03-02-2022, 03:03 AM
Here's a very good (and long) article in Scientific American regarding the Lab Leak Theory: The Lab-Leak Hypothesis Made It Harder for Scientists to Seek the Truth.
It articulated quite nicely a process it called "conspiratorial cognition":
It articulated quite nicely a process it called "conspiratorial cognition":
Quote:In normal scientific inquiry, as evidence emerges, the remaining space for plausible hypotheses narrows. Some facets continue to be supported, and others are contradicted and eventually precluded altogether. Some of the strongest advocates for a lab origin for SARS-CoV-2 changed their views as they learned more. Baltimore, for instance, withdrew his “smoking gun” comment when challenged by additional evidence, conceding that a natural origin was also possible. Revising or rejecting failed hypotheses in light of refuting evidence is central to the scientific process. Not so with conspiracy theories and pseudoscience. One of their hallmarks is that they are self-sealing: as more evidence against the conspiracy emerges, adherents keep the theory alive by dismissing contrary evidence as further proof of the conspiracy, creating an ever more elaborate and complicated theory.


