Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.953 [SLACK_001167] · slack_pm:msg:09917

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

I can't believe he is really that naive

In context

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

2021-06-20 16:48 Edward C. Holmes open

Such a stupid thing to do. He could have raised these points without all the accusations.
2021-06-20 16:49 Kristian G. Andersen open

Yup. And concluded - "It'd be really helpful if the samples were still available and full genomes could be produced". But no - he finishes on how this is a failure of science because the Chinese scientists are lying bastards.
2021-06-20 16:50 Robert F. Garry open

I think some of this is about "taking the heat" or at least forcing his way into the spotlight. He'll be a hero to DRASTIC and Alina - will this be a step too far for any of the rest of the Bloomshiters. Btwn JB and AC they are pretty much making a mockery of science. We'll know for sure when he starts making the rounds on Fox and Murdoch.
2021-06-20 16:50 Kristian G. Andersen open

Tone deaf. :notes:
2021-06-20 16:50 Edward C. Holmes

I can't believe he is really that naive
2021-06-20 16:51 Kristian G. Andersen open

After this meeting, I honestly think something might be wrong with him. But I'm not going to speculate.
2021-06-20 16:51 Kristian G. Andersen open

And it's not as much naive as it's willful ignorance.
2021-06-20 16:52 Edward C. Holmes open

I'm just disgusted that he has printed a FOIAd email in which the authors have no say
2021-06-20 16:52 Kristian G. Andersen open

Agreed. He brought up the pangolin genomes. And RaTG13. It's full on conspiracy. \