Michael Schellenberger

Rank 39 of 47
|
Score -80
1/20/2025, 1:22:39 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
99d
We broke the story that the first people to get Covid were the scientists in Wuhan, China who were manipulating coronaviruses. The WSJ confirmed our reporting one week later. It’s time for the US government to release the Covid and Fauci Files. Too much is still being hidden.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
686d
After years of official claims to the contrary, strong new evidence suggests the virus known as SARS-CoV-2 escaped from a Chinese lab. According to multiple sources, the researchers who led gain-of-function research, which increases infectiousness, were the first to be infected.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
99d
The internal documents show that Fauci’s allies knew they couldn’t prove there had been a natural spillover, and believed a lab leak was possible long after they claimed otherwise publicly. Imagine what the unreleased documents show.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
651d
Scientists studying Covid's origin told Congress last week that they were practicing science. But newly released private messages show Fauci's advisors knew they couldn't show a natural spillover had occurred and thought a lab leak was possible long after claiming otherwise.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
99d
Fauci played the media like a fiddle. They called the lab lead a “conspiracy theory.” Then, documents showed that Fauci’s main allies had sought to insert a furin cleavage site in the exact place where it exists on the Covid virus. Reason #7,969 for why the legacy media is dead.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
463d
The idea that bioweapons research caused Covid was debunked, people say. But it wasn't. New documents show scientists sought to insert a furin cleavage site right where it exists on SARS-CoV-2, and they'd been funded in the past by Anthony Fauci, who oversaw bioweapons research.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
99d
Fauci led an aggressive disinformation effort to discredit the lab leak hypothesis. If the Covid virus didn’t escape from the lab, why did he deliberately spread false or misleading information about it? Why did he repeatedly interfere in the investigation?
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
644d
Anthony Fauci, who oversaw America's response to the Covid pandemic, famously said, "I represent the science." But new evidence suggests that Fauci was behind a disinformation campaign to dismiss evidence that the virus escaped from a Chinese lab. @galexybrane
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
99d
Biden pardoned Fauci. He says it’s not an admission of guilt. But if Fauci were innocent, no pardon would be needed. The evidence suggests Fauci helped create the Covid pandemic, and then covered it up. The investigation must go forward. All Covid & Fauci Files must be released.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
580d
Fauci said he had an "open mind" about Covid's origin, but he didn't. A new, months-long investigation by Racket and Public reveals that Fauci secretly lobbied the CIA, State Department, and White House to reject the theory that Covid came from the Chinese lab his agency funded.

The statement and its context engage in public discourse by discussing significant public health and political issues related to COVID-19's origins and the actions of public figures. The tone is accusatory and critical, suggesting misconduct and cover-up by Dr. Fauci and others.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement may cause harm by potentially spreading unverified claims, which could mislead the public. [-2]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement challenges the privacy and dignity of individuals by making serious allegations without definitive proof. [-2]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not promote constructive dialogue, as it focuses on accusations rather than evidence-based discussion. [-2]