I think the fact that with SARS2 unlike the original SARS and MERS which were circulating in animal populations only spilled over once in a single location coun

I think the fact that with SARS2 unlike the original SARS and MERS which were circulating in animal populations only spilled over once in a single location counts as proof. You see when a wild virus that has been circulating within an intermediate host species, you get multiple independent outbreaks over a large geographic area with different mutations, additionally each of these outbreaks leave a trail of mutations as the virus adapts to humans. These mutations have been used to track down and find the intermediate host within months for both SARS -> civets and MERS -> Camels. They also had multiple outbreaks across many regions that were genetically distinct(but related). BUT! With SARS2 we seem to be missing the following: - Rapid mutations in the starting months of the outbreak(SARS2 displayed very little if any major mutations in the starting months as it was already pre-adapted towards humans). - Multiple spillovers over time each with a different variant of the animal virus, something that happened with SARS, MERS, Nipah virus, Ebola which had multiple spillovers all independent from each other. - Identification of intermediate host species. For SARS they found the virus that infected patient zero within months, MERS found the virus in camels. For SARS2 nothing! And this is after 3+ years of looking. And while it's true China won't allow scientists to look in China, the habitat of the Horseshoe bat overlaps with Laos and other South East asian countries and if it was present in civets you'd think they would find a civet with an ancestor of the early strains of the virus in Laos. So even throwing out circumstantial evidence like deleting databases in September of 2019, the way SARS2 outbreak occurred does not fit evolutionary theory.