My key take away from the article beyond the headline:
"Two sources said that the Department of Energy assessed in the intelligence report that it had “low confidence” the Covid-19 virus accidentally escaped from a labe in Wuhan.
Intelligence agencies can make assessments with either low, medium or high confidence. A low confidence assessment generally means that the information obtained is not reliable enough or is too fragmented to make a more definitive analytic judgment or that there is not enough information available to draw a more robust conclusion."
You need to take into account the political fallout for them to claim either medium or high confidence. I’m sure they were pressured or otherwise had some bias to reduce their assessment in order to preserve relations with China.
I personally find the lab leak theory more compatible with Occam’s Razor than the wet market theory. I don’t think there was an actual conspiracy here to release the virus intentionally though, I think it was leaked accidentally (again, Occam’s Razor). That said, I haven’t seen all the research, nor am I an expert at pathology, I’m merely looking at the motivations for the various parties involved and the research I have seen. Perhaps there’s some compelling evidence and arguments an expert pathologist could provide to change my mind.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/26/politics/covid-lab-leak-wuhan-china-intelligence/index.html
Turns out it holds a little more weight than previously acknowledged, at least.
My key take away from the article beyond the headline:
"Two sources said that the Department of Energy assessed in the intelligence report that it had “low confidence” the Covid-19 virus accidentally escaped from a labe in Wuhan.
Intelligence agencies can make assessments with either low, medium or high confidence. A low confidence assessment generally means that the information obtained is not reliable enough or is too fragmented to make a more definitive analytic judgment or that there is not enough information available to draw a more robust conclusion."
I think they meant lab, not labe. Not sure though
You need to take into account the political fallout for them to claim either medium or high confidence. I’m sure they were pressured or otherwise had some bias to reduce their assessment in order to preserve relations with China.
I personally find the lab leak theory more compatible with Occam’s Razor than the wet market theory. I don’t think there was an actual conspiracy here to release the virus intentionally though, I think it was leaked accidentally (again, Occam’s Razor). That said, I haven’t seen all the research, nor am I an expert at pathology, I’m merely looking at the motivations for the various parties involved and the research I have seen. Perhaps there’s some compelling evidence and arguments an expert pathologist could provide to change my mind.