Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.171 [SLACK_000385] · slack_pm:msg:01760

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

You might mention what a monumental waste of everyone's time this is.

In context

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

2020-09-15 17:48 Edward C. Holmes open

Well, well, well. Has Inspector Clouseau seen the light?
2020-09-15 17:49 Kristian G. Andersen open

I doubt it - but she's likely seeing some of her mistakes...
2020-09-15 17:50 Kristian G. Andersen open

I'm getting so many fucking questions about this shit - from journalists, colleagues, etc. I'm going to do a short Twitter thread on the main scientific claims and turn off comments - then that'll be all I have to say on the matter, book closed.
2020-09-15 17:52 Edward C. Holmes open

Seems wise. You could mention that the Wu et al. Nature paper was submitted before anyone had heard about RaTG13 so it could never have been included in that study anyway.
2020-09-15 17:53 Edward C. Holmes

You might mention what a monumental waste of everyone's time this is.
2020-09-15 17:53 Kristian G. Andersen open

I'm not even going to go there - I have no concerns about the bat or pangolin data so simply ignoring all of that is just dumb (well, that data invalidates their findings, so of course, I get it).
2020-09-15 17:53 Edward C. Holmes open

More than dumb: dishonest.
2020-09-15 17:56 Kristian G. Andersen open

I wonder what Bannon promised her (and honestly - I'm a little surprised by how extremely obvious the connection ishere - it took me a five second google search to figure it out... At least hide that part somewhat)
2020-09-15 17:58 Edward C. Holmes open

It has played into our hands beautifully