Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, pp.361-362 [SLACK_000575] · slack_pm:msg:03770

Date: 2021-01-06 07:23
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Robert F. Garry
Topics: Gain-of-function research Lab-leak / accidental release hypothesis Wuhan Institute of Virology collaboration

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

This sums it up perfectly Eddie. You really have to go full-on into the DRASTIC bizarro scenario that WIV in fact did have the 99+% virus and somehow they knew that it was or could become an ideal human pathogen. What possible reason could Shi have for covering up the existence of a closer SARSr-CoV than RaTG13? You have to believe that they were tuning this particular virus up by passaging in cell culture and/or inserting the FCS, when theyinadvertently released it on the world through a lab accident. To cover this up Shi then fabricated RaTG13 (96%)virus as a distraction from their ill-considered GOF research on the 99+% virus. Maybe Pottinger's whistleblower will confirm this theory, but I look forward to Trump introducing us to the space aliens prior to that. Instead what Shi did when she sequenced SARS-CoV-2 was to find that yes the lab had sequenced RaTG13 in 2018 and it was the closest match so she put it in the Nature paper, which was a perfectly reasonable thing to do. I think you could comeup with a lot of reasons other than Shi was covering up the greatest lab release in history by not publishing the RaTG13 sequence in 2018-19.

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
You have to believe that they were tuning this particular virus up by passaging in cell culture and/or inserting the FCS, when theyinadvertently released it on the world through a lab accident.	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

You have to believe that they were tuning this particular virus up by passaging in cell culture and/or inserting the FCS, when theyinadvertently released it on the world through a lab accident.

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.

2021-01-06 07:23 Robert F. Garry

This sums it up perfectly Eddie. You really have to go full-on into the DRASTIC bizarro scenario that WIV in fact did have the 99+% virus and somehow they knew that it was or could become an ideal human pathogen. What possible reason could Shi have for covering up the existence of a closer SARSr-CoV than RaTG13? You have to believe that they were tuning this particular virus up by passaging in cell culture and/or inserting the FCS, when theyinadvertently released it on the world through a lab accident. To cover this up Shi then fabricated RaTG13 (96%)virus as a distraction from their ill-considered GOF research on the 99+% virus. Maybe Pottinger's whistleblower will confirm this theory, but I look forward to Trump introducing us to the space aliens prior to that. Instead what Shi did when she sequenced SARS-CoV-2 was to find that yes the lab had sequenced RaTG13 in 2018 and it was the closest match so she put it in the Nature paper, which was a perfectly reasonable thing to do. I think you could comeup with a lot of reasons other than Shi was covering up the greatest lab release in history by not publishing the RaTG13 sequence in 2018-19.
2021-01-06 07:34 Kristian G. Andersen open

I like this guy... [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-01-06 at 7.34.29 AM.png]

Full conversation →