>It assessed the lab theory as "likely", although it did not have definitive proof.

Correlation does not equal causation my friend.

Plenty of people were able to talk about lab leak conspiracies. That is why we are still debating it today.

Because that is a bold claim to make. There is no proof of a lab leak and evidence leads to the wet market as the source. There is a debate out there for 100k to prove this. Check it out.

I can definitely understand that. I just have a hard time justifying the value of learning this way at scale. Just the energy costs alone are out of hand.

I think the primary difference would be they didn't waste billions of dollars in their research.