You want me to spoon feed you on what zoonotic virus means and that the researchers called it zoonotic?
From the researchers, had you bothered to read:
"Well, first, I’d like to just say that even before these data came out, the preponderance of scientific evidence (unlike posted by QTSA - for emphasis) has pointed to a natural zoonotic spillover [an animal disease jumping into humans] for quite some time. These new data are entirely consistent with that scenario. Now, what’s important here is that I think it’s a mischaracterization to say that these sequences show that raccoon dogs, or any other mammal host species, were infected with these viruses because all we’re showing is co-occurrence of genetic material from host environments. It’s not the same as swabbing a raccoon dog. And it’s not the same as watching a raccoon dog transmit a virus to a human—something, of course, we never see. We never get that level of evidence. But first and foremost, this is forensic evidence that these putative host animals were present at the market. There’s no more question about that. And they were there in the same place as the virus.
Now, clearly, some of these environmental samples have the virus in them because of infected humans. But it strains the imagination to say it was only humans who were depositing this virus all over places where susceptible hosts were and that this is just humans giving it to animals. Given everything else we know about the early days of COVID and everything we know about zoonotic viruses, this fits.
Is this going to put the lab-leak conspiracy to bed? No. Nothing will ever do that. But I think this should help convince more reasonable scientists (but never posters like QTSA who are still looking for hillary's emails and a basement at CometPizza). "
So off, idiot.