Yay, poke fun and emphasize only what serves your "side". And if you think leak is still plausible, you're the kooky anti-scientist..?
But what's actually substantive here?
researchsquare.com/article/rs-137…
But what's actually substantive here?
researchsquare.com/article/rs-137…
https://twitter.com/stuartjdneil/status/1499664646642487296
(1) SARS2+ found all over Market mainly on the ground& sewage wells, also west-side stalls, bags, fences, even a "feather removal machine" (2) this data published by the Chinese CDC 2 yrs after sampling in Jan'20 (3) 1 LinA positive sample found on a glove 1/1/20, the rest LinB.
(4) Conclusions of the paper are quite startling given the CCDC (not Worobey et al. or the WHO) collected, worked up &possess all the raw data: ZERO evidence of an animal origin was found at the Market. ALL of the SARS2 virus found originated in people, none came from animals.
And so, another reason why I used the word "startling", is instead of acknowledging the paper's polar opposite conclusion, Worobey et al, pick off the LinA result and jump up& down claiming it bolsters THEIR argument. Tell me that's not privilege and arrogance?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
