The media’s culpability in suppressing the lab leak hypothesis is obvious. But a larger share of the blame falls upon science journal reviewers & publishers - the “scientific establishment.
They shut down discussion & discredited viable alternatives.
These prestigious, influential journals should be providing a forum for pulsating debate as experts explore and test theories, especially on something as contentious and fascinating as the possible origins of a global pandemic.
The opposite, in this case, happened.
It appears that @Nature had made it very clear what the boundary of what Dr. @EricRWeinstein calls the Gated Institutional Narrative is:
Be warned, for Thou shalt not speak of the lab leak hypothesis.
The grant makers, the NIH, the science journals, the scientist experts - all of their incentives to tell the truth are misaligned.
It’s a giant racket, and they, like all bureaucrats have only one goal - to maximize the potency of the bureaucracy.
This I find particularly egregious on @Nature’s part - not disclosing that the genome offered as the closest known one to SARS-CoV2 had a name change.
Why? One could guess. The change obscured an important connection.
Only two possible choices: Negligence or maliciousness?
So there were personal & institutional interests to protect.
But there might be something else. Just like in Hollywood, the need to appease Chinese commercial interests might be at play here.
China is the biggest national sponsor of publishers that produce these journals (!!)
Corporate links to China compromise output and distort agendas, especially when investigating something as sensitive as the origins of covid19.
The epistemic role of science journals and the publishing process today should absolutely be questioned in light of this.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's almost impossible to conclusively prove that Harvard's academic output and policy stances are directly influenced by large financial contributions.
All we have is the observable: the timing of these gifts, the meetings that took place, and the outcomes.
A thread🧵
In February 2020, Chinese real estate developer Evergrande Group - yes the one that collapsed - pledged $115 million in funding to a Harvard led consortium, the Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness, to research COVID-19.
FOIA documents revealed that Dr. Anthony Fauci, the dean of Harvard Medical School George Daley and current President of Harvard (which is suing the Trump admin btw) Alan Garber, were in an email thread with the CEO and Chief Health Officer of Evergrande.
🚨BREAKING: To add to Harvard’s ongoing woes, we have uncovered a shocking new detail.
Harvard University may have violated US sanctions by hosting and providing training sessions for a Chinese paramilitary organization (XPCC)
Here's what we found 🧵
Harvard, along with other top US universities, is already facing intense scrutiny over foreign gifts and contracts that raise concerns about undue foreign influence.
Secretary @LindaMcMahonEd has said that Harvard has not been “fully transparent or complete in its disclosures." The Dept. of Education is currently investigating Harvard’s foreign donations.
Since 2012, Harvard has received over $1.1 billion in foreign funding, with significant contributions from China.
These gifts often come with “strings attached” that potentially comprise academic freedom and lead to partnerships that present huge attack areas for espionage, intellectual property theft, and corruption.
Another instance of journos tainting @elonmusk with the worst possible associations - this time Stalin - based on unnamed sources and baseless claims about filling top positions at OPM (Office of Personnel Management) with his “lackeys”
Let me show you what a pathetic excuse for an article this is 🧵
It opens with a source listing some names of incoming appointees and how they are linked to Elon’s companies.
Then they quote a professor from Harvard Kennedy School of Government who says “in the past, there have been one or maybe two political appointees in ALL of OPM”
The idea is that THIS year is an exception.
But a cursory look into the plumbook shows that in 2024, there were at least 17 political appointees in Biden’s OPM, excluding the open director slot.
I wonder how different our world would be like if our leaders and intelligentsia weren't so completely divorced from violence - both simulated or real.
Ancient Greek thinkers such as Plato - meaning "broad shoulders," so named because of a physique honed by wrestling - were not
merely men who lived their lives in their heads, pontificating in abstraction away from any understanding of savagery and the zero sum nature of conflict. Both Hemingway and Orwell fought in the Spanish Civil War.
Today, the stereotype that characterizes our erudite class is the
bespectacled tweed-wearing waif who turns down his nose at the idea of physicality. UFC, wrestling, heay weight lifting - these are signifiers of low social status or of a lesser intellect.
We need an elite who is in constant contact with reality, who