A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
This suggests the genomes were already publicly available for 24 hours when you posted to virological, Eddie.
-
Can he prove this: "George's alert gave us a chance to prepare, and gave our technical team time to set up an HTML area. We received the first 3x genomes and metadata in the afternoon of January 9th at 3:29 pm PST (2020-01-09 23:29 UTC). Two of these genomes, HB-01 and HB-05, were released on GISAID after processing, a little more than an hour later, at 4:41 pm PST and 4:44 pm PST (2020-01-10 0:41 UTC and 2020-01-10 0:44 UTC), respectively."
-
This is wrong: "Science News stated: "10 January Genetic sequence posted to virological.org", while Nature News states that the first sequence was posted on the website virological.org on 11 January 2020. Neither news organization had done even the most basic research, and did not realize that there were discrepancies in reports ofwhen and where the first coronavirus sequences were released to the world." That's just the time zone difference between Australia and elsewhere.
-
This note from HK also says the 12th as does the stuff from the WHO. [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-01-19 at 8.22.42 pm.png]
-
2021-01-19 01:25
Edward C. Holmes
Why did not a single person in the world see the sequences on the 10th? Something does not make sense here at all.
-
The post was on the 11th at about 1am GMT - the posting has at the top the 10th because that is when we started towrite it (of course it was already the 11th in Australia and China then). So that is probably the confusion about your post.
-
I know. And no one at GISAID, CCDC, WHO made any announcement until the 12th. Plus they hounded Zhang for it?
-
I think he is bullshitting.
-
I posted a follow up to your post at 12pm on the 12th saying some genomes were up on GISAID.