The certainty with which “expert” opinions are expressed to the public on matters of public policy import is almost always greater than that with which the “experts”, if speaking honestly, would admit to one another. And on the other hand, those “experts” (and others) who distrust the “consensus” frequently exaggerate the extent and sources of doubt. But in this case I agree with Pielke that even if one has just a 10% credence in the lab leak origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (as apparently was the case for at least some of the authors of the “Proximal Origin” paper), then that should by no means be considered as “case closed” and should motivate a much more serious investigation into whether or not a breach actually occurred, and into the effectiveness (and faithful application) of containment protocols in the research community as a whole. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Source: “We Just Need to Re-Convince Ourselves It’s Coincidence”<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The certainty with which “expert” opinions are expressed to the public on matters of public policy import is almost always greater than that with which the “experts”, if speaking honestly, would admit to one another. And on the other hand, … Continue reading