Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.603 [SLACK_000817] · slack_pm:msg:06307

Date: 2021-03-17 20:36
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Kristian G. Andersen
Topics: Lab-leak / accidental release hypothesis Natural origin / zoonotic spillover

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

"Central to being a good scientist is keeping an open mind when evidence is sparse, and as a "virus expert" who has followed this topic closely: it's clear in any objective assessment that both natural origins and accidental lab leak are plausible." Well, look at the fucking data first. Properly.

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
"Central to being a good scientist is keeping an open mind when evidence is sparse, and as a "virus expert" who has followed this topic closely: it's clear in any objective assessment that both natural origins and accidental lab leak are plausible." Well, look at the fucking data first.	quoted / not their view	quoted_external inside quotation marks	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

quoted / not their view

quoted_external inside quotation marks

asserts

In context

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

2021-03-17 20:11 Kristian G. Andersen open

https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1372383452197097473?s=20
2021-03-17 20:31 Edward C. Holmes open

Wow
2021-03-17 20:33 Kristian G. Andersen open

I mean - does he even _check_ the kind of shit he links to? [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-03-17 at 8.32.55 PM.png]
2021-03-17 20:36 Kristian G. Andersen open

Those RdRp fragments - which were all released months before the pandemic - aren't even remotely closely relatedto SC2. Any quick glance at one of the trees on Twitter or, you know, a simple blast search would tell you as much. Really, really disappointing he's gone down this route - not to mention the false equivalence here. Just complete bs.I'm all for keeping an open mind and for investigating _actual_ evidence, but it's this kind of sloppiness fromrespected scientists that makes me furious.
2021-03-17 20:36 Kristian G. Andersen

"Central to being a good scientist is keeping an open mind when evidence is sparse, and as a "virus expert" who has followed this topic closely: it's clear in any objective assessment that both natural origins and accidental lab leak are plausible." Well, look at the fucking data first. Properly.
2021-03-17 20:36 Edward C. Holmes open

I've just replied to one.
2021-03-17 20:37 Kristian G. Andersen open

Haha, just saw - sneaky :wink:
2021-03-17 20:38 Edward C. Holmes open

Been pissing me off all day.
2021-03-17 20:40 Kristian G. Andersen open

It's the same old shit recycled over, and over, and over, and over again and again. It's so frustrating. If these idiots would actually take a moment to look at the data themselves instead of grabbing bits from Twitter and shitty news articles.

Full conversation →