It only took 2+ years to get from 'dispositive' to 'not conclusive', which is what it always was - an argument for a market origin hypothesis based on very shaky data and rickety analyses, Not some thundering final verdict from 'The Experts' @USRightToKnow usrtk.org/covid-19-origi…
7
8
49
3K
5
Download Image
@BiophysicsFL @USRightToKnow Not really true -- dispositive was in the pre-print, not the @ScienceMagazine paper.
@Rebecca21951651 @USRightToKnow @ScienceMagazine I know. My point is that *even after* Science made them tone down the definitive language from the preprint, the authors were still making these hyperbolic claims - all the other quotes are from after publication.