Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.906 [SLACK_001120] · slack_pm:msg:09408

Date: 2021-06-02 14:47
Type: chat message · slack
mentioned: Andrew Rambaut
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Robert F. Garry

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

In other new it looks like the MOMA might actually let me use The Persistence of Memory along with my commentary The Persistence of Ebola regarding @Andrew Rambaut et al. sequencing paper on the newest Guinean Ebola outbreak coming out in _Nature_. Other good news - the mystery of the "thing" in PoM is solved - seems to be a bat - maybe a hammerhead bat. [shared file(s): image.png, image.png]

In context

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

2021-06-02 14:29 Kristian G. Andersen open

Shoot - can't you get that information deleted Bob? You might want to consider something like DeleteMe or PrivacyDuck - or both... Plus file some manual requests.
2021-06-02 14:33 Robert F. Garry open

Yeah - a good idea...
2021-06-02 14:41 Edward C. Holmes open

Jesus Bob - that's bad. This is really not on. We can't make ourselves and our families targets. Sharri is so dumb -just wait til she finds out that I told the Chief Medical Officer and the intelligence services here that we thought itmight be a lab leak...hang on, though, how can that be a cover-up?
2021-06-02 14:43 Kristian G. Andersen open

BECAUSE EDDIE!!!
2021-06-02 14:47 Robert F. Garry

In other new it looks like the MOMA might actually let me use The Persistence of Memory along with my commentary The Persistence of Ebola regarding @Andrew Rambaut et al. sequencing paper on the newest Guinean Ebola outbreak coming out in _Nature_. Other good news - the mystery of the "thing" in PoM is solved - seems to be a bat - maybe a hammerhead bat. [shared file(s): image.png, image.png]
2021-06-02 14:50 Edward C. Holmes open

I'm having doubts about the wisdom of our new letter: (i) it's crap - SO depressing that I spent ages cutting it down for it to be readded; (ii) it's late; (iii) there's so much hate out there that people will be reluctant to sign and I can't say I'm keen to get back in the firing line; (iv) what will it actually achieve - people have made their minds up.
2021-06-02 14:59 Kristian G. Andersen open

We'll get it back in shape, I'm sure. Let's decide on next steps once we have it - I very much think it's worthwhile tohave it out there for something to point to.
2021-06-02 15:00 Kristian G. Andersen open

I have a lot of urgent shit to deal with today, but I'll have some time tomorrow (hopefully...) to go through it - I think itcan be brought back to life and the full version history is saved.
2021-06-02 15:14 Andrew Rambaut open

Sorry - I have been out of the loop working on B.1.617.2. But I agree Eddie - it is got quite far from what we were thinking it should be. Everyone keeps saying 'keep it tight' and then adding more stuff in. I think we should not mention manipulation - no furin site, no passaging, nothing - that is all dumb and has been dealt with. I think itshould just address how implausible it is for it ever to get to the lab to escape in the first place and how plausible the animal route is. The one thing we need to nail is the 'lab escape is plausible' shit that serious scientists are signingup to.

Full conversation →