[wallacoloo]

Not to mention it was deleted in June 2020. I have to imagine many researchers had already downloaded the data by then and that there are a number of local copies that could be shared out if there was compelling reason to do so.

If it was a coverup it was a rather poor one. It’s hard for me to think this was nefarious, unless the intention was just to delay (in a plausibly deniable manner).

[mrkstu]

It isn't, by itself, conclusive at all, but the amount of smoke China generates around this whole thing, vs transparency, screams that there is fire in the middle of the smoke.

[SketchySeaBeast]

Is this amount of smoke uncharacteristic for China?

[tux3]

Establishing a pattern of shiftiness would not make the actions in question less questionnable.

If I hear a surprising claim from a pathological liar, I'm also less likely to believe it, not more!

[SketchySeaBeast]

True, but saying that doesn't actually give it weight. And they aren't making a claim here, they are denying an accusation. My saying "Hey, pathological liar, I think you're Santa" and them denying doesn't make it more likely they are Santa.

[tux3]

That's fair! I overstretched my analogy a little :)

[joejerryronnie]

No, but neither is fire

[tgb]

If SRA is like the closely related GEO database, then you can upload data without it being public yet. You frequently do so prior to publication (but give the reviewers special access) and then make it public later. So it may never have been publicly accessible.