Latest Breaking News On - Professor garry - Page 1 : vimarsana.com
and this is what he told me toda . �* ., today. at that point we will fill -- still _ today. at that point we will fill -- still largely - today. at that point we will fill -- still largely under. today. at that point we will| fill -- still largely under the fill —— still largely under the influence _ fill —— still largely under the influence when a particular sentence was written that that might — sentence was written that that might have been a bio engineered virus, may be a weapon— engineered virus, may be a weapon that accidentally got released. �* ., weapon that accidentally got released. �* . , . , released. but that sentence is not about _ released. but that sentence is not about bio _ released. but that sentence is not about bio weapons, - released. but that sentence is not about bio weapons, it - released. but that sentence is| not about bio weapons, it says any laboratory based scenario. yes, it was, so maybe we went a little _ yes, it was, so maybe we went a little bit — yes, it was, so maybe we went a little bit too _ yes, it was, so maybe we went a little bit too far there, but, you — little bit too far there, but, you know. so little bit too far there, but, you know— little bit too far there, but, you know. so for a scientific -a er you know. so for a scientific paper that _ you know. so for a scientific paper that was _ you know. so for a scientific paper that was as _ you know. so for a scientific| paper that was as influential as that one, the idea of hearing somebody as eminent as bob garry suggesting that they may have pushed that conclusion a little too far is, as you might expect, getting a fair bit of reaction on places like twitter this evening. it bit of reaction on places like twitter this evening.- twitter this evening. it does seem pretty _ twitter this evening. it does seem pretty surprising. - twitter this evening. it does j seem pretty surprising. how significant is this?— significant is this? well, we ou:ht significant is this? well, we ou . ht to significant is this? well, we ought to say _ significant is this? well, we ought to say and _ significant is this? well, we ought to say and make - significant is this? well, we ought to say and make it i significant is this? well, we l ought to say and make it very clear that professor garry told me that much of the evidence that has emerged since they wrote that paper, the location
SentenceWeaponPointVirusInfluenceBioFillOneIdeaBitPaperScenariowebsite. you are watching bbc news. an author of an influential scientific paper, that helped to cast the idea that covid might have leaked from a laboratory as a conspiracy theory, has told the bbc that they might have gone "a bit too far" in their conclusions. the statement, from tulane university's bob garry, comes in the latest episode of the bbc podcast, fever: the hunt for covid's 0rigins. john sudworth, our correspondent in china, until he was forced to leave in 2021, hosts the podcast, and joins us now. john, it is great to see you again. what did professor gary tell you? if again. what did professor gary tell ou? , ., ~' again. what did professor gary tell ou? ~ ., tell you? if you think back to the early _ tell you? if you think back to the early days _ tell you? if you think back to the early days of— tell you? if you think back to the early days of the - tell you? if you think back to l the early days of the pandemic we have those claims and counter claim circulating, the idea of course that covid may have been accidentally leaked from a laboratory, but even more controversial claim that it may have been deliberately released from a laboratory, that that idea of a bio weapon even finding itself into the
IdeaBbc-newsPaperConspiracy-theoryThe-hunt-for-covidLaboratoryAuthorWebsiteUsBitProfessor-garryPodcast