I’ve seen denunciations of coronavirus conspiracy theories (e.g. here) and also articles in the media putting forth a theory which seems very similar (e.g. here).
I’m wondering if they’re the same theory, and if so, on what basis it’s considered a CT.
The basic gist of things is the notion that the origin of the virus is a Chinese lab located very close to the purported original source of the virus. Is that a conspiracy theory? If so, why is that CT territory? Is enough known about the origins to definitively rule out the lab?
Or is the CT only related to the notion that the virus itself was created as a bio-weapon, and not simply the notion that it may have accidently leaked from a research facility?
The notion that the virus somehow accidentally leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology is plausible, though AFAICT not currently supported by evidence much better than the fact that this outfit is located close to the epicenter.
But this can’t properly be called a “conspiracy theory” - that would imply a deliberate plan to spread the virus.
Call it CT, call it pragmatism, but I truly believe the Chinese government, not the virus, killed whistleblowing doctor Li Wenliang. The government tried to silence him because reporting the virus made China look bad. Which it is, but China always tries to shape reality to its will.
It’s a CT because not only is there no evidence that it came from a lab, there is ample evidence that it explicitly did not. Using the NY Post (or Daily Mail, or Washington Times) as a cite to give it some aura of respectability is laughable if you know anything about that source.
To my knowledge, the only research suggesting otherwise was an unpublished paper comparing some sequences to those found in HIV, and it was immediate debunked by other researchers and withdrawn by the authors. On the contrary, there is plenty of actual research showing its origins are natural.
It does not appear that you paid much attention to the OP.
All your cites address the question of whether the virus was bioengineered, but not whether it originated from the lab. The OP specifically asked about the distinction between these two aspects.
Ah, so your theory is that the researchers grabbed samples of a bat virus from nearby caves, have been holding on to it but not doing engineering with it, and then that virus escaped the lab. And this chain of events is more likely than the source of that virus being those caves where the virus sits, already exposed to the environment.
No, that doesn’t sound like a conspiracy theory at all.
But FWIW, it’s my understanding that scientists work with viruses for reasons other than creating them via bio-engineering. Do you really disagree with this? If you don’t, then I can’t imagine what basis you might have for your mockery.
Because that theory is pointless. The sequence of the COVID-19 virus is similar to those found in bat caves near Wuhan. If it came from the environment and underwent no engineering, then it’s not really groundbreaking news that it was found out in the environment. We’re not talking about something like smallpox that hasn’t been seen in the wild for years.
The only reason for people to raise this question, again with no evidence, is to suggest, implicitly or explicitly, that it was human-caused. And that certainly deserves mockery.
If the way it was transferred from animals to people was due to lax controls at a scientific facility working on it, then that’s significant, even if the virus wasn’t deliberately created by the facility itself.
The part that makes it a conspiracy theory is there’s a simpler reason that fits observed facts.
Until and unless there’s you know…evidence that makes it the more likely scenario, the working theory that the disease transmission occurred from the natural environment is reasonable.
Pursuing theories for which there is a paucity of evidence and for which a much simpler and eminently more reasonable explanation already exist is a waste of effort and time. Yet it’s a hallmark of conspiracy theorists to insist on that course of action.
I don’t think it’s disputed that viruses from the bat caves were stored at the Wuhan facility (the Level 4 virology lab, not the wet market). The Rutgers professor who keep coming up in the news asserts this as fact. Do you disagree, TroutMan?
The linked article also noted a recent statement from the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology:
It’s certainly nothing conclusive, but I haven’t seen conclusive evidence for any other theory, either. Nor do I see why the possibility of a lab leak is inherently less “simple” or “reasonable” than other theories that are also being asserted without evidence. I guess I don’t see a basis for shutting down scrutiny of the Chinese government’s operation of the virology lab yet.
My Corona virus Corona viral marketing campaign is from YouTube which is Google and Google has access to all human knowledge . . . therefore, much more believable?
I’m sure it was not dismissed out of hand, and people have looked into it. Yet there is still no evidence, just innuendo.
I’m not arguing that there is a 0% chance the source was the lab. Maybe it was. But until there is some evidence – any evidence – of that other than social media posts and click-bait fear mongering, then this remains a conspiracy theory.