Substack is an openly-available hosting platform with almost zero editorial standards, so I'm not sure why anyone would consider it to have "authority"? It's like asking which brand of ballpoint pen writes the most trustworthy content.
I linked to that article because I read its content, and I believe that content to be correct. If you're looking to go by prestige instead of content, then the authors and signers are professors of molecular biology and adjacent fields, many from highly-ranked universities.
The Cell authors think SARS-CoV-2 arose naturally, beyond any reasonable doubt. The Biosafety Now authors think there's a possibility that SARS-CoV-2 arose from a research accident, and that tighter regulation of enhanced potential pandemic pathogens is therefore required. These are directly opposing views, on a question that may correspond to millions of past deaths, and yet more in future. What do you think?
Substack is an openly-available hosting platform with almost zero editorial standards, so I'm not sure why anyone would consider it to have "authority"? It's like asking which brand of ballpoint pen writes the most trustworthy content.
I linked to that article because I read its content, and I believe that content to be correct. If you're looking to go by prestige instead of content, then the authors and signers are professors of molecular biology and adjacent fields, many from highly-ranked universities.
The Cell authors think SARS-CoV-2 arose naturally, beyond any reasonable doubt. The Biosafety Now authors think there's a possibility that SARS-CoV-2 arose from a research accident, and that tighter regulation of enhanced potential pandemic pathogens is therefore required. These are directly opposing views, on a question that may correspond to millions of past deaths, and yet more in future. What do you think?