From your link
https://bmcmedgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12920-022-01208-w
It’s footnote 2 claiming
“scientists think covid-1984 has a natural origin” refers back to the same Kristin Anderson.
And the reference 15 of your first paper
https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/39/1/msab292/6382323?login=false
says this:
“Importantly, members of the relatively young (Boni et al. 2020) SARS-CoV/SARS-CoV-2 lineages (within Sarbecoviruses) do not yet appear to act as recipients in radical intertypic recombination events. They also display a very distinct AOF architecture. Thus, current evolutionary data do not favor a scenario where SARS-CoV-2 may (homologously) recombine with other currently circulating human CoVs of other subgenera/genera. Furthermore, SARS-CoV/SARS-CoV-2 do not seem to exchange accessory ORFs with other CoV subgenera or other viruses/hosts, with the exceptions of ORF3a that is an old and unresolved event and ORF7a (with some Decacoviruses).”
So this alone gives the game away: they’re just blowing smoke.
Troll.
“Troll”
Gosh. More links and another sissy insult by the Moggy Boy.
Think those will be any better than the time you copy & pasted that PubMed study?
And then tried passing it off as saying something entirely opposite of what the author had said?
Good times! That was peak grey_whiskers, lying about the study, figuring that no one ever bothers to read them.
Oh that’s right... you justified your little stunt because it was “political”, which for you apparently means that it didn’t need to be true. Ends justifying the means.
Well I roll with the same rule that we used in jury panels. Once you catch a witness in a bald faced lie you can assume that they will do it anytime that they think that they can get away with it. And you got caught long ago.