Private channel session 1410

18 messages over 2h 36m, 2021-05-20 – 2021-05-20.

A “conversation” here is an activity session — a run of messages with under 60 minutes of silence inside it. The channel had no native conversation boundaries.

1. 2021-05-20 17:38 Edward C. Holmes open PDF p.847
   https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2021/05/20/no-science-clearly-shows-that-covid-19-wasnt-leaked-fro m-a-wuhan-lab/
2. 2021-05-20 17:39 Edward C. Holmes open PDF p.848
   I enjoyed that. I particularly liked 'disgraced journalist' Wade
3. 2021-05-20 17:44 Robert F. Garry open PDF p.848
   :clap::clap::clap::boom:
4. 2021-05-20 17:52 Kristian G. Andersen open PDF p.848
   That's actually really good
5. 2021-05-20 17:54 Edward C. Holmes open PDF p.848
   It is!
6. 2021-05-20 17:55 Kristian G. Andersen open PDF p.848
   I thought it was going to be quite sketchy, but he correctly hits the main points. And yeah, Wade is a fucking disgraced journalist.
7. 2021-05-20 17:55 Kristian G. Andersen open PDF p.848
   Why people listen to him in 2021, I don't know.
8. 2021-05-20 17:58 Robert F. Garry open PDF p.848
   'Disgraced journalist' obviously could also be applied to Don McNeil as well - his "origins" piece only somewhat lessegregious. Also loved the Murdock media insight! Will the real science journalists start to re-insert their spines?
9. 2021-05-20 18:03 Edward C. Holmes open PDF p.848
   Forbes - who would have thought it
10. 2021-05-20 18:40 Kristian G. Andersen open PDF p.848
    Yeah, surprising.
11. 2021-05-20 19:00 Kristian G. Andersen open PDF p.848
    Key observation about the article :wink: [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-05-20 at 6.59.57 PM.png]
12. 2021-05-20 19:29 Edward C. Holmes open PDF p.848
    Clueless
13. 2021-05-20 19:48 Edward C. Holmes open PDF p.848
    What are the odds that all of the viruses in the WIV that they have worked on over the years it's the one that's thereno record of that is subject to a catastrophic lab leak? Improbable that this virus exists on current data x improbablethat any virus leaks out = highly improbable.
14. 2021-05-20 19:59 Kristian G. Andersen open PDF p.848
    Yup.
15. 2021-05-20 19:59 Kristian G. Andersen open PDF p.849
    There more you think about this particular aspect of it, the less sense it makes.
16. 2021-05-20 20:11 Edward C. Holmes open PDF p.849
    If they have shoddy lab procedures then surely it's the virus they use most often that has the greatest chance ofleaking out?
17. 2021-05-20 20:12 Kristian G. Andersen open PDF p.849
    Yes, although there may well be a difference between BSL-3/4 and BSL-2. A novel bat virus would likely be grown inBSL-2, whereas some of the others are likely BSL-3 or even -4
18. 2021-05-20 20:14 Edward C. Holmes open PDF p.849
    True.