That being said, there's plenty of reasons to keep looking; if nothing else, it would be very nice to have solid evidence of the origin of the virus, regardless if it was from a wild bat or not.
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.
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...
They honestly want us to believe that it was brought in on frozen fish at the market around the corner - that it never even originated in China. This is what we're dealing with. It's gaslighting in the extreme.
Let's relax with flexing our elite 'Western accountability'. It's all talk.
The critically important thing is to establish exactly what happened in order to prevent SARS 3, SARS 4, etc. Absolutely everything else is of secondary importance. In the absence of malicious intent - and I think everyone agrees on that - we should have no interest in appointing blame.
Lab leaks are also not uncommon. There’s a reason why the Obama administration paused gain of function research - with risk of SARS research specifically called out - after numerous incidents (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-d...). With SARS (the first one), there were literally multiple lab leaks from the Beijing institute of virology, including one leak tied to deaths (https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20040423/china-sars-death).
https://thebulletin.org/2019/11/what-happened-after-an-explo...