If two scentists(experts) have two different arguments, and each say 'mine is reality' : Then you need to check both arguments to reach acually real one, right? If i say(non-expert) my argument, you should check it too with knew that im not an expert. Whats wrong if you know how to reach reality?
Telling my basic argument as just paranoic does not simply make you reach the reality. Let experts & public opinion bring their arguments together..then work on each arguments scientific & transparent? This makes you reach reality..
Of course, freedom of expression is important as transparency for each countries, but you can basicly intrested in only some arguments that you like & you can say: " 'some animals more equal than others' on the road of reality."
My argument was just an harmless idea about corona's origin, and i also tell its only an option & not reality. Also no option is certain atm. Countries/experts must reach reality together. Each options should be on desk, each should be checked scientificly & transparent for the world.
When two experts have different opinions they settle it in peer reviewed papers. As I have shown earlier there are peer reviewed papers on whether covid came from bats or not, because that is a theory that has some merit. There is not a single actual expert in the field who would even consider that covid was created in a lab to fight cancer.
This is how you find out if someone is actually an expert in something:
1) Go to Scopus https://www.scopus.com/home.uri
2) Click on "author search" and look them up by their name.
3) See how many peer reviewed papers they have and what their citation metrics are.
This is what the profile of an expert in virology should look like.
As you can see there is some variability in the sense that people can be experts and still some will be more academically successful than others (which does not necessarily mean that one is "better" than the other). However there is a bare minimum of proficiency that you have to show. If you don't have at least a h-index of 10 as a full professor in a high impact field like virology or any medical field really, well that's a red flag.
Chances are people who push conspiracy theories won't even show up on Scopus so it's usually pretty easy to tell.
Now of course one can be a non expert and still be right by sheer chance. But that's not how any of this works. When you hear an outlandish theory on virus that is being brought up by the local herbalist before one even considers it there needs to be strong evidence. "This one guy had covid and got a bit better from his cancer is not it". My grandpa had covid and after he recovered his backpain was better for a couple of weeks, doesn't mean that covid cures back pain.
If I sound overly passionate about this it's because I am. All of this is very, very important. We live in a day and age where science is being overthrown by sensationalism and social media mumbo jumbo. Science is what makes your car start when you leave your house in the morning, not reptilians or adorably tiny hamsters running in wheels.