Slack / Private Message Drop — page 1065

[2022-01-16 08:50:04] [Robert Garry] Or as @Eddie Holmes clarifies theories that involve [massive] conspiracies... [2022-01-17 04:39:39] [Robert Garry] She's still at it - remarkable that Broad allows these persistent ad hominum attacks. [2022-01-17 18:58:47] [Eddie Holmes] I think that Sunday Times journo will take the same line that PO1 was an attempt to stop the lab leak conspiracy etc I've told her multiple times that our conclusions were :100: driven by the science and that the if the science had suggested something different we would have written something different [2022-01-17 21:08:06] [Kristian Andersen] They're all taking that line - fuck 'em. [2022-01-20 10:13:18] [Kristian Andersen] Alright, I got an email from the Sunday Times reporter as well: [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2022-01-20 at 10.12.43 AM.png] [2022-01-20 10:14:52] [Kristian Andersen] Here's my drafted reply - suggestions? ```I can only speak for our own investigations, however the idea that any of our investigations were influenced by politics or political ramifications of particular hypotheses is false and, frankly, absurd. The idea that there was a "prefered narrative" and that people like Drs. Fauci and Farrar had influence over our scientific conclusions (i.e., the idea that there is a conspiracy) is also false - which is clear from e.g., FOIA'd emails and news articles at the time. For example, it is public knowledge that the "origin question" was directly discussed at the level of the White House early in the pandemic - e.g.: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/white-house-asks-scientists-investigate-origins-coronavirus/story?id=68807304ABC ABC https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2020/02/national-academies-provide-rapid-response-to-white-house-on-c oronavirus-data-needs As others have stated, our conclusions - published in two peer reviewed scientific papers - have been driven strictly by science. That was true in 2020 when the pandemic started and that is true today. Our earlier conclusions have only been further strengthened by additional scientific evidence and analyses - and the absence of evidence from the recently completed investigations by the US intelligence community. For hypotheses that have been "unduly influenced" by "political ramifications" you need look no further than the narrative around the "lab leak" theory or the many conspiracy theories currently being amplified, including the ones suggesting that scientific investigations were "unduly influenced by the political ramifications of the hypothesis". Best, Kristian``` [2022-01-20 10:24:01] [Robert Garry] It's good - no suggestions. I got the almost same email. My response will be shorter and perhaps not as collegial. [2022-01-20 10:24:26] [Kristian Andersen] Just updated my last paragraph - because, fuck this - time to call a spade a spade.