Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.773 [SLACK_000987] · slack_pm:msg:08095

Date: 2021-05-11 02:53
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Robert F. Garry
Topics: Intelligence community assessments Natural origin / zoonotic spillover

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

I was typing this: JC is one of a handful of science journo that could get this right. He's probably non to happy _Science_ is publishing this crap. I find it interesting they give a Editorial credit to Jennifer Sills. On further reflectionof RelBloomshit the the two things that piss me off the most are: 1. the assertion that there is "no clear evidence" for natural origin in the WHO report and 2. "Not racists, however, the Chinese scientists, authorities, and public health officials are lying." 1 is an argument from authority meant to demean a scientific conclusion they don't like andconfuse ppl, while 2 is a self-serving plea to ignore the fact that they are proposing a massive cover-up and conspiracy.

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
On further reflectionof RelBloomshit the the two things that piss me off the most are: 1. the assertion that there is "no clear evidence" for natural origin in the WHO report and 2.	quoted / not their view	quoted_external sentence carries quotation marks	asserts
"Not racists, however, the Chinese scientists, authorities, and public health officials are lying." 1 is an argument from authority meant to demean a scientific conclusion they don't like andconfuse ppl, while 2 is a self-serving plea to ignore the fact that they are proposing a massive cover-up and conspiracy.	quoted / not their view	quoted_external inside quotation marks	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

On further reflectionof RelBloomshit the the two things that piss me off the most are: 1. the assertion that there is "no clear evidence" for natural origin in the WHO report and 2.

quoted / not their view

quoted_external sentence carries quotation marks

asserts

"Not racists, however, the Chinese scientists, authorities, and public health officials are lying." 1 is an argument from authority meant to demean a scientific conclusion they don't like andconfuse ppl, while 2 is a self-serving plea to ignore the fact that they are proposing a massive cover-up and conspiracy.

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.

2021-05-11 02:46 Edward C. Holmes open

"I think George is leading the effort and BGI is help with all the sequencing works. That's the national team, although other team are also working on similar project, but with smaller scale. There has been huge effort on environments(wet market in Wuhan) and wild-life animals (all over China, including bats and pangolines). I myself is involved inthese some of the work (one with pangoline and the other with the Gamey taste animals), but nothing relavent isfound at this stage. And I haven't heard anything interesting from others either. George previously wanted me toinvolve in the data analyses, and promised to send the hard disk, but they never arrived. So I guess he is having second thoughts."
2021-05-11 02:47 Edward C. Holmes open

Plus this awesome figure: [shared file(s): Fig 1 Hv20210510v2.pdf]
2021-05-11 02:48 Edward C. Holmes open

So, nothing found yet but great they are looking so hard. Can't see any evidence for mink or raccoon dog testing though.
2021-05-11 02:53 Robert F. Garry open

That's super interesting @Eddie Holmes Yes indeed I'm glad they are looking so hard!
2021-05-11 02:53 Robert F. Garry

I was typing this: JC is one of a handful of science journo that could get this right. He's probably non to happy _Science_ is publishing this crap. I find it interesting they give a Editorial credit to Jennifer Sills. On further reflectionof RelBloomshit the the two things that piss me off the most are: 1. the assertion that there is "no clear evidence" for natural origin in the WHO report and 2. "Not racists, however, the Chinese scientists, authorities, and public health officials are lying." 1 is an argument from authority meant to demean a scientific conclusion they don't like andconfuse ppl, while 2 is a self-serving plea to ignore the fact that they are proposing a massive cover-up and conspiracy.
2021-05-11 02:55 Edward C. Holmes open

My strategy now is try and do as much with China as I can get an insight into what the fuck is going on. Totally agree with your take Bob. #2 is really, really sleazy.
2021-05-11 02:56 Edward C. Holmes open

That they are looking so bloody hard suggests to me that they clearly think it is natural. Why bother if it's engineered? SLACK_000988
2021-05-11 02:56 Robert F. Garry open

It will be interesting to see what Daszak, Koopsman and others have to say about RelBloomshit. Surely they are not going to sit still and agree about the "no clear evidence."
2021-05-11 02:56 Edward C. Holmes open

Surely not. All the WHO team have seen it.

Full conversation →