Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.5 · slack_pm:msg:00039

Date: 2020-05-01 14:23 (hour precision)
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Robert F. Garry, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Edward C. Holmes
Topics: Proximal Origin paper

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

Yes, it's shite. That Baric paper is also really weird. Reads to me that are pissed off that they were not involved inour paper and so want to get in on the act.

Extracted statements

Rule-extracted, not adjudicated. The grade says what may be done with each one; read the document above before relying on any of them.

Statement	Grade	Attribution	Stance
Reads to me that are pissed off that they were not involved inour paper and so want to get in on the act.	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

Reads to me that are pissed off that they were not involved inour paper and so want to get in on the act.

own voice, substantive

speaker_own

asserts

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2020-05-01 14:23 Robert F. Garry open

Rasmussan, Daszak several others I don't recognize.
2020-05-01 14:23 Edward C. Holmes open

I've never emailed the Washington Post. That must come from an email that I sent to my press officer who then forwarded to them. I need to correct the I story. Nonsense.
2020-05-01 14:23 Kristian G. Andersen open

I don't remember talking to these journalists either...
2020-05-01 14:23 Kristian G. Andersen open

The video is pretty fucking terrible. Ending on "how unusual/remarkable is it that there's a lab working on bat coronaviruses exactly where an outbreak of a coronavirus started"? How dumb are people exactly? Good old correlation, not causation. May I suggest an alternative explanation - they're studying bat coronaviruses BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF BAT CORONAVIRUSES AROUND THERE. Which, I don't know, in combination with wet markets and the like might increase the risk of an outbreak from a bat coronaviruses.We need an actual razor in Occam's razor.
2020-05-01 14:23 Edward C. Holmes

Yes, it's shite. That Baric paper is also really weird. Reads to me that are pissed off that they were not involved inour paper and so want to get in on the act.
2020-05-01 14:23 Kristian G. Andersen open

Now I need to ready Ralph's paper too...
2020-05-01 14:23 Edward C. Holmes open

What proportion of your day is spent dealing with bollocks? Scientific bollocks I should add.
2020-05-01 14:23 Kristian G. Andersen open

Time spent on bollocks = 80%, of which scientific bollocks = 40%, bollock bollocks = 20%, and bollocks scientists =20%

Full conversation →