|
|
|
|
|
|
by groby_b
2099 days ago
|
|
|
There are, however, strong indications. I don't have my cites handy, but IIRC for COVID, they were twofold. One, it relied on a mechanism that pre-COVID was considered ineffective/borderline for spread, and that actually doesn't work well in simulations - so it's unlikely humans would've picked that. Two, it's closer to typical bat viruses than typical coronaviruses - again, an unlikely choice for humans to make. Ah, here we go: https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-not-human-made-in-la... No, that doesn't rule out manmade 100%, but it makes it quite unlikely. It's essentially saying "hey, I built a virus in a structure that doesn't rely match a well-working virus class. Also, it completely fails to do what we want to do in simulations. We should invest a lot of money to build that". Occam's barbershop would like to point out the very high number of unlikely events required to go down that path ;) |
|
|