Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.595 [SLACK_000809] · slack_pm:msg:06216

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

I've been very careful not to mention the smoking dog to any reporters yet, but looking forward to the opportunity when the report is dropped.

In context

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

2021-03-14 16:37 Robert F. Garry open

Agreed - but as far as the rainbow goes you've got to be kidding - I talked to an NBC reporter - Denise Chow -last week for about an hour wherein I used the term "lab magic." Chow's credible and actually one of the two NBC reporters that were allowed to visit WIV last year. Chow - not a lab leak fan by any means. Pretty sure she was goingto talk to Alina though - I dunno - I might have mentioned Alina was an idiot or something to that effect.
2021-03-14 16:38 Edward C. Holmes open

The question ought to be 'what evidence would proponents of the lab escape theory accept as disproving lab escape?'
2021-03-14 16:45 Robert F. Garry open

SC2 in an animal should do it. Having a virus positive environmental sample from under a cage is damn close. No other way that virus could have gotten there except from the animals in the cage.
2021-03-14 16:46 Robert F. Garry open

Need to think a bit more about the lineage A and B conundrum, but I think that too is consistent. Closer look at the Market associated environmental and human sample sequences in the context of the smoking dog will be revealing Ithink.
2021-03-14 16:48 Robert F. Garry

I've been very careful not to mention the smoking dog to any reporters yet, but looking forward to the opportunity when the report is dropped.
2021-03-14 16:49 Edward C. Holmes open

I agree - that you would do it. I would they accept any positive SC2 in an animal? Yes, best not mention the smoking dog yet...