Yesterday I passed along the news that new intelligence had persuaded the Department of Energy to support the COVID lab-leak theory with "low confidence." That was from the Wall Street Journal. Today the New York Times has the same story but adds this:
While the department shared the information with other agencies, none of them changed their conclusions, officials said.
I think we can pretty safely say this is a nothingburger, though I'm sure congressional Republicans will go to town with it. I can't wait.¹
¹This is sarcasm. I would be happy to wait forever.
I am now making over $15k every month just by doing an easy j0b 0nl!ne from home using my laptop. I am a student and after my college just doing this easy j0b for maximum 2 hrs a day. Very easy to do j0b and earn!ng from this are much bettrt than other office j0bs. Everybody can now get this and start making extra dollars 0nl!ne by just follow instructions on this s!te.
====)> https://www.pay.hiring9.com
I was actually thinking it was just something to throw at China, in the circumstances.
Nuance is not something America does...well.
If by "well" you mean "at all" — agreed!
I am a Democrat who works with and has many Republican friends. And no, I do not believe all Republicans are MAGA or crazy: but yes, many Republican's are nuts!
To paraphrase a friend from work:
'The controversy is not, if the Covid virus originated in a lab in China, as the information is unclear at this time. Rather, the controversy is that much of the mainstream media, similar to the Hunter Biden laptop, in the run up to the Presidential election, quickly took a strong position. Now we know the facts are far less clear, and it feels like Democratic leaning censorship by the mainstream media.'
While, clearly, one can disagree with my friend, I THINK his point is around media reaction, with a partisan lean, in the face of uncertain information.
Well, now we’ll get to see partisan lean in the other direction, in the face of still-uncertain information.
KenSchulz - agreed!
It seems to me, any honest broker on this topic, must say that the origins is uncertain: nothing definitive can be said on the lab versus natural variation dispute...
In the face of uncertainty, dont we want the media to push back against those claiming certainty without any supporting evidence? That isnt bias or partisanship. Its all to rare good journalism.
Its sad that the President chose to mislead people, but it isnt fair to accuse bias just because an organization isnt parroting the Presidents message.
The mainstream media is certainly eager to report the dribs and drabs of these targetted leaks. Did their partisan lean suddenly vanish?
Even with the carefully targetted recent leaks, the media's message from 3 years ago still looks pretty accurate. We still have no evidence of a lab leak and we should still be wary of people claiming certainty on the lab leak.
jdubs - I do not know the origins of Covid nor if the Hunter Biden laptop is 'accurate.'
Rather, without putting words in my friend's mouth, I think his point was the mainstream media selected, for partisan reasons, to pretend there was only one side (there could not be a lab leak and the laptop was a fake) on these controversial topics: when, in fact, the truth on either of these items remains unclear and should have been treated accordingly.
Basically, media should report the news versus alter the news. Note, I believe that Fox News is a huge offender of the concept I just highlighted. However, CNN and MSNBC have, on occasion, also drifted from the concept I suggest.
Nate Silver put out a Tweet yesterday excoriating unspecified scientists and public health experts for "supressing" information on the lab leak hypothesis. My take is: what suppression? We've been hearing about the lab leak hypothesis since the winter of 2020. And fair play! It remains a plausible (if not particularly likely) theory that can't be ruled out. But there's been no censorship that I can see—at least any that even approaches effectiveness.
Yay! Nuance.
Kevin - this is why so many people don't accept the notion that the "Lab Leak Hypothesis" is reality - because the people pushing the theory don't care about the truth of it, either. It exists to push a specific narrative, not to try to get to reality.
You can moan all you like about that, but complaining that people wont give a theory a chance when the people pushing it don't give a shit, either, is just doomed. You're watching people play polo and telling them to play football.
I always wonder if Trump withdrawing our scientists from China's version of the CDC might have closed down any opportunity to get an actual answer as well as being able to act on the outbreak faster. But getting to watch the lack of cognitive dissonance of COVID being both fake and a real Chinese plot for Fox is fun to...
"I always wonder if Trump withdrawing our scientists from China's version of the CDC might have closed down any opportunity to get an actual answer as well as being able to act on the outbreak faster. "
It certainly hampered our ability to notify local Chinese authorities and coordinate with them, like we had done with prior zoonotic outbreaks. I think that's (yet) an(other) unsung failure of the Trump admin.
I predict that releasing poorly researched findings with a "low confidence" qualification will be the new fad among lazy bureaucrats going forward.
Everything about this episode, from the "low confidence" bullshit to the bad faith latching on by Republicans and right-wing media, is just so representative of the pathetic state of our discourse.
'Flood the zone with shit', amirite?
Y'know, I am left dazzled by the phrases that appeared in the same release:
"...highly likely that ..."
and
"...low confidence in the conclusion..."
This must represent a new high in obfuscation.
The obvious but unspoken problem with the lab leak hypothesis is that it would unleash a bunch of beatings and killings of Asian Americans.
Well, there's this other problem with the hypotheses--"low confidence in the conclusions."
70% of Americans think there was a lab leak and that result only leans Republican.
[[Citation needed]].
I know this is accepted fact among some, but has anyone really proven that stuff like this actually happened? And if it actually WAS a lab leak (which I don't think it was but am not certain), should we repress such findings on this basis?
So therefore we should not pursue or find out the truth about something that could happen again if we don't understand it? Excuses, excuses.
I understand different agencies in the intelligence community (but not why we have 18??) can have different assessments, but I don't understand how the Energy Department would have unique sources of intelligence.
"but not why we have 18??"
FWIW, I've found compelling the statements of Russian dissidents who suggest that having a unified intelligence aparatus is bad because having different agencies effectively competing in delivering information to decisionmakers helps keep them (more) honest and (more) in check.
Also, we're a big country, with a lot of different government agencies and structures. One could just as easily ask why it is that we have 50 state governments or 3,000 county governments.
That's a very good question. Why not abolish the states?
Do you drink colloidal silver?
First, I thought you ditched nothingburger? Second, it seems more likely that the DoE's expertise has more to do with its changed assessment than being a nothingburger. Let's see what that intelligence is -- it seems quite likely it'll be leaked soon, given the politics in the House. Finally, it's disturbing how people so quickly align their opinions based on their political leanings on topics things that ought to be apolitical.
Amen.
Why is DOE even involved? As far as I know, viruses are neither a source of energy or of nuclear weapons.
The national labs have expanded into all areas of research, though I don't think any of them are doing lab work on pandemic viruses.
Why the hell is the ENERGY Department releasing an opinion about this? How is that in their area of expertise? And does anyone there have a clue of what the media response would be to make a statement essentially that the lab leak is "likely" but with "low confidence"? How can something be "likely" with "low confidence?"
Of course, the headlines all read essentially as "Government now says COVID was created in a Chinese lab." And no one at DOE cares? This smells very fishy to me.
All this hoopla is part of the continuing campaign, mostly Russian, to discredit the US (and Chinese) governments. It means nothing at all. Next week it'll be space aliens.