|
|
|
|
|
by bawolff
1723 days ago
|
|
> It's like seeing smoke billowing out of a building and refusing to accept that there's a fire until you see the flames. The stuff you cite is circumstantial at best. Yes, given the seriousness of covid i would like someone to investigate it, but i would hardly call it billowing smoke. > Very convenient that your standard of evidence surpasses anything we can possibly obtain after the CCP scrubbed everything. Is that really relavent? Say CCP would in theory destroy evidence if such a situation arised. That's not an argument that says it is china's fault, its just an argument that we might not ever know. Its not like the people arguing that it was natural aren't using lack of chinese whistleblower as the evidence for naturalness. At the very least i'd like evidence that suggests there is a higher probability that it was a chinese experiment than a natural occurance. Occam's razor and all. Arguing that it might be impossible to know what happened, increases uncertainty, but doesn't affect the relative probabilities. |
|