@razibkhan pointing out serious challenge for science & sci comm: “Spanish television.. reached out to me for comment because so many scientists who off the record would credit the idea of lab escape wouldn’t go on the record. The journalist told me he was quite depressed..”
https://twitter.com/theseeker268/status/1346562928900669440
“.. by the difference in how scientists would talk off-camera and what they were willing to say on the record. It basically made him not trust science at all.”
🎉 @rowanjacobsen “something changed when the Boston Magazine piece that highlighted the theory came out.. I started hearing from friends that really credible and high profile scientists thought that there needed to be an investigation about.. lab escape”
gnxp.com/WordPress/2021…
gnxp.com/WordPress/2021…
Several people have told me that the public is underwhelmingly science literate and will be easily misled and panicked by things that are not communicated with an abundance of caution. I think this is true & expect mistakes have been made and will continue to be made in sci com..
.. but I don’t think the solution to this problem is censorship or moving the discussion to a place that is inaccessible to the public (and probably subject to its own systemic biases as well).
Have scientists considered the damage that will be done to public trust in experts if any evidence comes out that SARS2 could have been from a lab?
What’s the plan? To tell the public that they were being shielded from questions they couldn’t handle?
What’s the plan? To tell the public that they were being shielded from questions they couldn’t handle?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
