8 Comments

As as young student pursuing an applied science degree in England in the 1960s, I never dreamed that one day I would become an eminent scientist, but with very little effort on my part it actually happened. By February of 2020 I already knew to be factual most of the information about Covid we are now supposedly learning. I knew that bioweapons research went back as far as the 1940s, that during Obama's term the administration shut down thegain if function work at the military lab at Fort Detruck and that this work was continued at the lab in China, and that lab was the source of the covid leak, and that the virus was manufactured and not naturally occurring. Perhaps the most derogatory behavior in science is lying about the science you are working on and so all the supposed eminent scientists leading this work have removed. themselves from the eminent category and if their credential awarding institutions were eminent those credentials would also be removed for the reason that they were mistakenly awarded in the belief that the candidates had the basic essential personal qualifications to be recognized as a person of science.

Not knowing is not all that bad as a qualification but knowing wrong facts and spreading them is a very serious failing and this is where publications such as Nature have fatally discredited their reason for existence. Failure to undertake careful house cleaning will leave them with a serious credibility problem and become regarded as little more than a part of the popular trendy press. Many once highly regarded science publications have decided to place themselves in this category.

Expand full comment

Isn't it ironic that the "we the science" group didn't want to leave traces of their amazing work and exchange of ideas that were so critical to save humanity? Why deleting emails that saved millions of lives? Churchill wrote his memories of WWII but these guys not even an email. Too modest obviously.

Expand full comment

Love this take.

Expand full comment

This is news, no? Why would leading newspapers decline to report on the news? What’s behind that decision? What is in it for people to be ardent supporters of Fauci? To me, it’s not a witch hunt. Is everybody missing the point? GOF research is questionable, why engineer a deadly virus that doesn’t exist in nature? The lack of strict security rules and oversight is dangerous to humanity. Wouldn’t everybody have a vested interest in that? And what about the kickbacks? I guess it’s a sham to say nobody is above the law.

Expand full comment

Please check at the top of the article about my assertions about the Washington Post. Also, I forgot to mention that Nature Magazine also ignored the hearing.

Expand full comment

WSJ covered it as an opinion piece under "Life Science". It's interesting to look at Dr. Morens body language. Wonder what a professional of body language study would say. And someone really needs to help him out with his tie selection.

Expand full comment