As stated above, the comment was made by the author of the article. We have nothing to show that what the author wrote had anything to do with what Professor Meselson said. We certainly don't have any actual quote from Professor Meselson.
You may believe that Professor Meselson is "misleading the media," even though the C&EN article clearly shows that the author interviewed MANY sources. You may believe that Professor Meselson "duped" Douglas Beecher into adding comments about the attack anthrax to his report, but that report was supported by many scientists who actually worked with the attack anthrax.
You may see Professor Meselson as some evil mastermind who is misleading the media and duping FBI scientists in order to show you to be wrong about the attack anthrax. But the FACTS also show you to be wrong. And arguing about petty matters and things that happened 30 years ago doesn't change the fact that YOU are the one who is trying to mislead the media and everyone else about the attack anthrax of 2001. It seems very clear that you attack Professor Meselson because he is showing that everything you have said about the attack anthrax of 2001 was a load of crap.
But why did Meselson tell the C&E News reporter (Lois Embers) that AFIP did NOT publish a silica spectrum when they DID publish a silica spectrum?
I would hardly call the Sverdlovsk events “petty matters”. Meselson put people’s lives in jeopardy (directly for outstanding Sverdlovsk doctors Faina Abramova and Lev Grinberg) so he could promote his false story about contamintated sausages).
Is this a “petty matter”?
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB61/
Meselson had finally came around to the view long held by the intelligence community when he published his final findings on the case in November 1994 in the journal Science.(9) Meselson was prepared to conclude that the cause of death was airborne anthrax spores released from a military installation, He also concluded the size of the release was between a few milligrams and a gram, leaving open the possibility it was the result of defensive biological warfare research, a conclusion contested by U.S. intelligence analysts, who argued the release must have involved pounds of anthrax, based on prior studies into the dispersal of biological agents. As Dr. William C. Patrick, the veteran of over 30 years as a biological weapons researcher at Fort Detrick, Maryland and expert on anthrax dispersal noted later, he and other experts “hooted” when Meselson presented his release estimates.(10) The U.S. intelligence position was also supported by Ken Alibek, who said Compound 19 was involved in the “industrial” production of anthrax. Regarding the actual cause of the release, information later obtained from people involved with the Soviet biological warfare effort revealed that the cause of the anthrax release in Sverdlovsk was the failure by maintenance personnel to replace a critical filter in a vent serving the anthrax production facility.