I said a lot more interesting things than the wording of one phrase you are picking on. I read your take as "eager to defend the mainstream squarequote-science"

I said a lot more interesting things than the wording of one phrase you are picking on. I read your take as "eager to defend the mainstream squarequote-science" on this topic. we know they lied about what they knew about the origins of covid-19 and gain of function research, the very same people were in charge of mitigating/vaccinating/curing covid, we know they had conflicts of interest, we know they suppressed open airing of dissent, so I don't trust what the experts are writing down at all, and I don't waste a lot of time reading about the subject. My comment you replied to I think stands as a reasonable explanation of what I was responding to, but really must be read in the context of that comment (like quote him then quote me) and not standing alone.