Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by qkqk 1777 days ago
Right, you can tell by the publication date (it's in the URL), why I say "they reference a medical journal article from 1.5 years ago as evidence."

What you said is not true, and their position hasn't shifted (they're critical of those that did). https://www.snopes.com/news/2021/07/16/lab-leak-evidence/
2 comments
unanswered 1777 days ago
You're still linking the retconned article. In the original it is as I said.

This new article is also extremely disingenuous. It argues "there's no evidence Wuhan isolated RaTG13". Well no shit, since the best evidence is that RaTG13 is completely made up, never existed in reality, and never existed on paper until early 2020. For snopes to take that evidence and turn it around and say it's evidence for the Wuhan Institute being totally reliable and trustworthy is perverse.

link
qkqk 1777 days ago
That is false, and I linked to a new, different article, not a "retconned" one. They didn't change their stance, they criticize those that do, and reference a medical journal article from 1.5 years ago as evidence.

As you said, you agree with the evidence they cite...

link