Chat message

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

1. 2021-05-12 23:19 Edward C. Holmes open
   Let's sleep on it an do it carefully
2. 2021-05-12 23:21 Andrew Rambaut open
   You don't really need to get into the individual arguments I think - just address the non equivalence of saying there isno evidence for either hypothesis - one has a prior probability that is vanishingly small so requires at least some evidence the natural hypothesis is everything else.
3. 2021-05-12 23:22 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Yeah, but the prior doesn't work with them because, Wuhan.
4. 2021-05-12 23:22 Edward C. Holmes open
   I would add: 1. Long evolutionary gap to Yunnan bats. 2. Yunnan bats look close because they mainly sampled Yunnan bats. 3. Two lineages in Wuhan at different markets. 4. No reason not a publish a closer virus before the pandemic.
5. 2021-05-12 23:23 Andrew Rambaut
   I love this one: > --Closest known (not that close) viral relatives in nature are ~1000 miles from Wuhan So the known relatives are not the close relatives and thus the fact they are far away is expected.
6. 2021-05-12 23:24 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Andrew you nailed that one way back - Ebola virus in West Africa...
7. 2021-05-12 23:24 Andrew Rambaut open
   > To call this scenario a "conspiracy theory" is inappropriate and unfair to everyone involved.
8. 2021-05-12 23:25 Edward C. Holmes open
   Send them this to explain the point: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MMiKyfd6hA0
9. 2021-05-12 23:26 Andrew Rambaut open
   > I would never hang my hat on any of it. But I would send a letter to Science

Full conversation →