Well, I cited a canonical paper making the argument you're advancing, so if it's not that, then... As for the rest of your comment -- oy, talk about a straw ma

Well, I cited a canonical paper making the argument you're advancing, so if it's not that, then... As for the rest of your comment -- oy, talk about a straw man fallacy. There's absolutely nothing I said that requires the false dichotomy you've presented between H0 and H1 (i.e. there are other plausible hypotheses that aren't as extreme as the ones you've presented). Also, I don't "accept" H0. I just can't rule it out. > H0 should be the most easy explanation, which is a zoonosis that has happened before thousands of times, and for which we have also evidence Neither hypothesis is easy (i.e. likely). Natural, human-optimized zoonosis is incredibly rare in viruses. Making humanized viruses in a lab, starting from natural viruses, is actually straightforward. But when one of the world centers for doing that kind of work, on very similar coronaviruses, was right there in Wuhan...