Not Marion Koopmans

Don’t mistake sarcasm for nonsense | I’m Mario, not Marion | Unconventional Virologist | Takes Lab Leak Seriously | Totally fictional sibling | "Parody"

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

It was a tech glitch that locked me out for 8 weeks, not @karelpopper's fantasy crusade, but he’s welcome to the delusion. Now that he’s blocked me and is urging strangers to report me, I suppose we finally have his answer on Koopmans’ COI: cowardice wrapped in a block.

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

@EMM_386 @thackerpd “The lab in Wuhan”? Just a joke. Apparently.

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

@EMM_386 @thackerpd Marion later said she was referring to wild theories, and sure, some of them were. But she simply said “the lab in Wuhan” without specifying any outlandish claim about it.

[Sigrid Bratlie @sigridbratlie]

Hensel just emailed me again saying I am misrepresenting his message to my employer. I am not having that conversation with him in private, it will be in full public view here. To be clear; in the message to my employer, Hensel complained that I haven’t replied to his personal emails to me over the last weeks about my opinions on his paper, therefore he sees no other option than to contact my employer about it. In the email, he specifically references my signature on the retraction letter and also specifically says I should remove any ‘accusations’ from my book. If that isn’t intimidation and breach of freedom of speech, I don’t know what counts. Not replying to his emails certainly doesn’t warrant contacting my employer. But Hensel is not operating in good faith. During a public digital event on biosecurity in Washington DC a few weeks ago, he complained in the meeting chat that I had been invited to a separate closed meeting on the topic a couple of days earlier. Trying to prevent me from even participating in meetings is also an attempt at censorship. Therefore, I have no interest in having that dialogue with you Zach Hensel.

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

@Rebecca21951651 Mr. Stava walks the zoonosis walk, literally. Leader of Norway’s Pedestrian Spillover sect. Big on GPT. Doesn’t write a thing himself.

Some say he’s a sock puppet. And I think they’re right. The seams are showing.

[Sigrid Bratlie @sigridbratlie]

The search for the origins of Covid is so deeply politicized and problematic that I have decided to be fully open and transparent about the foul play happening in the background. I describe quite a lot of it in my book, and I will continue to write about it in public. This week, one of my employers received an email from Zach Hensel requesting them to take action to make me remove my name from the retraction request submitted by @BiosafetyNow for the wet market paper he coauthored (Crits-Christoph et al). He also wanted my employer to ensure I don’t misrepresent his research in my book. Firstly, my employer has nothing to do with my book or my signature on the petition, that is a personal decision by me as a scientist. Second, in line with principles of freedom of speech and academic freedom, I am entitled to my opinion and expressing it. Third, it is simply unacceptable to encourage my employer to take actions against me. I know others like @Ayjchan have similar experiences. Thankfully I have employers who give me full autonomy in this matter and who have a high level of trust in my decisions, so such attempts will not work. I will nevertheless post about it here to make sure that everyone understands that I am playing with my cards fully open and that any attempts at intimidation will become public.

@R_H_Ebright @gdemaneuf @Bryce_Nickels

[Rebecc@ ███████ @Rebecca21951651]

@R_H_Ebright @StavaRune @sigridbratlie @MarionKoopmans They all figured out the truth early and now lie:

in @JeremyFarrar 's book "Spike"

[Richard H. Ebright @R_H_Ebright]

As sock puppet "Rune Stava" knows:

Andersen et al. 2020 concluded "Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus" and "we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible."

Andersen et al. 2020 is scientifically invalid and is a product of scientific misconduct, up to and including scientific fraud. Private email and Slack communications of authors Andersen, Garry, Holmes, and Rambaut, made public through a US Congressional inquiry, show that they knew the conclusions of their paper were false at the time the paper was drafted, at the time the paper was submitted for publication, and even at the time the paper was published.

In private email and Slack communications, first author Andersen wrote "the lab escape version of this is so friggin' likely to have happened because they were already doing this type of work and the molecular data is fully consistent with that scenario" on the day the first draft of the paper was started; wrote "accidental escape is in fact highly likely" and "we can’t prove one way or the other, but we never will be able to" on the next day; wrote "From a genomics perspective, the theories Richard Ebright lay out I expect would look the same - there would be no way to distinguish between them" four days later; wrote "The furin link keeps bugging me" on the day the first draft of the paper was completed; wrote "we unfortunately just can’t rule out a potential accidental infection from the lab" on the day the paper was submitted for publication; and wrote "we can’t fully disprove culture" and "We also can’t fully rule out engineering" a month after publication of the paper.

In private email and Slack communications, author Garry wrote "I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario where you get from the bat virus or one very
similar to it to nCoV where you insert exactly 4 amino acids, 12 nucleotides, that all have to be added at the exact same time to gain this function....I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature" and "Of course, in the lab it would be easy to generate the perfect 12 base insert that you wanted" on the day the first draft of the paper was started; wrote "The major hangup I have is the polybasic cleava[g]e site....Contributing to my hangup. Its not two basic amino acids it’s three plus the proline, and it's a perfect 12 base insertion - no mutations at all in the rest...So this major variation occurred without any other changes anywhere close" and "Transmitting a b[a]t virus like RatG13 in HeLa cells and then asking your graduate student to insert a furin site...would get you there. It's not crackpot to suggest this could have happened given the GoF research we know is happening" on the next day; and wrote "You could put the furin site in very cleanly" and "You can also synthesize bits of the genes de novo with perfect precision then add them back in without a trace" three days later.

Formal requests for retraction of Andersen et al. 2020 for scientific misconduct have been submitted.

Only an ignoramus or a fraud would nominate science fraudster Andersen for an award in science or a employment in science.

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

Just need to know if Dr. Scary’s @Scary7Dr in the new Resident Evil. I mean, she’s out here handling the T-virus like she invented it.

[DiscussingFilm @DiscussingFilm]

First look at Raccoon City in RESIDENT EVIL: REQUIEM’

Releasing on February 27, 2026.

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

BREAKING: My sister Marion receives a lintje for services rendered in the lab leak coverup. Still holds the highest score at Pingo. Some say it’s all connected.
https://t.co/wrofPVzIRd

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

🧑‍🔬 Meet Marion Koopmans, virologist, WHO investigator, and EcoHealth partner, helping investigate a lab they funded.

She joined secret meetings, blames intelligence for secrecy, but WIV deleting its database? No issue.

Time for Pingo. How many squares will she hit? 👇

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

@HeerRozenwater @ggronvall So the ‘serious debate’ phase is over, and it’s zoonati time now?

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

@ggronvall Not bad with ‘Gain of Fiction,’ but I’ll take credit for ‘Gain of Funding’, far more on point.

[Leave it to Anna @annabaltisberg]

Zo’n bord voor de kop. Het gaat niet om die bokswedstrijd. Het gaat zelfs niet om vrouwen in de sport. Waar het om gaat is dat er de afgelopen zeg 10 jaar groepsdenken, één lijn + never admit to having been wrong is geslopen in het maatschappelijk debat. Trump, trans, COVID,
1

[Edward Hammond @pricklyresearch]

@Rebecca21951651 @JoshuaL68860745 @jhas5 @emilyakopp As I've said before, Marion Koopmans told me, in a taxi in Geneva, that she smuggled zika out of Brazil by vial-in-pocket, in contravention of Brazilian genetic resources and biosafety law. We were both attending a WHO meeting on management of West African Ebola outbreak samples.

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

@EMM_386 @HeerRozenwater Reddit’ll shame you for asking. Rozenwater won’t, he’ll just drop 1,500 words of independent research, expertly polished by GPT. No lecture, just enlightenment. Can’t wait.

[EMM386 @EMM_386]

Natural viruses do not result in 292 pages of this.

Anyone who is in the field who is claiming it is a natural virus can not answer this logically.

Small redactions will be 'protecting sources'.

292 pages of this from the NIH?

It's not natural.

[Dr. rer. nat. Valentin Bruttel @VBruttel]

@angie_rasmussen Looks like you prefer not to answer.
I understand.
It must be terrible to realize that your own colleagues accidentally killed millions of people.

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

Koopmans’ department partnered with EcoHealth, which funded the Wuhan lab. She then helped "investigate" the lab, and now retweets a GPT essay arguing that’s not a conflict of interest.

Seriously: what does constitute a COI if not that?

https://t.co/cNnmQrjWEa

[Heer Rozenwater @HeerRozenwater]

@MarioKoopmans You take the question of Dr. Marion Koopmans’s potential conflict of interest very seriously. Because COI issues are complex and important, I chose to address it in a dedicated reply rather than lumping it into a longer, multi-topic answer.

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

@enithka @thackerpd Apparently there's no hard evidence that Sander van der Linden used sockpuppets to promote himself and his ideas on Wikipedia, or so says this Dutch science editor.

[Not Marion Koopmans @MarioKoopmans]

@enithka Hier is een betere, directe link naar het artikel over Sander van der Linden.

https://t.co/QkW4XEkDxB