If this virus originated in a bat, and naturally evolved to maximize its ability to infect bats, and is genetically most similar to other viruses found in bats in China… why is SARS-CoV-2 proving impossible to find in bats in China?

Let us not be distracted from the people responsible for the deaths of millions;

Questions for those on that famous 1st Feb 20 call, who then suddenly changed their mind about the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 being a lab construct:

1/ Did you know that SARS-CoV-2 cleavage site ( RRAR|SVAS) is only found in hENaC, which was characterised precisely at UNC?

2/ Did you know of the DEFUSE work-plan?

T01-Task 3: Create a chimera
For this use a promising low prevalence pathogenic spike and a more prevalent lower-risk backbone.

RaTG13 would be at the exact top of the list as it was known to have very likely killed 3 people in 2012.

3/ Did Peter Daszak tell you at the time about the Mojiang story and RaTG13, which would have clued you to the fact that RaTG13 would have been the perfect candidate spike for this work?

Or did he like Shi at the time just forget to give any detail about the mine and the deaths?

Pour a coffee and get your reading glasses. It’s not as hard to understand as it first appears.

Put Them Back: Viruses Found In 15,000-Year-Old Tibetan Glacier Ice Are Like Nothing Seen Before

No debate about COVID’s origins was permitted. It had been settled by The Science™.

The reason this consensus was so quickly consecrated was that a group of more than two dozen scientists published a letter in the prestigious science journal Lancet in February, 2020 — while very little was known about SARS-CoV-2 — didactically declaring “that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.” The possibility that COVID leaked from the Wuhan lab was dismissed as a “conspiracy theory,” the by-product of “rumours and misinformation” which, they strongly implied, was an unfair and possibly racist attack on “the science and health professionals of China.”

For months, that letter shaped the permissible range of debate regarding the origins of COVID. Or, more accurately, it ensured that there was no debate permitted. The Science™ concluded that COVID was a zoonotic virus that naturally leaped from non-human animal to human, and any questioning of this decree was deemed an attack on The Science™.

That Lancet letter has fallen into disrepute due to the key role in its publication played by one of its signatories, Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance. To say that Daszak had a gigantic but undisclosed conflict of interest in disseminating this narrative about the natural origins of COVID is to understate the case. Daszak had received millions of dollars in grants from the National Institute of Health (NIH) to conduct research into coronaviruses in bats, and EcoHealth awarded part of that grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the lab which would be the leading suspect, by far, for any COVID lab leak.

Daszak’s enormous self-interest in leading the world to believe that a lab leak was impossible is obvious. It would be a likely career-ending blow to his reputation if the Wuhan laboratory to which EcoHealth had provided funding for coronavirus bat research was responsible for the escape of a virus that has killed millions of people around the world and caused enduring suffering among countless others due to lockdowns and economic shutdowns.