Re:Covid: Summary of lab-origin hypothesis
by oasisbob on Thursday September 22, 2022 @10:40PM
(#32947379)
> Not only is their argument for two introductions not a standard molecular clock approach, but it's not a molecular clock approach at all, since "Inferring" provides no support
Okay, lets revisit this now that some of the terminology confusion is recognized.
"Inferring the MRCA of SARS-CoV-2" introduces their phylogenies. It was produced with BEAST as described in their methods. I believe this is the model you were referring to as "Inferring." Yes?
I don't understand what you're trying to say here. If you don't understand how their phylogeny helps support their theory of multiple introductions, I don't know what to tell you. Maybe just another clarification of what you're trying to say would help.
> I'd note that you yourself referred me to "Separate", back in ... So why did you switch to "Inferring"
Because we're discussing multiple things in the same paper?
Okay, lets revisit this now that some of the terminology confusion is recognized.
"Inferring the MRCA of SARS-CoV-2" introduces their phylogenies. It was produced with BEAST as described in their methods. I believe this is the model you were referring to as "Inferring." Yes?
I don't understand what you're trying to say here. If you don't understand how their phylogeny helps support their theory of multiple introductions, I don't know what to tell you. Maybe just another clarification of what you're trying to say would help.
> I'd note that you yourself referred me to "Separate", back in ... So why did you switch to "Inferring"
Because we're discussing multiple things in the same paper?