/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15435411
>>15435415
>>15435959 (cont.)

Admittedly, your Reddit link gives me the impression that you're just trolling and not entirely serious, but again that is exactly the problem. It is very difficult to find anyone from the anti-lab leak side who is willing to honestly discuss the topic, despite the fact that they constitute the dominant position on the topic in the media and pop culture.

Again, the question is not whether the Lab Leak Hypothesis is true or whether or not the majority of people talking about it are racist. The question at hand is an epistemological question and perhaps a linguistic question. I'm not asking a biological question about the origins of COVID, nor am I asking a sociological question about whether or not most people who believe the lab leak hypothesis are racists or conservatives. Once again, the question I am asking is what is it that makes the lab leak hypothesis an "anti-science" or "conspiratorial" position, whereas denial of the lab leak hypothesis is not "anti-science"? We here constantly in the media and the news that disinformation and science denial is not just a political concern, but a serious threat to the very foundations of democracy and modern civilization. If that is indeed the case, then why should we not be concerned about people who falsely claimed, without evidence, that COVID did not leak from lab? If the Lab Leak Hypothesis is indeed a legitimate scientific question - as you yourself seem to recognize on some level, since you acknowledge that scientists are currently investigating the topic - then falsely claiming that the Lab Leak Hypothesis is a "conspiracy theory" would itself constitute a form of science denial. What makes that kind of science denial more acceptable? Why shouldn't we be trying to censor people for calling the Lab Leak Hypothesis a conspiracy theory?