Hacker News Reader

Comment by markdog12 | Hacker News Reader

I came to this link from HN, but noticed it was deleted? Not sure why?

Probably because it makes a lot of claims while dismissing every other explanation. Without citations, it is indistinguishable from the Weekly World News.

I've also linked to an article that dismisses the study in question, and links to it.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/06/07/controver...

But why would it be deleted? I guess because it has already been on here? Maybe multiple times? But wouldn't people just link to previous discussion(s)?

Fair enough https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23725966 (18 points, 4 comments, Flagged. Posted 1 day ago) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23727763 (10 points, 3 comments, Not Flagged. Posted 1 day ago) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23738264 (22 points, 4 comments, Flagged, Dead. Posted 3 hours ago) & yours (21 points, 14 comments, Flagged) I don't have a stance on the topic (that I want to discuss or is relevant here) but I nearly skipped it since it seemed a bit Off Topic in regards to the submission guidelines and possibly a bit 'hot button-ish' but was intrigued enough to take a look and comment after seeing a 21 point submission being Flagged. Hope that helps [Edit to add - I didn't downvote or flag any of these but up till now had not read any of the links nor comments]

Thanks, I hadn't seen those. I did a search, but I guess flagged submissions don't show up. It might be handy to have a link to see the flagged ones. If that was the case, I wouldn't have re-submitted.

Edit: Just did the search again, for "laboratory", and this flagged submission showed up. Not sure why the original one didn't show up for me.

I picked them up from a search using https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=minervanett.no as a query. Usually HN detects a duplicate submission URL (or certainly it did - which has saved me from posting a dupe or two in the past)

It doesn't dismiss the other explanations, but argues that they are probably less likely than the current narrative would suggest:

> “In a sense it is natural. But the natural processes have most likely been accelerated in a laboratory,” he explains. “It’s also possible for a virus to attain these properties in nature, but it’s not likely. If the mutations had happened in nature, we would have most likely seen that the virus had attracted other properties through mutations, not just properties that help the virus to attach itself to human cells.”

Speaking against the sanctioned narrative is "dangerous".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com