3 ms·

Email messages and Slack direct messages among authors of the paper obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process or by the U.S. Congress and pub

by causi 3y ago

Email messages and Slack direct messages among authors of the paper obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process or by the U.S. Congress and publicly released in full in or before July 2023 (2-7), show that the authors did not believe the core conclusions of the paper at the time it was written, at the time it was submitted for publication, and at the time it was published. Quite damning if true.

Georgelemental 3y ago
Originally reported here: https://public.substack.com/p/top-scientists-misled-congress-about https://public.substack.com/p/top-scientists-misled-congress...
vannevar 3y ago
Are those materials linked anywhere? The opinion pieces linked in the letter are not persuasive, it would be better to see the actual source materials before deciding to sign such a strong accusation.
- blululu 3y ago
  Yep, the intercept article has a good summary and also provides a link to the sources: https://theintercept.com/2023/07/12/covid-documents-house-republicans/ https://theintercept.com/2023/07/12/covid-documents-house-re... https://www.documentcloud.org/app?q=%2Bproject%3Asubcommittee-on-coronavir-213954%20 https://www.documentcloud.org/app?q=%2Bproject%3Asubcommitte...
  - YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
    From the Intercept article (quoting Andrew Rambaut, one of the authors): >> “I personally think we should get away from all the strange coincidence stuff. I agree it smells really fishy but without a smoking gun it will not do us any good,” he wrote. “The truth is never going to come out (if [lab] escape is the truth). Would need irrefutable evidence. My position is that the natural evolution is entirely plausible and we will have to leave it at that. Lab passaging might also generate this mutation but __we have no evidence that that happened__.” >> Not that discussing it isn't fun (My underlining) The email and Slack messages' significance has been overblown. The communications make it clear that the authors of the paper had no evidence to support a lab leak theory. It is obvious this whole thing is played for political gains, much like the email leaks of climate scientists a few years ago where held up by "skeptics" as evidence that the whole climate change thing was made up.
baja_blast 3y ago
The emails and slack messages are indeed authentic. None of the participants involved have ever denied it probably because doing so under oath would put them in legal risk. But luckily for the participants their misconduct has been largely ignored outside of right wing outlets, despite the fact the lead authors joking about how to mislead the press NYT specifically.
- eesmith 3y ago
  "largely ignored outside of right wing outlets" because of pieces like "Everyone should be skeptical of Nate Silver: And anyone touting the lab-leak 'theory' of COVID's origin at this point" at https://theracket.news/p/everyone-should-be-skeptical-of-nate https://theracket.news/p/everyone-should-be-skeptical-of-nat... . > Likely in hopes of fostering that illusion of inevitability, as well as of transparency, the Public crew made the Slacks and a separate document trove containing scientists’ emails available for download. This is also a well-worn tactic seen, for instance, in the mass release of hacked emails from Democratic staffers during the 2016 presidential campaign: You put out a document dump of hundreds of pages that few will have time to read, cherry-pick the lines that best serve your narrative, then set a legion of fans loose on the internet to scream “READ THE SLACK MESSAGES” at anyone who disagrees. > Well, I did read the Slack messages. And it seems my skepticism of Silver, Shellenberger, and their cohort was well-founded. And I well remember Climategate, which used the same tactic.

by causi 3y ago

Georgelemental 3y ago

Originally reported here: https://public.substack.com/p/top-scientists-misled-congress-about https://public.substack.com/p/top-scientists-misled-congress...

vannevar 3y ago

Are those materials linked anywhere? The opinion pieces linked in the letter are not persuasive, it would be better to see the actual source materials before deciding to sign such a strong accusation.

blululu 3y ago
Yep, the intercept article has a good summary and also provides a link to the sources: https://theintercept.com/2023/07/12/covid-documents-house-republicans/ https://theintercept.com/2023/07/12/covid-documents-house-re... https://www.documentcloud.org/app?q=%2Bproject%3Asubcommittee-on-coronavir-213954%20 https://www.documentcloud.org/app?q=%2Bproject%3Asubcommitte...
- YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
  From the Intercept article (quoting Andrew Rambaut, one of the authors): >> “I personally think we should get away from all the strange coincidence stuff. I agree it smells really fishy but without a smoking gun it will not do us any good,” he wrote. “The truth is never going to come out (if [lab] escape is the truth). Would need irrefutable evidence. My position is that the natural evolution is entirely plausible and we will have to leave it at that. Lab passaging might also generate this mutation but __we have no evidence that that happened__.” >> Not that discussing it isn't fun (My underlining) The email and Slack messages' significance has been overblown. The communications make it clear that the authors of the paper had no evidence to support a lab leak theory. It is obvious this whole thing is played for political gains, much like the email leaks of climate scientists a few years ago where held up by "skeptics" as evidence that the whole climate change thing was made up.

baja_blast 3y ago

The emails and slack messages are indeed authentic. None of the participants involved have ever denied it probably because doing so under oath would put them in legal risk. But luckily for the participants their misconduct has been largely ignored outside of right wing outlets, despite the fact the lead authors joking about how to mislead the press NYT specifically.

eesmith 3y ago
"largely ignored outside of right wing outlets" because of pieces like "Everyone should be skeptical of Nate Silver: And anyone touting the lab-leak 'theory' of COVID's origin at this point" at https://theracket.news/p/everyone-should-be-skeptical-of-nate https://theracket.news/p/everyone-should-be-skeptical-of-nat... . > Likely in hopes of fostering that illusion of inevitability, as well as of transparency, the Public crew made the Slacks and a separate document trove containing scientists’ emails available for download. This is also a well-worn tactic seen, for instance, in the mass release of hacked emails from Democratic staffers during the 2016 presidential campaign: You put out a document dump of hundreds of pages that few will have time to read, cherry-pick the lines that best serve your narrative, then set a legion of fans loose on the internet to scream “READ THE SLACK MESSAGES” at anyone who disagrees. > Well, I did read the Slack messages. And it seems my skepticism of Silver, Shellenberger, and their cohort was well-founded. And I well remember Climategate, which used the same tactic.