Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.171 [SLACK_000385] · slack_pm:msg:01765

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

Amusing that Inspector Clouseau still finds time to moan about the Proximal Origins paper even though it seems wewere right all along?

In context

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

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
2020-09-15 18:06 Edward C. Holmes

Amusing that Inspector Clouseau still finds time to moan about the Proximal Origins paper even though it seems wewere right all along?
2020-09-15 18:26 Edward C. Holmes open

Enjoyed the thread.
2020-09-15 18:41 Kristian G. Andersen open

There will be no further comments. Promise...
2020-09-15 19:06 Edward C. Holmes open

I thought had better chime in with my non conflicts of interest though...
2020-09-15 19:25 Kristian G. Andersen open

Yeah, sorry - my usage of "we" was confusing referring to my lab (where I always say "our lab" and "we"...) and not necessarily the Proximal authors. Having collaborations with China clearly isn't a conflict either - and as you said, isa good thing ffs!