[jkqwzsoo]

> It came from a wet market for exotic meats. If it wasn’t a bat it was some other animal that was illegally trafficked and shouldn’t have been sold for consumption.

And this has what to do about making specific claims without evidence? With passing off sources as supporting your claims when they make no such claim?

[moulei]

https://time.com/5770904/wuhan-coronavirus-wild-animals/

Several media outlets have confirmed that the "seafood market" actually sells a wide variety of wildlife meat

And a reference pic in Chinese here On this board, it says "Wildfowl Market". They put a price on some meats, including Masked palm civet, which suspected to be the intermediate host of the disease.

https://www.6parknews.com/newspark/view.php?app=news&act=vie...

[jkqwzsoo]

> Several media outlets have confirmed that the "seafood market" actually sells a wide variety of wildlife meat

I'm sorry, but as I've said numerous times, the specific claim that I was disputing was that the commenter above claimed that they had an article stating that bat consumption was the "most probable". In fact, the article you linked specifically says what I'm saying. Namely, don't speculate!

> The West Blames the Wuhan Coronavirus on China’s Love of Eating Wild Animals. The Truth Is More Complex

Wonder what this could mean?

> The 2002-2003 SARS pandemic was eventually traced to civet cats sold in a similar style of wet market in southern Guandong province, and some foreign tabloids are circulating unsubstantiated claims that the Wuhan coronavirus originated from everything from bat soup to eating rats and live wolf pups.

This certainly doesn't sound like Time magazine is speculating that bat consumption is the "most probable" cause to me.

> However, Adam Kamradt-Scott, associate professor specializing in global health security at the University of Sydney, says this way of thinking is often flawed. While scientists first thought that Ebola started with the consumption of bat meat in a village of south-eastern Guinea, they now believe that the two-year-old girl known as Child Zero was likely infected via bat droppings that contaminated an object she put in her mouth. MERS was also primarily spread from live camels to humans through association, rather than the eating of camel meat.

This, rather, seems to support my claim that we shouldn't speculate on things that we don't have any information or expertise about.

[tempsy]

That is a fact that has been reported by dozens of news outlets. The market in question has been shut down.

[jkqwzsoo]

Once again, the claim was:

> From what I've read it came from bats. Most probably bats being eaten.[1]

This claim is not found in

> 1. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xgqy3n/scientists-now-thi...

Simple as that.

[tempsy]

There are more news outlets reporting this fact than Vice. I’m commenting on the actual facts not the legitimacy of whatever source OP decided to cite.

[beaunative]

Facts in this case can only be reached through consensus of the scientific community. Journalism can only confirm so far as to when who did what, they simply don’t possess the professional knowledge to assert the truthfulness of a scientific theory.