While I see the irony in asking to avoid ad hominem attacks in response to an article that itself is pretty much a large ad hominem attack, do you believe there’s any facts mentioned in there to be suspect? Even the facts in one paragraph of the article would be enough to torpedo a PhD application leave alone the apparently sole arbiter of all viral sequences in the planet.
No I have no reason to suspect facts mentioned - like I said I think the article probably adds value in shedding light on a popular database; but that's not my point; the contributors to the article demonstrate the usual coordination & incentives
we've come to expect from a small handful of vocal virologists and those who write for them.
