“most likely story you can think of that would make it be wrong”—that can be the hard part. For investments its sometimes easy—just they fail to execute, their competitors get better, or their disruption is itself disrupted. Before the debate I put Lab leak at say 65-80%, now more like <10%. The most likely story/reason I had for natural origin being correct (before I saw the debate) was that the host was found, and the suspicious circumstances where a result of an incompetent coverup and general noise/official lies mostly by the CCP around this.
Well I can’t say for sure that LL was wrong of course, but I changed my mind for a reason I didn’t anticipate—i.e. a high quality debate that was sufficiently to my understanding.
For some other things its hard to come up with a credible story at all, i.e. AGW being wrong I would really struggle to do.
“most likely story you can think of that would make it be wrong”—that can be the hard part. For investments its sometimes easy—just they fail to execute, their competitors get better, or their disruption is itself disrupted.
Before the debate I put Lab leak at say 65-80%, now more like <10%. The most likely story/reason I had for natural origin being correct (before I saw the debate) was that the host was found, and the suspicious circumstances where a result of an incompetent coverup and general noise/official lies mostly by the CCP around this.
Well I can’t say for sure that LL was wrong of course, but I changed my mind for a reason I didn’t anticipate—i.e. a high quality debate that was sufficiently to my understanding.
For some other things its hard to come up with a credible story at all, i.e. AGW being wrong I would really struggle to do.