@hubertusswanson.bsky.social
Navarro is a joke--he basically faked his PhD www.newyorker.com/magazine/202...
Peter Navarro, Trump’s Ultimate Yes-Man
The tariff cheerleader established the template of sycophancy for Trump Administration officials.
www.newyorker.com
December 24, 2025 at 4:57 PM
Navarro is a joke--he basically faked his PhD www.newyorker.com/magazine/202...
Yes, but as this article reveals, he paid someone to do all the math on his economics PhD www.newyorker.com/magazine/202...
Peter Navarro, Trump’s Ultimate Yes-Man
The tariff cheerleader established the template of sycophancy for Trump Administration officials.
www.newyorker.com
December 24, 2025 at 4:41 PM
Yes, but as this article reveals, he paid someone to do all the math on his economics PhD www.newyorker.com/magazine/202...
Burn!? Writer also thinks it's damaging that Navarro paid for someone to do the math on his PHD, made up a pseudonym to praise himself in his own books, is a total fool, etc etc
December 24, 2025 at 1:06 PM
Burn!? Writer also thinks it's damaging that Navarro paid for someone to do the math on his PHD, made up a pseudonym to praise himself in his own books, is a total fool, etc etc
Also weird that she doesn't disclose that her editor is Jofie Ferrari-Adler, the same man who "edited" Nuzzi's book
December 9, 2025 at 4:39 PM
Also weird that she doesn't disclose that her editor is Jofie Ferrari-Adler, the same man who "edited" Nuzzi's book
there's also this story. i bet she did more than she admitted here thehill.com/homenews/med...
thehill.com
November 18, 2025 at 3:59 PM
there's also this story. i bet she did more than she admitted here thehill.com/homenews/med...
It's problematic when people tweet before they read
October 6, 2025 at 3:42 PM
It's problematic when people tweet before they read
The article does note that warrants were issued for Hamas! Right up top.
October 6, 2025 at 3:41 PM
The article does note that warrants were issued for Hamas! Right up top.
He looks like Austin Powers
July 25, 2025 at 6:13 PM
He looks like Austin Powers
good song choice, tho
April 8, 2025 at 2:10 PM
good song choice, tho
That article says,"They will be kept on their preserve, protected by a ten-foot security fence and surveilled by drones—and visited, one suspects, only by the occasional billionaire.Colossal’s wolves are now at the age when their parents would teach them to hunt, but of course they have no parents."
April 8, 2025 at 2:10 PM
That article says,"They will be kept on their preserve, protected by a ten-foot security fence and surveilled by drones—and visited, one suspects, only by the occasional billionaire.Colossal’s wolves are now at the age when their parents would teach them to hunt, but of course they have no parents."
the "wolves" have no family, haven't ever met other wolves :(
April 8, 2025 at 4:17 AM
the "wolves" have no family, haven't ever met other wolves :(
I just found this thread v confusing, having read the article first, which explained clearly that Shapiro has new dire DNA samples. thread writer seems to have pounced on this jackal business without reading the article carefully, whereas Jabr did read carefully. no defense of colossal's ethics tho!
April 8, 2025 at 4:15 AM
I just found this thread v confusing, having read the article first, which explained clearly that Shapiro has new dire DNA samples. thread writer seems to have pounced on this jackal business without reading the article carefully, whereas Jabr did read carefully. no defense of colossal's ethics tho!
I agree with that! Not pro-Colossal But this thread was all about how the article cited seems unaware that dire wolves are *jackals,* and this seems out of data. (Colossal needs to publish its data, ofc.) The article also describes the creatures as modified wolves. So, again, agreed.
April 8, 2025 at 4:08 AM
I agree with that! Not pro-Colossal But this thread was all about how the article cited seems unaware that dire wolves are *jackals,* and this seems out of data. (Colossal needs to publish its data, ofc.) The article also describes the creatures as modified wolves. So, again, agreed.
your thread is very good, thanks for it. it seems that some people on bluesky have been citing apparently out-of-date 2021 understanding of dire wolves, but how can you blame them if Shapiro doesn't publish a new peer-reviewed paper?
April 8, 2025 at 3:26 AM
your thread is very good, thanks for it. it seems that some people on bluesky have been citing apparently out-of-date 2021 understanding of dire wolves, but how can you blame them if Shapiro doesn't publish a new peer-reviewed paper?
For what it's worth, Shapiro told the New Yorker where she got better DNA samples from, allowing, she says, Colossal to create a 91-percent complete wolf genome. But she should publish info explaining what the "better sampling techniques" are.
April 8, 2025 at 3:02 AM
For what it's worth, Shapiro told the New Yorker where she got better DNA samples from, allowing, she says, Colossal to create a 91-percent complete wolf genome. But she should publish info explaining what the "better sampling techniques" are.
Looking back at the article, it mentions the 2021 study you cite and Shapiro explictly goes on to say that she got a lot more DNA in two new samples. Of course, she will need to publish an actual paper to prove it. But this explains why the new yorker report doesn't gibe with the 2021 paper
April 8, 2025 at 2:51 AM
Looking back at the article, it mentions the 2021 study you cite and Shapiro explictly goes on to say that she got a lot more DNA in two new samples. Of course, she will need to publish an actual paper to prove it. But this explains why the new yorker report doesn't gibe with the 2021 paper
Or maybe not? Maybe the 2021 study you cite—co-written by Beth Shapiro herself!—is out of date, because of better DNA analysis. bsky.app/profile/ferr...
🧵🐺🧬 An important point is getting lost in the discussion abt today's "deextinction" news: Colossal is not just claiming to have created something akin to a dire wolf. They claim they've made new/unpublished genetic discoveries that would rewrite our understanding of dire wolf evolution & anatomy 🧪
April 8, 2025 at 2:41 AM
Or maybe not? Maybe the 2021 study you cite—co-written by Beth Shapiro herself!—is out of date, because of better DNA analysis. bsky.app/profile/ferr...
Carl Zimmer, in the comments section, addresses the paper you reference: "This work builds on that 2021 study. Some non-wolves share a more recent ancestor with gray wolves than dire wolves. But more recent gray wolf ancestors interbred with dire wolves 2.6 million years ago. So it’s complicated!"
April 8, 2025 at 2:05 AM
Carl Zimmer, in the comments section, addresses the paper you reference: "This work builds on that 2021 study. Some non-wolves share a more recent ancestor with gray wolves than dire wolves. But more recent gray wolf ancestors interbred with dire wolves 2.6 million years ago. So it’s complicated!"
The writer expresses similar skepticism.
April 7, 2025 at 8:32 PM
The writer expresses similar skepticism.
The New Yorker article ends with a sense that these animals are one-offs who will have no companionship. :( Also quotes one of the Colossal's own Board Members making your point about it being a wolf with some gene editing.
April 7, 2025 at 8:28 PM
The New Yorker article ends with a sense that these animals are one-offs who will have no companionship. :( Also quotes one of the Colossal's own Board Members making your point about it being a wolf with some gene editing.
This is the New York Times. This is wrong?
April 7, 2025 at 7:14 PM
This is the New York Times. This is wrong?