|
|
|
|
|
by fzeroracer
1385 days ago
|
|
The problem with your argument and anyone else's argument that alleges grand conspiracy among scientists is that you always take a US centric view and pretend the US is the only place in the world with scientists. Scientists like many other individuals are divided by country. There are many countries out there that would love to do nothing but prove that this was a lab leak so that they could take a swing at China. All of that information is accessible and public. In order for grand corruption theory to make sense you would need to posit some way not only for the US to suppress this information perfectly but also control every single other countries scientific research. |
|
As for the rest of the world, all the information is NOT accessible and public. Far from it. China is notoriously secretive and the US bio-security industry certainly isn't more forthcoming. Second, who says there isn't a control mechanism for non-US research science? Where does funding come from outside the US and how is it any different from the situation inside the US? The Atlanticist alliance is one center of knowledge-power. The BRICS may be another. But the idea of sovereignty operating at the country level is absurd on its face. Tell that to th EU member states. Most countries are effectively vassal states for the major powers. You can easily see what happens when they act independently. That's geopolitics 101.
Like the US, China is a major source of funding for developing countries in what it considers to be its sphere of influence. So, pick your poison. Either the US hegemonic science industrial complex or the Chinese version. Either way, savvy people don't shit where they eat. Who do you think wants to take a swing at China? A full investigation of Wuhan (and Ukraine) would likely reveal the hand of the biodefense industry evading local laws by laundering illegal weapons research through fronts like EcoHealth Alliance. Would you like to go up against that? I sure wouldn't.
For your version of things to make sense, you would also need to explain the embargo on the publication of dissenting research across the major US and European journals. Did you propose that just happened organically? Reality is catching up to politics and the consensus is shifting of necessity or the system will lose all remaining credibility.