1. EXCLUSIVE: Not hard to fathom why insiders are going to the WSJ reporters w/ fresh intel. Science writers at the NY Times, WashPost, Nature & Science have turned themselves into stenographers for the NIH--#scicomm is not journalism.
2. The Energy Department made its judgment with “low confidence”, FBI with “moderate confidence” and this will be ignored by #sccomm ideologues covering the NIH.
More than one million Americans have died in the pandemic that began more than three years ago.
3. "The Covid-19 virus first circulated in Wuhan, China, no later than November 2019, according to the U.S. 2021 intelligence report." (This means some think it was circulating prior, which kicks a hole in Worobey's papers.)
4. Further cold water on Worobey papers: "An outbreak at a seafood market in Wuhan had initially been thought to be the source of the virus, but some scientists and Chinese public-health officials now see it as an example of community spread...."
5. The FBI sure seems concerned about briefing Congress. Why is that? Why is the FBI saying, "Hey, go talk to Avril Haines at the ODNI."
Is the ODNI sitting on the FBI to keep them from briefing members of Congress?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. WSJ's report on Department of Energy conclusion that lab accident started the pandemic, created a lot of Twitter threads that left out critical information. wsj.com/articles/covid…
First, this is really a second set of DOE scientists, from a different lab than in the past.
2. In June 2021, WSJ reported that DOE Lawrence Livermore's "Z Division" pointed to a lab accident, see foto wsj.com/articles/u-s-r…
I'm told yesterday's news was based on a report from another DOE lab: Los Alamos, which researches pandemic preparedness discover.lanl.gov/news/0705-blac…
3. You could argue this is a second DOE assessment, because it involves different scientists at a different lab. On top of this, we have the FBI assessment that the pandemic started from a lab accident.
Again, you could call this "three separate assessments."
1. COVID Made McDonald’s a Public Health Savior disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/covid-made-m…
Obesity made COVID outcomes worse, so governments partnered on jabs with the junk food chain, because of course.
2. Back in 2004, the film "Super Size Me" shamed McDonald's into removing large sized options from its menu. Artist Ron English lampooned the company w/ an obese Ronald McDonald, a version of the clown who ate only McDonald's.
3. But then COVID happened, and everyone's brain fell out of their heads. Both the Biden administration and California's governor Gavin Newsom partnered w/ McDonald's, EVEN THOUGH WE KNEW OBESITY MADE COVID OUTCOMES WORSE!!!
2. Parker describes "two plausible theories" although "neither proves direct and definitive evidence."
This language violates #scicomm which finds that a lab leak is "speculation" that "lacks direct evidence."
Maybe Parker doesn't have a NY Times subscription?
Here's more:
3. Parker states that we don't know how this virus jumped into humans and began transmission.
This violates #scicomm by ignoring some shabby studies published in Science by Worobey. et. al. that were lapped up by #scicomm writers at Times, Post, Science & Nature.
1. Researchers Find No Evidence (Again!) Of Mask Effectiveness, Yet Self-Styled Experts Continue Promotion disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/researchers-…
My interview with Cochrane Review author Tom Jefferson, who says governments "don’t have the science to back up what they claim."
"They engage in personal attacks, have all this certainty and think they can see the future. They're not scientists because uncertainty is the engine of science."
3. TOM JEFFERSON: "The WHO recently said that PCR is the gold standard for detecting if you are infectious. Anybody who works on PCR knows that's nonsense. You can detect a virus with PCR long after the infection is gone."