Chat message

In context

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

1. 2021-03-30 16:20 Edward C. Holmes open
   Yes, better. I wonder whether the WHO think the effort was worth it? I'm not sure much more of this I can take. It's not about science any more.
2. 2021-03-30 16:31 Robert F. Garry open
   Eddie you did great with the Amy M - Nature report. If this was the only article re the release of the report, I'd [nearly]declare victory. My guess is that Tedros - who can be all over the place - walks back his implicit criticism of the investigation. Truth will be told. Lab leak krewe including Lipstich and Bloom (sounds like a boutique) esp the latter need to actually take a look at the science.
3. 2021-03-30 16:43 Kristian G. Andersen open
   The triangulation nails it for me - deaths and cases being two independent data points. While it doesn't _prove_ anything, it shows that the market (or something around there) was the nucleation point of the pandemic. Sure, itcould have gotten from the lab to the market, buuuuuut.....
4. 2021-03-30 16:49 Edward C. Holmes open
   Yes, that's very instructive. Great work. I'm too tired to think about it right now.
5. 2021-03-30 16:57 Edward C. Holmes
   Jesse obviously did not read Annex D
6. 2021-03-30 17:01 Kristian G. Andersen open
   I don't think he read any of it.
7. 2021-03-30 17:44 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Disgraceful. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-wuhan-whitewash-11617142921
8. 2021-03-30 17:44 Kristian G. Andersen open
   shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-03-30 at 5.43.20 PM.png
9. 2021-03-30 17:47 Edward C. Holmes open
   Absolutely disgusting

Full conversation →