Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.921 [SLACK_001135] · slack_pm:msg:09567

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

Agreed - casual racism thanks to WSJ and the Bloomshitters. How predictable.

In context

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

2021-06-04 17:51 Edward C. Holmes open

Wow. Is that actionable? Perhaps let the Scripps lawyers know.
2021-06-04 17:57 Edward C. Holmes open

How can we have been so quick to defend our Chinese counterparts after raising the alarm in the first place. Fucking ridiculous.
2021-06-04 18:03 Kristian G. Andersen open

Just pinged the institution - we'll get the lawyers involved. Enough of this pure bullshit.
2021-06-04 18:08 Edward C. Holmes open

It's just infuriating. And the by-line in that article seems racist to me.
2021-06-04 18:14 Kristian G. Andersen

Agreed - casual racism thanks to WSJ and the Bloomshitters. How predictable.
2021-06-04 18:37 Robert F. Garry open

Yes - indeed - Denise Chow one of two reporters allowed into WIV has no doubt that the LL is pure crap - she got pushed to the back and my statement seems to have been selectively edited - sure investigate but only to put the bSto rest.
2021-06-04 18:44 Robert F. Garry open

How is it possible that they believe you had anything to do with the Lancet letter?
2021-06-04 19:23 Edward C. Holmes open

This is basically an attack on the rights of scientists to say and write what they believe to be true.
2021-06-04 19:35 Edward C. Holmes open

I can't quite articulate how angry I am about this: we have every right to express our scientific opinion and every rightto change our views on the basis of new data.