@spacecadet does the monthly review article u linked before cover this topic?

No way people still hanging on to the lab leak theory 2 years later lol

i mean, the original lab leak theory about CHINA = BAD = LEAKED VIRUS clearly is bs but the whole "wet market" theory was also basically disproven. the amount of misinfo in the first year of COVID was nuts though. i don't think we'll ever know from that period just how much of info was fake. Almost every video/picture supposedly from China depicting COVID or the effects of COVID, origin of COVID, etc. was all fake.

I don't see how it's been "disproven" when its still what most scientists seem to settle on

I'm not sure what you mean though, that's definitely not the case? First off every single picture which was supposedly from Wuhan depicting the market was proven not to be from there. It's not as if the "it didn't start in a wet market" is some weird thing restricted to only conspiracy alex jones internet...even a quick search of it on google returns actual websites and journals debating it. It's not settled by any means.

my point isn't really that the lab leak is the full truth either...it's just that there's no "clear science" on it or anything. it's still heavily debated and given the mass amount of disinfo during the COVID era esp. during the beginning it's unlikely it'll ever truly be settled

independent.co.uk/news/science/covid-origin-china-wildlife-market-b2132008.html

okay but this is what i'm saying. this is a study making a claim. even the video in the article admits it's a contentious debate and this is progress but not a clear answer. the same guy himself even says (again in the same video) the lab leak theory isn't meritless but this evidence made him change his mind. I don't think there's ever going to be a single definitive answer

Definitely not definitive or anything but it seems to be seen as more likely by most scientists

seems kinda like war when everybody involved is trying to get a hold of the narrative that benefits them

but im not looking forward to the increased frequency of s*** like this happening (more viruses due to climate change etc and mutation) but i feel like we’re in for a f***ed up decade

I'm just saying I don't think the idea of the lab leak theory being this weird outdated easily dismissed theory is fair. You're right the popular view changes regularly but that's kinda what I'm saying - It's not some weird outlier belief only held on r/conspiracy or among quacks which is to be auto-dismissed or anything.
Even last month the WHO was publishing papers saying the theory needed to be looked into more. The hearings here in the US w/ Fauci about gain a function research do not paint a great picture either. I think any weird illuminati or china bad fixtures extrapolated from the theory are BS, especially the type that exist in the JRE-adjacent space obv though

information wars are gonna get even more nuts over the next few years. been an issue for a long time for sure regardless and it hit critical mass w/ COVID and stuff too but the level of psyop over the next few years I think is gonna be insane. the coverage of the ukraine war is a great example of this

I will step in and determine what happened.

I dont think pictures are of big relevance to the researchers lol. But I didn't say that it was settled, I said most scientists seem to settle on the wet market theory and that's definetely the vibe you get if you do a quick google search

There is debate about it of course but even the last WHO report that made headlines for requesting more research on a lab origin says it probably came out the zoo market and the two big studies published yesterday say the same thing.

wow would you look at that haha guess it was the fault of the US this whole time! sure is whacky every single politician is guilty and needs to be prosecuted!! who would have thought, what a shame even if the innocent looking ones are actually guilty and need to be replaced institutionally!

I wasn't saying the pictures were of relevance in the same regard, just that there's a dissonance in what seems settled in public opinion vs scientific or political debate and the public was mislead significantly early on as there was heavy disinformation everywhere.

I'm not doubting the new studies or anything outright, I'm just saying the OP was just acting like the lab leak theory is some weird fringe thing which is dismissable outright. Like even last month here's the WHO saying they want further investigation into the theory (Jun 9): washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/09/who-sago-covid-origins

Yeah but what I'm saying is the evidence has been pointing one way (wet market) for a while and even now that it's more acceptable and even encouraged to look into the lab leak theory they're still pointing to the wet market as the likely origin. Like I said in that new WHO thing they're still saying lab leak is unlikely but it hasn't been looked into enough

My issue is that there are still so many people portraying things as "nobody knows, lab leak and wet market are equally likely" instead of the more accurate "nobody knows but wet market more likely than lab leak"

That's fair, I get what you mean, I do think it's murky though and outright dismissal isn't the correct tactic. In this essay I will demonstrate the leftist case for minecrafting Dr Anthony Fauci because when

@frolein what do you think of ho fung hung ?

thank u

finally somebody

@krishna_bound @DontAtMe what are the best books by Hegel to understand dialectic thinking more ? also would love to be rec secondary sources on those books as well

im gonna be honest i dont recommend reading Hegel directly. even as far as philosophy nerds go and whatever, its unlikely you'll receive a better understanding reading the direct source as much as you will just reading summaries or lectures.
There's nothing especially additional in his work you won't really find through secondary materials or other people extrapolating on him.
If youre specifically looking for dialectics the formation of the Hegelian Dialectic wasnt necessary done by Hegel himself as much as it based on his ideas. Hegel did use a similar model but the direct interpretation of "Hegelian Dialectics" is extrapolated from his work rather than him directly writing about it which is in part what makes it confusing to read the source material for. Well that plus the writing not being super engaging. Reading Science of Logic is basically just reading a textbook.
Most stuff by Hegel is far more applicable to simply read from the people who extrapolated the thought after he laid the groundwork imo. So i.e. it's more the phenomonelogical aspects of it you find interesting I'd recommend reading Husserl or Heideigger instead.
If you do want to torture yourself on Hegel specifically then probably just read Science of Logic, Phenomenology of Spirit, and Elemetns of the Philosophy of Right. There's also the compilation of Lectures on Aesthetics.

Cushvlogs is essential listening