DT团队出品

《P4实验室系列》第三季外传篇

美国国家地理杂志刊文攻击闫丽梦博士报告说明什么

If you hear something twice, you're more likely to think that it's true than if you've only heard it once.

LISA FAZIO, VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY

For instance, humans are prone to confirmation bias, a way of interpreting new information as a validation of one’s preconceived notions. Motivated reasoning switches on too, and the brain tries to force these new conceptual puzzle pieces together, making connections even when they don’t fit.

The most potent factor that warps critical thinking is the illusory truth effect, which Fazio defines with this scenario: “If you hear something twice, you’re more likely to think that it’s true than if you’ve only heard it once.” So prevalence turbocharges false news, and echo chambers then turn into self-perpetuating whirlwinds of misbelief.

If the news involves politics, it gets yet another virality boost. “Political news travels faster than the rest of false news,” says Aral. “We can speculate that it’s such a lightning rod because it’s so emotionally charged.” And to Aral, the Yan report has every attribute of a false news story that was primed to go viral.

“In terms of that specific story, I would say all of these analyses of why false news spreads apply,” Aral explains. “It’s shocking; it’s salacious. It’s immediately relevant to political debates that are happening, but obviously coronavirus is on everyone’s mind. Trying to understand its origins is a big story.”

这篇文章从结构上分为以下几个部分，并对每个内容进行中文大意翻译和内容编码

序号 分类 内容
A01 引图 The Chinese horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus sinicus) ranges from northern India to southern China. Horseshoe bats are so named due to their horseshoe-shaped nose leaves. They are often found in caves or cave-like locations and feed mostly on small moths. The pandemic likely began with a coronavirus-infected horseshoe bat in China. 引用一张中国马蹄蝠的照片，并且直接说明这种蝙蝠的分布，而后直接断定这种蝙蝠可能是中国开始爆发的新冠疫情的病毒来源，也是大流行的起源。注意这种马蹄蝠的分布区域与病毒起源流行区域的相同之处，这是刻意的一种引导。
A02 主标题 Why misinformation about COVID-19’s origins keeps going viral 为什么关于COVID-19的谣言（错误信息）一直像病毒一样流传。文章主标题直接定义了关于COVID-19的谣言的病毒式流传的现象
A03 副标题 Another piece of coronavirus misinformation is making the rounds. Here’s how to sift through the muck. 副标题指出了一条关于病毒的谣言正在发生中，并且明确本文将告诉大家如何识破甄别这个谣言。
A04 文章作者 BY MONIQUE BROUILLETTE AND REBECCA RENNER MONIQUE BROUILLETTE REBECCA RENNER
A05 发表时间 PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 18, 2020
B01 文章主体 TWENTY YEARS AGO, data scientist Sinan Aral began to see the formation of a trend that now defines our social media era: how quickly untrue information spreads. He watched as false news ignited online discourse like a small spark that kindles into a massive blaze. Now the director of the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy, Aral believes that a concept he calls the novelty hypothesis demonstrates this almost unstoppable viral contagion of false news. 数据研究科学家出场，从数据网络传播学理论上证明虚假信息传播的速度并且引爆了网络话题热点。这位科学家的基本观点就是新奇假设的概念（指闫博士报告）
B02 “Human attention is drawn to novelty, to things that are new and unexpected,” says Aral. “We gain in status when we share novel information because it looks like we're in the know, or that we have access to inside information.” 引用这位专家的言语，证明闫博士的报告就是制造热点，吸引注意力。并且分析这种谎言流行（被分享）的心理逻辑。
B03 Enter the Yan report. On September 14, an article was posted to Zenodo, an open-access site for sharing research papers, which claimed that genetic evidence showed that the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus was made in a lab, rather than emerging through natural spillover from animals. The 26-page paper, led by Chinese virologist Li-Meng Yan, a postdoctoral researcher who left Hong Kong University, has not undergone peer review and asserts that this evidence of genetic engineering has been “censored” in the scientific journals. (National Geographic contacted Yan and the report’s three other authors for comment but received no reply.) 切入正题，直接谈到闫博士报告。包括报告发布时间，发布的地址，报告的主要内容，报告的页数，报告的主要领导者，闫梦丽的身份，关键证据是所提供的证据没有在科学期刊上被审查。并且说明本文作者与报告的主要作者进行了联系，没有得到答复。一个没有被科学期刊审查而发表的报告被他们成为伪科学的主要证据。按照这种逻辑，只要没有经过专业科学期刊审查发表的报告都值得怀疑，那么通过专业审查的论文就不值得怀疑吗？这是典型的强盗逻辑。包括没有得到作者的答复作为理由更是无理取闹。
B04 A Twitter firestorm promptly erupted. Prominent virologists, such as Kristian Andersen from Scripps Research and Carl Bergstrom from University of Washington, took to the internet and called out the paper for being unscientific. Chief among their complaints was that the report ignored the vast body of published literature regarding what is known about how coronaviruses circulate in wild animal populations and the tendency to spill over into humans, including recent publications about the origins of SARS-CoV-2. 一场TWITTER风暴迅速爆发，这两位是在TWITTER上活跃的两位著名的病毒学家观点是该报告忽略了大量已经发表文献，这些文献已经证明冠状病毒如何在野生动物种群中传播，以及向人类传播的趋势，包括最近关于SARS-CoV-2起源的文献。这里所说的文献主要是指早时间发表的论文。这些忽略的文献几乎具有相同的观点，就是病毒来源于自然产生。
B05 The experts also pointed out that the report whipped up wild conspiracy theories and wrongly accused academic journals of plotting with conspirators by censoring important evidence. 这篇报告还煽动了阴谋论，并且错误地指责学术期刊通过审查制度与阴谋家合流同污。
B06-C1 This paper just cherry-picked a couple of examples, excluded evidence, and came up with a ridiculous scenario.DAVID ROBERTSON, UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW 批判这篇报告的第一个关键科学家的观点这篇论文只是挑选了几个例子，排除了证据，并且提出了一个荒谬的假设场景。
B07 In July, David Robertson, a viral genomics researcher at University of Glasgow, authored a peer-reviewed paper in Nature Medicine that showed the lineage behind SARS-CoV-2 and its closest known ancestor, a virus called RaTG13, have been circulating in bat populations for decades. Virologists think this relative, which is 96-percent identical to the novel coronavirus, probably propagated and evolved in bats or human hosts and then went undetected for about 20 years before adapting its current form and causing the ongoing pandemic. 引用7月发表关于RaTG13的文章证明SARS-CoV-2早已可能在自然界中变异形成并流行。
B08 The Yan report claims this hypothesis is controversial, and that RaTG13 was also engineered in a lab. But that flies in the face of the overwhelming body of genetic evidence published about SARS-CoV-2 and its progenitors. What’s more, the report was funded by the Rule of Law Society, a nonprofit organization founded by former chief White House strategist Steve Bannon, who has since been arrested for fraud. That’s yet another reason many virologists are questioning the veracity of its claims. 故意歪曲闫梦丽在报告中关于“RaTG13”表述，报告中的表述是“RaTG13是石正丽伪造的虚假病毒序列”根本不存在，而不是文章中所称“实验室中合成”。如果在报告中表述“实验室合成”就是表示承认这个序列的存在。所谓7月份的关于“RaTG13”的这篇专家的论文，所有的科学家可以下载阅读，这篇文章只是用并不存在的“RaTG13”来假证SARS-CoV-2早已可能在自然界中变异形成并流行，而“RaTG13”到底是不是石正丽所伪造到底存在不存在根本没有回答。这段表述还有一段证据，就是这份报告是由前白宫首席策略师史蒂夫·班农(Steve Bannon)创建的一个非营利组织——法治协会(Rule of Law Society)资助的，而班农因为欺诈而被捕。这就是典型的中共的逻辑，首先邦农是接受调查而不是因为欺诈而被捕，这种表述就是典型的“道德绑架，未审先判”，和对待郭文贵的先生的手法一样，更为荒谬的是，不去揭示法治社会资助这份报告是否合法，而直接说因为资助者存在道德瑕疵而资助的报告不可信，真是滑天下之大稽。
B09 “It’s encroaching on pseudoscience, really,” says Robertson. “This paper just cherry-picked a couple of examples, excluded evidence, and came up with a ridiculous scenario.” Robertson说：“事实上，它正在侵蚀伪科学。 “这篇论文只是挑选了几个例子，排除了证据，得出了一个荒谬的场景。”
B10 National Geographic reached out to other prominent virologists and misinformation researchers to better understand where the Yan report came from and what it got wrong. Along the way, they offered tips for overcoming misinformation surrounding the coronavirus. 《国家地理》与其他著名的病毒学家和谣言信息研究人员进行了接触，以更好地的说明报告从哪里来的，它错在哪里。同时，这些科学家给出了识别冠状病毒谎言的相关建议。
B11-D1 What do we know about SARS-CoV-2’s origins? 我们对SARS-CoV-2的起源了解多少
B12 Coronaviruses exist in nature and can infect many different creatures. SARS-like coronaviruses are found in bats, pigs, cats, and ferrets, to name a few. The most widely agreed upon origin of SARS-CoV-2, based on its genetics, is that its ancestors moved around in wild animals—swapping genetic features as they went along—before they jumped into humans. 冠状病毒存在于自然界中，可以感染许多不同的生物。 类似非典的冠状病毒在蝙蝠、猪、猫和雪貂身上也有发现。 最广泛认同的SARS-CoV-2的起源，基于它的遗传学，是它的祖先在野生动物中传播-在它们传入人类之前已经完成了主要的遗传变异。
B13 Scientists have yet to find the direct parent of SARS-CoV-2 in feral beasts, though its closest relatives exist in bats. The virus may have passed through an intermediate animal—pangolins have been implicated—and then evolved to become better at infecting humans. Or it may have made the jump directly from bats to humans, given past examples of such occurrences. After the original SARS outbreak in China 20 years ago, researchers began surveying wild bats in local caves and the people who live near them. A 2018 study found the genetic relatives of the original SARS virus in the winged mammals—as well as specific antibodies, a residual sign of infection, in their human neighbors. 科学家尚未在野生动物中找到SARS-CoV-2的直接母体，尽管它的近亲存在于蝙蝠中。 这种病毒可能是通过一种中间的动物-穿山甲传染给人-然后进化成传染性更强的病毒。 或者，考虑到过去发生的类似事件，它可能直接从蝙蝠传到人类身上。 在20年前中国最初的SARS爆发后，研究人员开始调查当地洞穴中的野生蝙蝠和附近的居民。 一项2018年的研究发现，原始SARS病毒在有翅膀的哺乳动物中的遗传亲缘关系，以及在它们的人类邻居中的特异性抗体，一种残留的感染迹象。
B14 Finding answers to the precise events that led to a spillover pandemic is a “needle in a haystack proposition,” says Ian Lipkin, an epidemiologist from Columbia University, who co-authored an early research paper in Nature Medicine about the natural origins of SARS-CoV-2. The Yan report claims this Nature Medicine report had a “conflict of interest” due to Lipkin’s work in containing the 2002-2003 SARS epidemic, for which he received an award from the Chinese government. Lipkin says this accusation is “absurd,” and when asked for his view on the role of bioengineering in the origins of SARS-CoV-2, he adds: “There is no data to support this.” 哥伦比亚大学的流行病学家伊恩·利普金(Ian Lipkin)说，找到导致溢出性大流行的精确事件的答案是“大海捞针”，他是《自然医学》(Nature Medicine)一篇关于SARS-Co V-2自然起源的早期研究论文的合著者。 闫的报告声称，这份自然医学报告有“利益冲突”，因为利普金的工作，以遏制2002-2003年非典疫情，他得到了中国政府的奖励。 利普金说，这种指责是“荒谬的”，当被问及他对生物工程在SARS-CoV-2起源中的作用的看法时，他补充说：“没有数据支持这一点。”
B15 Uncovering the natural source of the coronavirus will likely require large-scale sampling of animals—including bat and human populations—in China to trace the evolution of the novel coronavirus. The World Health Organization is readying a team to conduct such an investigation in China, though a timetable has not been released. 揭示冠状病毒的自然来源可能需要大规模的动物取样-包括蝙蝠和人类-在中国，以跟踪新的冠状病毒的进化。 世界卫生组织(World Health Organization)正准备成立一个小组，在中国进行这样的调查，但时间表尚未公布。
B16-E1 VIDEO EXCLUSIVE: FAUCI DISPELS COVID-19 RUMORS, ADVOCATES CHANGE In an exclusive interview with National Geographic, Anthony Fauci of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases addresses the misinformation about the origins of COVID-19 and what he hopes will change to prevent a similar crisis from happening in the future. 视频独家：福西驱散COVID-19 谣言，倡导改变美国国家过敏和传染病研究所的Anthony Fauci在接受《国家地理》的独家采访时，谈到了关于COVID-19起源的错误信息，以及他希望改变的东西，以防止类似的危机在未来发生。
B17-D2 What does the Yan report say? 闫梦丽的报告说什么？
B18 The Yan report attempts to tackle this question in a different way, starting with the murky claim that SARS-CoV-2 is bad at infecting bats, therefore it could not have come from them. But scientists point out that viruses are constantly evolving and passing between species. The initial spillover from bats to humans could have happened decades ago, allowing the virus ample time for its spike protein, the part it uses to enter cells, to optimize through natural selection to infect humans. 闫的报告试图以另一种方式来解决这个问题，首先是模糊的说法，即SARS-CoV-2不擅长感染蝙蝠，因此它不可能来自它们。 但科学家指出，病毒在物种之间不断进化和传递。 蝙蝠最初对人类的溢出效应可能发生在几十年前，这让病毒有足够的时间来利用它的突起蛋白，即进入细胞的部分，通过自然选择来优化感染人类
B19 Another argument made by the Yan report centers on the presence of a “furin-cleavage site” on the spike protein, a critical genetic feature that is thought to enhance the virus’s ability to enter cells. The report claims this feature is found on no other coronavirus and therefore must be engineered. But this statement contradicts findings: similar cleavage sites are found on bat coronaviruses in wild populations. 闫报告提出的另一个论点集中在穗蛋白上存在一个“furin-cleavage site”，这是一个关键的遗传特征，被认为可以增强病毒进入细胞的能力。 该报告声称，这一特征是在没有其他冠状病毒，因此必须设计。 但这一说法与研究结果相矛盾：在野生种群的蝙蝠冠状病毒上发现了类似的切割位点。
B20 “I'm going to scream if I have to explain the fact that many viruses have cleavage sites,” says Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at Columbia University. 哥伦比亚大学病毒学家Angela Rasmussen说：“如果我必须解释许多病毒有切割位点的事实，我会尖叫的