@TyLKelly That's not just an MP, that's our Minister of Science (who often goes on and on about Universities not doing enough to protect "free speech").
@staffy501 @OAlexanderDK The NYTimes article did link to @OAlexander's thread (though without mentioning his name, he was referred to as an "online researcher").
@StuartJRitchie Do we have independent confirmation about the reason for replacing Eisen? Not sure I'd jump on this having heard just one side of the story.
@jburnmurdoch I think there is another reason - the fear to be "wrong". Reporting 'Hamas claims that...' and 'IDF claims that' can never be "wrong" (but of course can become highly misleading). When you make your own calls, even if based on expert input, you could be "wrong".
@peligrietzer@littmath I think I explained myself badly. What I call a "theorem" is a mathematical statement for which there is a public proof that the mathematical community has accepted. Maybe by "theorem" you mean what I would call "mathematically true fact".
@m_artigiani@BarbaraFantechi Bulletin of the LMS happily publishes surveys. The survey being comprehensible is a necessary condition, the original result being incomprehensible isn't. </promotion>
@alexselby1770 More importantly perhaps, I think any superspreading is likely to be caused by a particularly high viral load. (If the storm didn't just sink my boat, but 80% of the boats out that day, it was probably a very heavy storm!)
@andrew_croxford@zeynep Obviously I have no business telling you how to use your free time. Just saying that there might be a bigger audience for the kind of corrective post you sometimes make than you might think.
So thanks for that - we even put up with the puns to read them!
@andrew_croxford@zeynep 2. The point of course is not to argue with those posting misinfo, but to correct it for those who read your posts with an open mind and have seen the misinfo. Of course, the arguing might be unavoidable, but...