[reuben_scratton]

There is no direct evidence of zoonotic origin either. An entire year on and we don't even know the intermediate species, let alone where crossover occurred. With the original SARS this was worked out in a couple of weeks.

Also I've yet to see any slightly convincing explanation as to why SARS-Cov-2 emerged from the wild spectacularly well-adapted to human ACE2.

[BurningFrog]

Is this lack of information in itself unusual enough to imply the origin is being covered up?

[mytailorisrich]

It took 15 years to find the origin of the original SARS, but indeed it took a few months to pinpoint the intermediary species (civets). Now I don't know about SARS but many people infected with SARS-Cov-2 have no symptoms or mild symptoms, which means the virus might circulate for a while before it hits a major population centre and blows up, which would make finding the source more difficult.

They have already found virii in bats in Yunnan that are 96% similar to SARS-Cov-2 so it seems probable that the origin will be similar to the origin of SARS.

Certainly the consensus is that the virus is natural despite you and others implying that it might not, which is nothing but FUD at this point.

SARS origin:

"Around late 2017, Chinese scientists traced the virus through the intermediary of Asian palm civets to cave-dwelling horseshoe bats in Xiyang Yi Ethnic Township, Yunnan" [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndr...