It doesn’t really matter what your motivations are If you parrot racist right-wing talking points. The parroting is what is damaging. If you and Ted Cruz are on the same side of an issue, then you are on the wrong side of that issue.
2 Likes
This is not the right way to think about politics
On some issues, it is though…
Holding essentially the exact same position as the WHO is not parroting racist right-wing talking points. Pretending otherwise to score internet points is kinda douchey.
Plenty of people here have gone far beyond the WHO ITT to ‘Pretty sure research into the mystery animal is what caused the virus to be passed to humans in the first place’ and beyond.
1 Like
This is the second time in an hour that you have accused large numbers of nameless straw posters, which is also kinda douchey.
I mean, I provide a quote. Feel free to re-familiarize yourself with this thread. Feel free to look into Robert Redfield, former Trump CDC director, who the anonymized account based that position on. Good luck!
No one here is on Ted Cruz’s side just because they think the lab leak theory has some merit, c’mon man.
They literally parroted Trump’s CDC directors Fox News talking points trolly. Obviously it was to be a contrarian, but that happened, you can scroll up to the beginning of this thread.
If he names names we’ll get a 200 post addition to the about moderation thread.
1 Like
It’s a Senate minority report (i.e., the same Republican slapdicks who’ve been blaming China since day 1) with the help of China-hawks from the Rand Corporation. You should take it about as seriously as Rand Paul going after Anthony Fauci.
Meanwhile:
https://www.science.org/content/article/nam-exonerates-daszak
2 Likes
Yeah there’s obvious bias in the report, and everything/anything new is entirely circumstantial. I felt that the article didn’t really endorse the report’s conclusion and presented the information with more equanimity, but in this environment it’s really difficult to do so with appearing to be leaning one way or the other.
I did not find the argument that China’s speed in developing a vaccine is evidence that they had COVID’s genetic sequence early very persuasive. I admit I find the CCP communications tea-leaf reading interesting, but it also feels a little like examining Bobbi’s vibrating chair.
I don’t doubt for a minute that there are serious safety issues with the lab but uh… what’s the biosafety protocol like in the small farms around Wuhan?
2 Likes
I read the entire ProPublica article. It’s not particularly well organized or written, but there is a lot of good information in there, some of it new.
I think it is worth reading in full. I think it is worth reading without looking for ways to support or discredit previously stated positions.
3 Likes
Cool.
Does this mean you won’t be reading it? I also read the entire Science article you linked about the Senate minority report. It was a pretty dry, both-sides look at the issue that didn’t take an editorial stand one way or the other.
I means I saw and noted the obvious condescension you’re throwing at me. Yes, I read the article every bit as completely and objectively as you did. It’s Senate Republicans and the State Department once again pushing a nothingburger case. Last time it was Pompeo alleging bombshell evidence the intelligence community had that was just too secret to show the public.
I wasn’t throwing condescension at you. I intentionally didn’t direct my comment at anybody because all I wanted to say was that I thought it was worth reading without revisiting old grudges. I am genuinely trying to avoid contributing to the toxicity around here. I guess I failed today.
1 Like
My bad then. I misinterpreted it maybe I’m too prickly this morning.
2 Likes