Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, pp.667-668 [SLACK_000881] · slack_pm:msg:06997

Date: 2021-03-31 19:00
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Kristian G. Andersen
Topics: Lab-leak / accidental release hypothesis Wuhan Institute of Virology collaboration

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

Yup. And it's not just scientists at the WIV that would have to be lying - it's a whooooole lot of other people too. Also key - "that they don't have a virus more closely related to SARS-CoV-2 than RaTG13" - it's not even that - they don't even have _that_ virus, only the sequence. When we started looking into this there was no intel and hence it was more than appropriate to consider a lab leak apossibility. However, after one year, there's still no intel - and we're finding related viruses all over the place. Had itreally been a lab leak, I seriously doubt they would have been able to cover this up - if they did, great job, yougraduated spook school.

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
And it's not just scientists at the WIV that would have to be lying - it's a whooooole lot of other people too.	quoted / not their view	hypothetical conditional framing	asserts
When we started looking into this there was no intel and hence it was more than appropriate to consider a lab leak apossibility.	needs context	speaker_own	asserts
Had itreally been a lab leak, I seriously doubt they would have been able to cover this up - if they did, great job, yougraduated spook school.	quoted / not their view	hypothetical conditional framing	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

And it's not just scientists at the WIV that would have to be lying - it's a whooooole lot of other people too.

quoted / not their view

hypothetical conditional framing

asserts

When we started looking into this there was no intel and hence it was more than appropriate to consider a lab leak apossibility.

needs context

speaker_own

asserts

Had itreally been a lab leak, I seriously doubt they would have been able to cover this up - if they did, great job, yougraduated spook school.

quoted / not their view

hypothetical conditional framing

asserts

In context

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

2021-03-31 18:20 Edward C. Holmes open

The WIV claim that (i) all their staff were PCR/antibody negative to SARS-CoV-2 and (ii) that they don't have a virus more closely related to SARS-CoV-2 than RaTG13. If those two facts are true then the WIV cannot be the source ofSARS-CoV-2. If these facts are not true then the scientists at WIV are lying. It's as simple as that. And it's not just the Chinese govt that are misleading as Pompeo rants, but scientists at WIV who publish in top journals.
2021-03-31 18:49 Robert F. Garry open

*"It's as simple as that."* Could not agree more! Before the freaking pandemic they would have had zero motive tolie. On the contrary they would have had every incentive to publish ASAP on a new novel betacov related toSARS-CoV-1.
2021-03-31 18:50 Edward C. Holmes open

Exactly!!
2021-03-31 19:00 Kristian G. Andersen

Yup. And it's not just scientists at the WIV that would have to be lying - it's a whooooole lot of other people too. Also key - "that they don't have a virus more closely related to SARS-CoV-2 than RaTG13" - it's not even that - they don't even have _that_ virus, only the sequence. When we started looking into this there was no intel and hence it was more than appropriate to consider a lab leak apossibility. However, after one year, there's still no intel - and we're finding related viruses all over the place. Had itreally been a lab leak, I seriously doubt they would have been able to cover this up - if they did, great job, yougraduated spook school.
2021-03-31 19:04 Edward C. Holmes open

Totally. If the State Dept/Security services have evidence of nefarious activities at the WIV then they should publishit. Please show the the results of all your security investigations. It's all very well bashing the WHO without releasing their own data. Put up or shut up.

Full conversation →