Those two assumptions don’t make sense to me, sorry.
I wanted to have heard from the biologists/chemists/virologists who had it right from the start. I don’t recall hearing all sides of the issue. Somebody out there surely saw this coming.
Actually I am not assuming anything. I clearly said I wasn't sure, which leaves the possibilities open.
assuming that every biologist/chemist/virologist came to the same conclusion
Not really, because I don't know every single scientist. I am still talking about the ones in my area. A couple of which I've talked to and those all agreed. And again: the conclusion at the start was not "there is high risk", it was "we do not know how high the risk is". The default mode of scientists is "we do not know" so I hope you see it's pretty easy for a group of scientists to all agree on that. Much, much easier than agreeing on something else because that requires thorough research. But basically you are right on this one: I obvisouly do not have hard evidence all possible scientists agreed they didn't know the actual risks for surface transmission, I just assume they all admit that.
I don’t recall hearing all sides of the issue.
There are many factors which influence that of course. Media in general can be problematic passing through everything.
Somebody out there surely saw this coming
Of course, but that still doesn't mean those people wouldn't agree with "we do not know for sure".