This does not follow logically.
If there is no animal then C-19 is not zoonotic by definition. That is logic.
The Covid-19 pandemic has disrupted lives the world over for more than a year. Its death toll will soon reach three million people. Yet the origin of pandemic remains uncertain: the political agendas…
nicholaswade.medium.com
This was surprising because both the SARS1 and MERS viruses had left copious traces in the environment. The intermediary host species of SARS1 was identified
within four months of the epidemic’s outbreak, and the host of MERS within nine months. Yet some 15 months after the SARS2 pandemic began, and a presumably intensive search, Chinese researchers had failed to find either the original bat population, or the intermediate species to which SARS2 might have jumped, or any serological evidence that any Chinese population, including that of Wuhan, had ever been exposed to the virus prior to December 2019. Natural emergence remained a conjecture which, however plausible to begin with, had gained not a shred of supporting evidence in over a year.
---------------------------------
This means SARS1 and MERS is zoonotic while C-19 is not zoonotic. Why? No animal identified.
Just because scientists have not positively identified which animal C-19 came from in the wild, that does not mean it didn't come from an animal in the wild.
Then produce the animal. If there is no animal then it is not zoonotic. That is logic.
This is a common misconception - that whenever scientific information is incomplete
Appeals to the future is a logic fallacy since you have no crystal ball. They go by the information they have and all the information they have now is no animal identified and they have been looking.
, one can fill it in with whatever they can imagine.
What do you mean by that? If there is no animal then it is not zoonotic and that is fact. It either is or it is not and that excludes filling in whatever they want. Its limited to two options. Not whatever they can imagine. How hard can this be?