Thread by @MichaelWorobey

Intemperate attacks? No, @mattwridley, it is not at all intemperate to call you out as I did. It needs to happen more often. Says the purveyor of disinformation, "how DARE you accuse me of spreading disinformation!"

Time's up on that.
1/

https://twitter.com/mattwridley/status/1471194370703511562

You take issue with this tweet of mine:
2/

https://twitter.com/MichaelWorobey/status/1470863799179624449

But what I say is simply and demonstrably true, as your own tweets illustrate. To deny this, as you have, is just further disinformation:
3/

And:
4/

And regarding my calling you "ignorant and antiscientific", that is also factually correct, no matter how much you wish to protest and claim otherwise.
5/

Case in point, which you conveniently choose not to engage with in your effort to play the victim, is your failure to reckon with the findings in my recent Science Perspective
6/

science.org/doi/10.1126/sc…

Here is your tweet. Fair enough to draw attention to an error I made, but not fair enough to pretend that that tangential point in any way diminishes to main findings of the paper: no evidence of ascertainment bias in large proportion of early cases linked to Huanan...
7/

...and a really stunning pattern whereby cases *not* linked to Huanan nevertheless lived near the market. This strong evidence that the pandemic started at Huanan Market.

To ignore it, as you did, is, simply, ignorant.
8/

It is also antiscientific. Ignoring, dismissing, denigrating, and downplaying evidence that does not fit your preferred scenario of origin is the very definition of antiscientific.
9/9