Over the past month, the New York Times, Washington post, and the Wall Street newspaper have all published editorials and editorials endorsing the “credibility” of the theory that COVID-19 was published by the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
The majority of these editorials and editorials cite the writings of Nicholas Wade, the former New York Times journalist who, in an article of May 5 in the Newsletter the Atomic scientists, translated what began as a purely political hoax into quasi-scientific language.
Wade argued that Shi Zheng-li, China’s leading expert on bat viruses, had received funding from the National Institutes of Health, together with zoologist Peter Daszak, to genetically manipulate bat coronaviruses that , he said, could have created SARS-CoV-2 and allowed him to flee to the city of Wuhan.
But none of these articles mention the fact that Wade is a known serial manufacturer and a big advocate of racist pseudo-science, whose 2014 book arguing for a genetic basis for the differences in intelligence between races. was condemned by the scientists whose research he cited, together with more than 140 other leading human development biologists.
Nor do they mention that Wade’s book was hailed by the former great wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke, along with other neo-Nazis, as a blow to “Jewish supremacists.”
Over the past month, Wade’s writings have been cited by the following articles, which have used his arguments as the backbone of their claims that COVID-19 could have been released from the Wuhan Institute of Virology:
• A Editorial of May 17 speak Washington post, titled “Two possible theories on the origins of the pandemic remain viable. The world must know “:
Has a research by-product leaked or have workers been inadvertently infected? Was the research carried out in less protected BSL-2 laboratories instead of the more secure BSL-4? Did Dr. Shi successfully manipulate a virus in the lab to add genetic characteristics that enhance affinity for human cells, as science journalist Nicholas Wade suggested in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists?
• A May 25 fact checker article in the Washington post, headlined: “How Wuhan’s Laboratory Leak Theory Suddenly Became Credible”:
Former New York Times science journalist Nicholas Wade, writing in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, reviews the evidence and argues for the theory of lab leaks.
• A May 29 editorial by Ross Douthat in the New York Times, titled “Why is the Laboratory Leak Theory Important”:
This is especially true if there is a chance that the Covid-19 virus was designed, in the so-called search for gain of function, to be more transmissible and deadly – a possibility raised, among others, by a former editor. scientist of this journal, Nicholas. Wade.
• A May 31st Editorial by Bret Stephens in the New York Times, titled “Media Groupthink and the Theory of Laboratory Leaks”:
Was it smart for science journalists to accept the authority of a February 2020 letter, signed by 27 scientists and published in The Lancet, feverishly insisting on the “natural origin” of the Covid? Not if these reporters had probed the links between the letter’s lead author and the Wuhan laboratory (a fact, as science writer Nicholas Wade points out in a landmark essay by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which is common knowledge for months).
• A Editorial of June 3 by Marc A. Thiessen in the Washington post, headlined: “The case where the virus emerged from nature, not from a laboratory, is collapsing”:
Nicholas Wade, a science journalist for nearly 50 years at Science, Nature and The New York Times, points out in his comprehensive report for the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that during the SARS1 outbreak, the intermediate host (civets raised for human consumption ) was identified in just four months.
• A May 7 editorial in the the Wall Street newspaper by James Freeman, titled “China, Fauci and the Origins of Covid”:
In a comprehensive account of the viral possibilities published this week by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Nicholas Wade argues that the Chinese lab is the most likely source of global agony.
On May 6, 2014, Wade published a book titled, An Inconvenient Legacy: Genes, Race and Human History. The book, according to the New York Times Critic by David Dobbs, says that modern genetics show that “the three main races”, Africans, Caucasians and East Asians, are genetically distinct races that are as divergent as the subspecies, and that their genetic differences underpin “the rise of the West”.
the New York Times The report notes that Wade talks about, “for example, specific genetic variants that supposedly create less trust and more violence in African Americans and, he says, explain their resistance to modern economic institutions and practices.”
He continues to flay Wade’s pseudo-scientific method, declaring, “he does this sort of thing over and over: he constantly pulls together long shots, speculation, and spurious allegations, and then declares that they add up to back his up. case… The result is a misleading, dangerous book.
Eric Michael Jonson, writing in American scientist, made similar reviews in an essay titled “On the Origin of White Power,” which provides a devastating review of Wade’s book:
Nicholas Wade is not a racist. In his new book, A Troublesome Inheritance, the former New York Times science writer makes this explicit. “It is not automatically racist to consider racial categories as a possible explanatory factor. He then explains why white people are better because of their genes.
The article in American scientist note passages from Wade’s book such as the following:
From a glance at the physique of an Eskimo, it is easy to recognize an evolutionary process at work that has shaped the human form for better survival in an arctic environment. Populations that live at high altitudes, such as Tibetans, represent another adaptation to extreme environments; in this case, changes in the regulation of blood cells are less visible but have been identified genetically. The adaptation of the Jews to capitalism is another of these evolutionary processes (emphasis added).
For these and other passages, Wade’s book has been praised by leading white supremacists and anti-Semites, including the website of David Duke, who greeted it as a “fascinating glimpse into how Jewish supremacists attempt to guard the gates of scientific debate”, stating “that there is indeed a biological basis to race”.
Scientists whose work Wade misinterpreted condemned his book in a letter at New York Times, denouncing his “diversion of research in our field to support arguments on the differences between human societies”. The letter concludes,
Wade juxtaposes an incomplete and inaccurate account of our research into human genetic differences with speculation that recent natural selection has led to global differences in IQ test scores, political institutions, and economic development. We reject Wade’s implication that our findings corroborate his conjectures. They don’t… We totally agree that there is no support from the field of population genetics for Wade’s conjectures.
The top three co-signers were joined by a total of 143 faculty members in population genetics and evolutionary biology.
In the dozens of pages of comments from the New York Times, Washington post, and the Wall Street newspaper citing Wade’s writings, his role as a serial maker and provider of white supremacist pseudo-science is never mentioned.
This raises an obvious question: How did repeated quotes from a prominent white supremacist ideologue and serial liar get through the “fact checkers” employed by the three major American newspapers?
After all, when New York Times columnist Bret Stephens city of 2005 paper by Gregory Cochran, Jason Hardy and Henry Harpending, who said: “Ashkenazi Jews have the highest average IQ of any ethnic group for which there are reliable data,” the New York Times was forced to issue a embarrassing retraction, declaring:
An earlier version of this Bret Stephens column cited statistics from a 2005 article that advanced a genetic hypothesis for the basis of intelligence among Ashkenazi Jews. After the publication, Stephens and his editors learned that one of the newspaper’s writers, who died in 2016, was promoting racist views. Mr. Stephens did not approve of the study or the opinions of its authors, but it was a mistake to quote it without criticism.
But this exact article was fully embraced by Wade in his 2014 book as “the only serious recent attempt by researchers to deepen the links between Jewish genetics and intelligence.”
In his arguments in support of the “Wuhan laboratory” conspiracy theory, Wade leads exactly the type of argument for which the New York Times one reviewer condemned him in 2014: “He constantly pulls together long shots, speculation and spurious allegations, and then says they add up to support his case. “
Responding to a question from the WSWS on Twitter, Georgetown University virologist Dr Angela Rasmussen concluded that “Wade’s book on human genetics is in fact his belief in the genetic basis of distorted intelligence at through a lens of racist pseudoscience “.
She added: “So when he speculates on the origins of the virus that are based on racist stereotypes, his track record as a supplier of bullshit books on the non-existent genetic links between race and intelligence is not taken into account “by the mainstream press. .
What could explain the dependence of the three major American newspapers on a discredited serial manufacturer and promoter of racist pseudo-science in their efforts to promote the Wuhan laboratory “theory”?
Wade’s confidence and uncritical quote can only be explained by the fact that this “theory” is a lie from start to finish, and his supporters are willing to accept any pretense – no matter how dirty and discredited it is. – express their preconceived objectives. to divert attention from the politicians responsible for the massive death and suffering caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and redirect them to xenophobia and nationalist hatred against China.