Read on Twitter
And investigating zoonotic origins can take decades, and you may NEVER find the "smoking bat" or whatever other intermediate species that may be involved. It's like looking for a needle in a planet-sized haystack.
None of this means we shouldn't do an investigation or that we shouldn't consider all possible hypotheses, and by my estimation there are 3:
1. Zoonotic spillover
2. Lab accident
3. Intentional release
1. Zoonotic spillover
2. Lab accident
3. Intentional release
But we also shouldn't give these hypotheses equal weight, when the current evidence suggests one of these is more likely. We must investigate this objectively and let the evidence lead the way. Publicly proclaiming belief in the lab origin theories harms our ability to do this.
Robust debate is essential to sound science, but that debate should be informed by empirical evidence, not speculation based on pre-existing personal biases. Currently, this entire conversation has been derailed by the latter.
That will impair our ability to actually conduct the investigation that lab origin proponents are constantly clamoring for, and yet they seem unable to recognize that they are hindering, not helping, these efforts.
I urge everyone reading this to let the evidence lead the way, and to contribute to a climate that makes a fair & objective investigation possible. Call conspiracy theories what they are, distinguish between politics and science, and push back against this harmful misinformation.
A pandemic is by definition a global crisis. Telling the true story of its origin will require global cooperation. We can't move forward collaboratively without trust, and that is eroded by when personal bias and conspiracy theories are given equal weight as objective inquiry.
