For those who still cling to the belief that COVID-19 emerged naturally from a wet market in Wuhan, I’ve got some bad news. While the “natural origin” story was spoon-fed to the public from day one, the hard evidence and statistical probability paint a very different picture—one that makes the bioengineering theory far more plausible than many are willing to admit. Let’s take a closer look at the facts and probabilities that suggest the virus wasn’t some random jump from a bat to a human but rather a product of human meddling.
First, let’s talk about the infamous furin cleavage site. This tiny part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus plays a massive role in its ability to infect humans, and it’s the smoking gun in this whole debate. Furin cleavage sites don’t just pop up out of nowhere in viruses like SARS or MERS—so why here? The odds of a natural bat coronavirus acquiring a furin cleavage site that makes it so perfectly transmissible to humans are slim. In fact, according to molecular biologists, such a specific modification is extremely rare in naturally occurring viruses. Statistically, it’s far more likely that this modification occurred in a lab through gain-of-function research, which, surprise, surprise, was being conducted in Wuhan.
Still not convinced? Let’s talk about the odds of a virus emerging in a city that just so happens to be home to one of the world’s largest labs studying bat coronaviruses. According to a statistical analysis by a researcher at Harvard, the chances of a zoonotic virus spontaneously emerging within miles of a lab studying those very viruses are astronomically low. We’re talking less than 0.1% probability. Yet, the natural origin narrative insists that this is what happened. A once-in-a-lifetime “coincidence” that defies the laws of probability? Or perhaps, a far simpler explanation: the virus leaked from the very lab that was studying it.
Then there’s the issue of no intermediate host being found. For a virus to jump from animals to humans, there’s typically a middleman—like a civet in the case of SARS or camels with MERS. In the case of COVID-19? Nothing. No pangolins, no raccoon dogs, nothing. Despite an exhaustive search by scientists around the globe, no animal reservoir has been identified. This absence only strengthens the lab-origin theory, where no intermediate host would be needed because the virus was engineered in controlled lab conditions.
Now, consider the timeline. After months of stonewalling, China finally allowed the WHO to investigate the origins of the virus—only to have the investigation hamstrung and controlled at every turn. Lab data? Restricted. Researchers? Silent. Critical records? Sealed. If the virus truly had a natural origin, wouldn’t China have every incentive to provide full transparency and put the issue to rest? Instead, their actions only fuel the growing suspicion that they’re hiding something far more sinister.
In conclusion, the statistical probability, the glaring lack of an intermediate host, and the convenient location of the Wuhan lab all point to one thing: the “natural origin” theory was a rushed narrative with gaping holes. The idea that the pandemic just magically appeared out of thin air while virologists in Wuhan were studying the very same virus strains is about as plausible as winning the lottery twice in one day. It’s time to stop pretending that this was all a tragic coincidence and start looking at the overwhelming evidence that COVID-19 was, at the very least, a lab accident.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA