Friday, January 14, 2022

Why Did They Label Lab Leak Theory A "Dangerous Conspiracy Theory"?

For all of 2020, the idea that Covid could be due to a "lab leak" was "fringe disinformation". As this NY Times article reports: 

The common reaction in elite liberal circles? A Washington Post reporter called it a “fringe theory” that “has been repeatedly disputed by experts.” The Atlantic Council accused Cotton of abetting an “infodemic” by “pushing debunked claim that the novel coronavirus may have been created in a Wuhan lab.” A writer for Vox said it was a “dangerous conspiracy theory” being advanced by conservatives “known to regularly spew nonsense (and bash China).

But why would our "trusted elites" do such a thing? As the Ridley article points out:

The emails unveiled this week reveal no good scientific reason at all for why these leading virologists changed their minds and became deniers rather than believers in even the remote possibility of a lab leak, all in just a few days in February 2020. No new data, no new arguments. But they do very clearly reveal a blatant political reason for the volte-face. Speculating about a lab leak, said Ron Fouchier, a Dutch researcher, might ‘do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular’. Francis Collins was pithier, worrying about ‘doing great potential harm to science and international harmony’. Contradicting Donald Trump, protecting science’s reputation at all costs and keeping in with those who dole out large grants are pretty strong incentives to change one’s mind.

Naturally it would be certifiable crazy to consider the possibility that the "lab leak" was not an accident, right? 

I know if my IBM taskmasters had me working on a project to enhance computer viruses to make them harder to detect, easier to spread, etc, I would NEVER suspect that they had any ulterior motives. Like maybe they had agreements with a few big anti-virus companies to release anti-virus software that was absolutely required to remove this enhanced virus? Certainly we trust big business,  big pharma, big government to never do such a thing. Right? 

Did we miss National Socialist Germany? The USSR? 9-11? Millions of babies murdered in their mother's womb?  Is it unimaginable in such a world to trade off the deaths of a few million elderly people soon to die anyway for a vast increase in government control and massive profits for the Davos elite? 

We live in an amoral world. Catholic priests abuse boys. Powerful men fly on the "lolita express".  Presidents stain the carpet of the Oval Office with their semen with impunity. What part of "no rules" (for those who control and support "the narrative") is it that you have not taken to heart? 

As Nietzsche said "without God, all is permissible". 

No comments:

Post a Comment