Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.812 [SLACK_001026] · slack_pm:msg:08464

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

And, here's eDim revealing the true agenda beyond relitigating GoF research restrictions. [shared file(s): image.png]

In context

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

2021-05-14 08:01 Kristian G. Andersen open

I'm pretty sure he'd say "equally plausible", because he does seem to have a very hard time weighing evidence andutilizing probabilities at the moment. It's _exactly_ the same line of thinking that led to half the country believing the election was stolen - because nothing can ever be known with 100% certainty.
2021-05-14 08:03 Kristian G. Andersen open

It's the exact same debate - Bloomshitters saying "I'm just asking questions here" and "we just want to know the truth - don't you want to know the truth"? And then words by folks like us will be twisted to make it seem like _we_don't actually want to know the truth, but rather want to push an agenda.
2021-05-14 08:03 Kristian G. Andersen open

It's dangerous, that's for sure.
2021-05-14 08:22 Robert F. Garry open

And Shi is right - what data could she produce that would satisfy this crowd?
2021-05-14 08:26 Robert F. Garry

And, here's eDim revealing the true agenda beyond relitigating GoF research restrictions. [shared file(s): image.png]
2021-05-14 09:04 Kristian G. Andersen open

Unlike others, at least he's clear and consistent :wink:
2021-05-14 09:37 Robert F. Garry open

All about the narrative and the agenda, which for eDim boils down simply to virologist=bad. For others it's China=bad, P01 authors=bad, GoF=bad, animal research = bad, etc.