Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.862 [SLACK_001076] · slack_pm:msg:08967

Date: 2021-05-24 15:35
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Kristian G. Andersen
Topics: Lab-leak / accidental release hypothesis

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

It really is important - the issue isn't about lab leak, it's about that they _must_ have had the virus prior to the pandemic, which (a) is hugely unlikely and (b) there's absolutely zero evidence for - in fact, the evidence quite strongly suggest they didn't!

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
It really is important - the issue isn't about lab leak, it's about that they _must_ have had the virus prior to the pandemic, which (a) is hugely unlikely and (b) there's absolutely zero evidence for - in fact, the evidence quite strongly suggest they didn't!	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

own voice, substantive

speaker_own

asserts

In context

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

2021-05-24 15:32 Kristian G. Andersen open

I might have been able to do a little convincing yesterday morning to make him a little more confident in that statement - good! His team was pushing on him pretty hard to come out and say that natural emergence is _much_ more likely - I'm glad he did!
2021-05-24 15:33 Edward C. Holmes open

Huge!
2021-05-24 15:34 Robert F. Garry open

Agreed!
2021-05-24 15:34 Kristian G. Andersen open

All of this is so fucking dumb. Glad to see David and Andrew hammering the "it's conspiracy" really hard on Twitter too :wink:
2021-05-24 15:35 Kristian G. Andersen

It really is important - the issue isn't about lab leak, it's about that they _must_ have had the virus prior to the pandemic, which (a) is hugely unlikely and (b) there's absolutely zero evidence for - in fact, the evidence quite strongly suggest they didn't!
2021-05-24 15:36 Edward C. Holmes open

Told the same to Simone at the SCMP
2021-05-24 15:37 Edward C. Holmes open

Told another journo that if it's not a conspiracy theory it's without doubt a 'theory containing a conspiracy'. I hope they get sarcasm.
2021-05-24 15:39 Kristian G. Andersen open

We need this particular point to be crystal clear in the letter. Will find some time tonight.
2021-05-24 15:43 Edward C. Holmes open

I'll take a look as well

Full conversation →