ab7675226

The unsolved (i.e., we don't know if they stop or not) potential Busy Beaver machines for N=5 look like versions of the Collatz algorithms.

"Rasmussen notes another major piece of new evidence against a lab origin: If Covid-19 were invented as part of a benevolent gain-of-function experiment, the goal would be to make it more transmissible, or more lethal to people, in order to study that strain in the lab. But when current strains of Covid-19 are cultured in cells in the laboratory, the virus tends to mutate fast and become less contagious to humans. "

The author presents the mutation history as an argument against a 'benevolent gain-of-function experiment.' But the key word there is 'benevolent.' And it is there on purpose. Let me formalize this: Set(gain-of-function experiments) - Set(benevolent gain-of-function experiments) => Set(non-benevolent gain-of-function experiments).

So if it was a lab leak from a gain-of-function experiment, it is, according to Rasmussen, a lab leak from a biowarfare gain-of-function experiment.

"WIV officials told the investigators that serum samples for all staff and students in the bat coronavirus group subsequently tested negative for Covid antibodies. We have only their word to go on because the lab hasn’t been independently audited, but if that’s true,..."

My goodness, that statement from the essay is missing critical context. The lab hasn't been independently audited because the CCP refused permission for any independent inspections.

And yes, you are allowed to take into account their refusal to allow inspections when making a judgement on whether the CCP is covering up a lab-leak.

It has taken us millennia to understand that the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused.

To claim that someone benefits from Structural Racism is an accusation. Yet Structural Racism is poorly defined and is - in practice - used as a grab-bag to contain any disparity, any grievance, and any complaint. Thus, it is impossible to defend against. Indeed to defend against it is to 'benefit from White Privilege.' Hence the Kafka-Trap book, 'White Fragility.'

There is nothing good about this sort of stuff and it needs to go away.

It's not that you need to tighten up the rules... it's that you need to actually follow them. The Wuhan lab had a reputation for not following the rules for the CCP-Claimed Biosafety Level 4.

Occam's Razor indeed. The lab in Wuhan was studying bats and coronaviruses. Animal transmission is completely consistent with a lab leak, especially given that the virus in question is transmissible before symptoms.

The wet market in Wuhan was not selling bats.

There are thousands of wet markets throughout China. Even if you restrict your view to major cities only, there's over 100 cities in China with a million inhabitants.

There were 2 known locations in China where coronaviruses were being studied - Beijing and Wuhan.

Now apply Bayesian analysis.

This is before you look at the coverup and the history of diseases escaping from research labs all over the world and the documented inadequate safety measures in the Chinese labs.