In September I wrote a blog post reciting several false #covid19 claims and predictions made by Levitt over the course of the pandemic. That is not an "ad hominem attack". I reported Levitt's claims (with references). liorpachter.wordpress.com/2020/09/21/the… 2/14
Levitt, for his part, has responded to criticism of his failed predictions with non-sequiturs about attacks on free speech.
The truth though is that nobody has canceled Levitt. His incoherent rants have been written about in newspapers ranging from the LA times... latimes.com/science/story/… 6/14
He's been interviewed on countless TV shows and even hosted by a governor for a roundtable. 8/14
And he has been tweeting incessantly for months, not only freely, but with ample bots to amplify his nonsense. 9/14
While screaming from the rooftops unencumbered, Levitt has had no qualms about trying to cancel others. He emailed several of my colleagues with threats against me, including the suggestion that I should be fired. 10/14
He asked one of my colleagues whether he should contact the police to report me, and for advice on what he could do "that will be effective but not necessarily damage Lior Pachter’s career in an irretrievable way?" 11/14
He didn't just email my colleagues to try to get me fired. He emailed the president of my university. Because I wrote a blog post reciting his failed #covid19 predictions. 12/14
I guess this is what he meant by the new dark age cometh? 13/14
A final thought: instead of trying to cancel others, Levitt ought to take the advice here to heart (he hasn't yet). stanforddaily.com/2020/12/13/dr-… 14/14
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There is a lot of focus on the importance of reproducible science for facilitating replication of published research. That's all good, but reproducible science has another benefit: when adopted by a group it is an incredible accelerant for research *in that group*. 2/
Consider the paper we wrote on whole animal multiplexed #scRNAseq. The @GoogleColab notebooks Tara Chari wrote for the analyses were a monumental effort, but she did not start from scratch. 3/
The design is simple and elegant. A single motor drives the shaft of the tube rack, which is coupled to the dispenser arm via a spiral track. This ensures both rotate in tandem. 2/
The device is easy to 3D print and build, and can be assembled from off-the-shelf parts in less than an hour for $67.02. This low cost, and the straightforward assembly, is possible thanks to the design around a single motor. Amazing work by @annekylosaurus & @sinabooeshaghi. 3/
Universal Health Services @UHS_Inc is the largest facility-based behavioral health provider in the country. Its mission statement includes "To provide..healthcare services that..INVESTORS seek for long-term returns."
We show #scRNAseq can be used for "reverse genomics" to conduct low-cost *experiments*. Instead of sequence first ask questions later, we ask questions first & then sequence. We illustrate the approach w/ a starvation experiment using the emerging model Clytia hemisphaerica. 2/
We performed multiplexed #scRNAseq using the ClickTag approach developed in our lab by @JaseGehring (w/@sisichen, Matt Thomson, Jeff Park). The chemical multiplexing can be used on any tissue/animal and facilitates experiments with little batch effect. 3/ nature.com/articles/s4158…
In 2006 I went on a year-long sabbatical to @UniofOxford from @UCBerkeley. My grants were just ending and I thought I'd reset by doing some math after several years of genome consortia (I didn't have a biology mentor to tell me R01s can be renewed, so I didn't know & didn't try).
At @UniofOxford I was hosted by Philip Maini in Maths and @JotunHein in the Stats. It was a fun year in which I met @satijalab who was a student at the time. We ended up writing a paper on phylogenetics, alignment and annotation: academic.oup.com/bioinformatics…