The only thing that needed to be corrected was that there was another version of the virus in laos instead of hubei. The main points of the article still stand.
That point has been carefully argued by other people.
What I’m saying is that when you’re wrong (and he was) and you apologise (and he did) then don’t leave your (wrong) article up there encouraging other people to take up the same (wrong) views that you previously had.
That’s acting in bad faith.
I don’t care what you believe; believe whatever you think is appropriate.
…but he said that he thinks that his own article is wrong.
If you think that the article is right under those circumstances, perhaps consider:
You’re being suckered by a lazy click bait article.
(Not convinced? Actually go and read those Twitter threads I posted. It’s pretty damning. Wtf, “the NYT made this diagram that shows…” <— nope, that was from the paper, he was just being lazy and didn’t read it before writing an article about it. It’s just click bait to rile people up and get page views with random plausible but unsubstantiated crap)
