This will be the first of many comments. I will be savoring each one, and not rushing to put them here. Do reply and ask any questions that you have. Because he is so well known, the piece, which has been published in many places, one of which was
https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-…
This will be the first of many comments. I will be savoring each one, and not rushing to put them here. Do reply and ask any questions that you have. Because he is so well known, the piece, which has been published in many places, one of which was
He has this completely inaccurate statement in his Acknowledgements:
---BEGIN NONSENSE
The first person to take a serious look at the origins of the SARS2 virus was Yuri Deigin, a biotech entrepreneur in Russia and Canada. In a long and brilliant essay, he dissected the molecular biology of the SARS2 virus and raised, without endorsing, the possibility that it had been manipulated. The essay, published on April 22, 2020, provided a roadmap for anyone seeking to understand the virus’s origins
---END NONSENSE
First I will assert that posting with a name identical or similar to the posting here, obviously limited to events known by January, 2020, which was plenty serious predates Yuri's essay by months. It seems to me that because of Wades linking to Dan's takedown of the gravely flawed Anderson political pseudo science with "A technical critique of the Andersen letter takes it down in harsher words." linking to here:
Unless he is incompetent, he would have known about our earlier publication. Possible incompetence aside, what is it called when someone states something they know to be untrue?
Oh yes, and he was way too arrogant to have responded to my questioning him about this by email.
I guess if this is one comment, I really should split them up, or they might be too long to read. Feel free to reply and I would be happy to engage in discussion about this.
This will be the first of many comments. I will be savoring each one, and not rushing to put them here. Do reply and ask any questions that you have. Because he is so well known, the piece, which has been published in many places, one of which was
https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/
He has this completely inaccurate statement in his Acknowledgements:
---BEGIN NONSENSE
The first person to take a serious look at the origins of the SARS2 virus was Yuri Deigin, a biotech entrepreneur in Russia and Canada. In a long and brilliant essay, he dissected the molecular biology of the SARS2 virus and raised, without endorsing, the possibility that it had been manipulated. The essay, published on April 22, 2020, provided a roadmap for anyone seeking to understand the virus’s origins
---END NONSENSE
First I will assert that posting with a name identical or similar to the posting here, obviously limited to events known by January, 2020, which was plenty serious predates Yuri's essay by months. It seems to me that because of Wades linking to Dan's takedown of the gravely flawed Anderson political pseudo science with "A technical critique of the Andersen letter takes it down in harsher words." linking to here:
https://harvardtothebighouse.com/2020/03/19/china-owns-nature-magazines-ass-debunking-the-proximal-origin-of-sars-cov-2-claiming-covid-19-wasnt-from-a-lab/
Unless he is incompetent, he would have known about our earlier publication. Possible incompetence aside, what is it called when someone states something they know to be untrue?
Oh yes, and he was way too arrogant to have responded to my questioning him about this by email.
I guess if this is one comment, I really should split them up, or they might be too long to read. Feel free to reply and I would be happy to engage in discussion about this.