[LatteLazy]

The top comment in this thread:

>I wonder how many people who are seemingly willing to believe the self-serving CCP party-line on this, would be just as believing of the owners of a nuclear power plant in their town, once the drinking water became radioactive, claiming "it didn't come from the plant, someone else down the street must have done it" - that is just about as believable as this.

Absolutely sure the CCP are lying (I don't trust them either but that's not proof they're lying is it?)

Another comment here:

>I don't believe this to be true. I consider the likelyhood that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the cause of this to be much higher than that the seafood market in wuhan was the cause and there's no reason to trust any media or NGO to be truthful in that regard.

Literally "I don't believe the facts".

That's just this thread, on HN.

It's really concerning, or it was when I thought people could be self governing. /EdgyBS

[tick_tock_tick]

> Literally "I don't believe the facts".

Where is the fact in there? "China investigated itself and found themselves not guilty" does not make a "fact".

[LatteLazy]

Well first,:

>there is no reason to trust any media or NGO to be truthful in that regard.

So if there are facts, you cannot believe them and OP doesn't.

And Second:

For arguments stake, let's assume that is correct and there are zero facts. So what can you conclude?

Nothing! It's possible there was a lab leak, it's possible there wasn't, we just do not know. That would be a fine conclusion.

So why has Op decided one possible conclusions is "much higher (probability) than" the others?

We don't know if there is a god or not. So concluding one particular religion is correct is dumb. The same applies to people claiming one theory or another is right re Covid Origins.

That is where the disregard for (lack of) facts comes in. If you don't know, you don't know; you don't get to decide with certainty what reality is because looking is too hard.

[encryptluks2]

To be fair, if 100 years ago some scientist wrote a paper about how being a certain race made you more prone to violence or how lobotomies are safe and effective.. there would be people saying you don't believe the facts of you don't agree. So, before you judge people maybe reflect on history a little and see that people have reasons to distrust government. A single paper doesn't prove anything. It must be reproducible throughout the scientific community.

[LatteLazy]

That's the weird thing. 100 years ago I'd have doubted that. Some people would have been sure it was 100% accurate and others that all medicine was just nonsense.

And we're in the same place now.

Because people 100% believe things based on zero evidence.