The Proximal Origin Of A Cover Up - Part Three

This paper was one of the single most impactful and influential scientific papers in history, and it expressed conclusions that were not based on sound science or fact, but instead on assumptions.

Aug 08, 2023

∙ Paid

Part 3, the Conclusion

Text Book Scien(tism)

Incredibly, Andersen et al. turned around and submitted a draft of the Proximal paper to Nature with the exact opposite claims, e.g. that the virus was “NOT human-engineered.”

Is it really presumptuous to say that the authors made a hard pivot to suppress the discussion of the lab leak theory?

During the hearing, Andersen made it seem that making a 180-degree shift in just a few days from man-made to a natural spillover was simply “textbook science in action.”

When asked about the millions of dollars he received after the publication of Proximal Origin, he said it wasn’t related.

“There is no connection between the grant and the paper. Funding decisions… were made before the pandemic, months before February.”

There is also an allegation that Andersen stated this would also secure his tenure.

With all due respect, Andersen is not trustworthy, he lied under oath a few times. It reminded me of when Dominion President & CEO John Poulos fibbed under sworn testimony before the House Administration Committee on January 9, 2020.

Within hours of receiving the first draft, Dr. Fauci reportedly worried about the possibility of “serial passage” in lab animals and asked the whole group:

The Proximal Origin Of A Cover Up - Part Three

This paper was one of the single most impactful and influential scientific papers in history, and it expressed conclusions that were not based on sound science or fact, but instead on assumptions.

Text Book Scien(tism)

This post is for paid subscribers