lololol

    • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      A YouTube video and an opinion piece lol.

      News investigation & report quoting correspondence between biosafety experts/researchers & their letters to journals?

      a Nature article

      Paywalled & also in the news section?

      It’s possible despite lax biosafety, they didn’t leak the virus & didn’t have it. Based on what little I can read of the article: the word of a person at the center of the matter may be true; however, that’s considerable weight for their word to carry that leaves doubt over impartiality & independence. Findings of an independent monitor/investigation would be more convincing.

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Nature is the most highly regarded scientific publication in the world. I can’t help you with your paywall issues.

        • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          It’s a news article in their news section, not a scientific study, Nature’s domain of prestige/authority. In the hierarchy of evidence, this ranks at the bottom as background information.

          The previous comment stands: it’s an isolated claim lacking independent, impartial corroboration.