Very interesting to correct this error of Quay's in response to @mbw61567742 only to see @mbw61567742 cite Quay approvingly on this point one week later.
This is quite the indictment of Quay's book, since you said you read it and this is in the book.
Aren't you concerned someone divorced from reality is reportedly going to head up NIAID?
Once again it's a peak behind the curtain and there's no evidence of any conspiracy to cover up anything.
What’s with weirdos showing up to change the subject when lab leak bullshitters are challenged?
"We have peer reviewed science!" - says the virologists pretending to be GIS experts. #MermaidGate
teapawt.net/Engineer2The/status/17…
insideNIAID retweeted
Our new preprint on the origin of insertion mutations (including furin cleavage sites) in coronaviruses
This is a masterclass in journalism fuck ups by @Ayjchan and @nytopinion
1. Wrong quote
2. Wrong attribution
3. Taken out of context to lie about the experiment’s rationale
How to Stop a Lab Leak from Starting the Next Pandemic.
My new op-ed made possible by the @nytimes graphics and editorial team:
nytimes.com/interactive/2026…
gg Drastic — amazing @wapo opinion falls for what these guys say.
Wow the entire DRASTIC brain trust and not one of you thought to check whether GCA is actually a rare alanine codon.
11/12 Full report: researchgate.net/publication…
Credits: @BillyBostickson, @ydeigin, @stevenemassey, @AlmanaLepiz2252, @VBruttel, @gdemaneuf
@Jerdman2005 which lab leak investigation came to the right conclusion for the right reason? CIA or FBI?
Oh! @JasonBannan10 is also on X if he wants to weigh in. Looking back years later, was your investigation’s result correct? Or CIA? Both? Neither?
One figure is from a review paper and includes published sequences.
One figure is from a Masters thesis and includes original data.
Did I spot the difference?
The author of the 2019 thesis publishes on the same project (paper submitted Nov 2018, published Feb 2019). Spot the difference.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3073…
What was the "announcement/news" that @Ayjchan was coordinating with @dasher8090 on January 6?
Come on now, you can’t list DRASTIC’s contributions to leave out its work in reintegrating a child sex abuse criminal into society.
It was the relentless pressure from DRASTIC, the "Paris Group," and scientists like Alina Chan and Richard Ebright that ultimately forced three of the world's most prestigious scientific journals - The Lancet, Science, and Nature - to correct some of the public record on key COVID origin papers (Calisher et al, Pekar et al, Worobey et al, Zhou et al.)
This fact isn't talked about nearly enough.
But he doesn’t care about the origins criticism, really.
The problem was informing people that he ran at least three companies into the ground as CEO.
teapawt.net/insideNIAID/status/207…
insideNIAID retweeted
As always @philippmarkolin.bsky.social bangs the nail exactly on the head. Scientists are being used as political tools, prosecuted w/ full hyped-up horror for minor administrative issues while US global leadership in science & health is being rapidly demolished.
open.substack.com/pub/protag…
Quay’s brain is so totally cooked and he’s publishing lame AI info graphics every day to try to win clout… now some AI hallucinated analysis as wisdom… something so obvious it got the account nuked.
Concerning for $ATOS @atossainc
unavailable