Even Bezos' Corporate Newsletter The Washington Posts Now Admits -- After Previously Dismissing It as a "Debunked Conspiracy Theory" -- That the Lab Leak Theory Is Perfectly Viable and Plausible and Deserves to be Investigated

Buh-buh-buh Communications Majors who pretend they're scientists told me it was all "discredited."

TWO POSSIBLE theories broadly explain the origin of the coronavirus pandemic that has killed more than 3 million people. The first is the long-observed pathway of zoonotic spillover, in which a pathogen leaps from animal to human. The second is that a laboratory in Wuhan, China, was carrying out risky experiments with bat coronaviruses and could have suffered an accident or leak. Neither theory has proof, but as 18 prominent scientists caution, "both remain viable." The world needs to know.

Well I won't know what to believe until Dr. Guy P. Benson, M.D. tells me what to believe. He has done so much Twitter Research on this topic. I can't wait until he publishes his Twitter Monograph.

A week ago I posted about former NYT "news" man Donald MacNeil admitting that maybe he shouldn't have leveraged his Literally Zero Expertise in Virology to make strident claims about the absurdity of the lab leak theory.

I mentioned to you that I didn't advise you read it, because he excuses his own failures by summoning the power of Orange Man Bad. And also, Fauci Is a Truth-Teller.

He actually excuses his failure to do his job based on his hatred of Trump and admiration of Fauci:

For about a year, [the idea that the lab leak theory was "debunked" and a "conspiracy theory"] was the general wisdom among science writers

Note well: Science writers are not scientists, though, as usual, Communications Majors imagine themselves to be virtual scientists just because they occasionally talk to scientists.

They know little enough about the field to imagine they know almost all of it.

What science writers think about the lab-leak theory should be completely irrelevant.

But it's not, of course. Because they arrogantly decide they get to decide what the truth is. They get to gatekeep which theories the public is permitted to read about.

The "lab-leak theory" migrated back to the far right where it had started -- championed by the folks who brought us Pizzagate, the Plandemic, Kung Flu, Q-Anon, Stop the Steal, and the January 6 Capitol invasion.

Actually it started with The Bat Lady herself admitting that it was completely possible that one of her pet viruses escaped and caused the pandemic.

But do go on, Science Writer.

It was tarred by the fact that everyone backing it seemed to hate not just Democrats and the Chinese Communist Party, but even the Chinese themselves. It spawned racist rumors like "Chinese labs sell their dead experimental animals in food markets."

So obviously none of these are scientific reasons to dismiss the theory -- and of course Don MacNeil could not use actual science to dismiss the theory, as he is not, despite his delusions, a scientist.

So he dismisses it with Communications Major type reasons -- like "Bad People believed this so it's bad."

He then offers the second reason he arrogantly, ignorantly dismissed the lab leak as a possibility:

My first reaction [to Nick Wade's article demonstrating that the lab leak theory was viable and plausible] was dismissive, even though I very much respect Nick as a journalist. (Some of his work is controversial and he can be cranky, but who am I to criticize anyone on those grounds?) I covered the pandemic from its earliest days and I disagreed with his retelling of how the leak-vs.-spillover debate began.

Also, I was offended by some aspects, such as his attacks on Dr. Anthony S. Fauci of the National Institutes of Health and Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance, both of whom I have known for years; I know both are dedicated to saving lives, and they have always told me the truth -- or what they honestly believed to be the truth at the time, because evidence sometimes changes. They are now both getting death threats, and that is repulsive.

Orange Man Bad, Gray Cuck Good.

This is "science" to the Communications Majors of the media.

I bring this up because one of the contributors (I assume) that that Washington Post editorial, Josh Rogin, calls out media "scientists" for justifying their previous failures and claiming, basically, that they were Right to be Wrong.

Which is getting to be the theme song of the "Expert" class.

If you are writing a piece defending yourself for being wrong for a year about the lab leak hypothesis by blaming everyone else except yourself for your own wrongness, you haven't learned a thing and you are just engaged in bullshit navel-gazing that literally nobody cares about.

I think a lot of science writers are racing to think "How can i position myself" and "How can I seem reasonable while changing my position" and "Aren't I great for eventually being objective after failing for a year." It's transparent and besides the point.

What all these science journalists won't admit is they got took by their best scientist sources, who misled them, on purpose, to the detriment of science, journalism and our public health. The scientists who got it right were the ones who had no conflicts of interest.

And then to say "oh well I guess we'll never know" is an awful copout. If you are willing to admit the lab leak theory is plausible, you MUST call for a full investigation NOW, including our labs who have crucial information. In any sane world, that would already be underway.

I believe he's calling out MacNeil, but he might be calling out any number of Media Scientists.

Drew Holden compiled a great thread noting all of our Media Scientists sagely informing us that the lab leak theory is a debunked conspiracy theory -- based on the same Orange Man Bad/Gray Cuck Good "scientific reasoning" that MacNeil admits to.

CNN was, of course, the worst:

Did I say CNN is the worst?

Well, CNN and Jen Rubin.

Politifact has sent its previous Communications Major "Science" Fact-Check on the lab leak hypothesis to the memory hole while PoltitiFact conducts "further revie."

Here's PolitiFact's bullshit statement, if you can't read it in that tweet:

When this fact-check was first published in September 2020, PolitiFact's sources included researchers who asserted the SARS-CoV-2 virus could not have been manipulated. That assertion is now more widely disputed. For that reason, we are removing this fact-check from our database pending a more thorough review. Currently, we consider the claim to be unsupported by evidence and in dispute.

Memory-holing it, they mean. "Removing it from our database" just means "we are disappearing our arrogant, ignorant error."

This is why I get insane about the media's stance that they will not cover competing theories and political beliefs evenly, because they know which is true and which is false, and it is their duty to "protect" the public from false claims.

How the hell would they know what is true or false? As I've mentioned before, of the so-called Educated Classes, they are the least educated -- the only "educated" people they're more educated than are... teachers.

The biggest fucking idiots in the word conceive themselves as combination Philosopher-Scientist Sages gifted with the ability to finally decide the answers to economic, political, scientific, and metaphysical questions that have remained open questions for centuries.

But oh, now Lester Fucking Holt is going to tell us what's Right and what's a Debunked Conspiracy Theory, huh?

Drew Holden concludes his thread thus:

Do we know for certain how the pandemic started? No, and it isn’t clear that we ever will. I tried to give a lot of leeway on this one given that.

But as you can see, the narrative was strong, the dismissal of other ideas was near-religious, and now it's as if it never happened.

Events like this do infinitely more to undermine America's faith in experts and the media than anything Trump could ever do or say. And it's all both self-inflected and avoidable.

But too many people can’t seem to help themselves. And whole industries suffer as a result.

And remember, all of this is coming from the same people who purport to be deeply concerned with the supposed plague of mis- and disinformation.

@NellieBowles puts it perfectly:

Nellie Bowles @NellieBowles The liberal consensus about-face on the lab leak hypothesis and whether it can even be discussed is the best possible example of why "banning disinformation" is an extremely dangerous, murky zone best not managed by ideologues

This situation had many of the classic elements of bad reporting of late: uncritically trusting dishonest sources, rushing to a conclusion because it would hurt President Trump, media circular logic.

And it had an unsurprising result: a huge & quickly memoryholed media failure.

Here here.

And let me repeat Nellie Bowles' point again:

The liberal consensus about-face on the lab leak hypothesis and whether it can even be discussed is the best possible example of why "banning disinformation" is an extremely dangerous, murky zone best not managed by ideologues.

And best not managed by Communications Majors, too.

posted by Ace at 01:18 PM

| Access Comments