We should question the veracity of the information presented. The nature of this fluid topic is a good example. I read the first part, a few days ago, and most of the information presented tallied with what was presented elsewhere. However, since then Dr. Eric Ding's profile has risen in prominence and the Twitter feed is commingling speculation with credentials, so it is entirely justified to question the validity of your source.

It would seem that there were doubts around the content in the Wikipedia entry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletio...

From 2K followers to 64K+ followers in less than 7 days! https://socialblade.com/twitter/user/drericding