The guy looked at information and came to a preliminary conclusion that it was an enginered disease. He then spent a couple of weeks trying to disprove that theory and his final conclusion was that it wasn't an engineered disease.
This isn't even an accurate timeline (emphasis added).
On February 1, 2020, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Francis Collins, and at least eleven other scientists convened a conference call to discuss COVID-19.1 It was on this conference call that Drs. Fauci and Collins were first warned that COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China and, further, may have been intentionally genetically manipulated.
Only three days later, on February 4, 2020, four participants of the conference call authored a paper entitled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2” (Proximal Origin) and sent a draft to Drs. Fauci and Collins.3 Prior4to final publication in Nature Medicine, the paper was sent to Dr. Fauci for editing and approval.
There wasn't "a couple of weeks" spent doing anything. The paper was authored just three days later. This is further corroborated in the article I posted earlier in the thread.
Andersen would later explain to The New York Times that his initial conclusions were made “in a matter of days, while we worked around the clock” and the subsequent revised position was the result of “more extensive analyses, significant additional data, and thorough investigations to compare genomic diversity more broadly.” Despite this claim, however, “Proximal Origin” was written “in a matter of days,” with a draft complete by Feb. 4 and the paper accepted by Nature Medicine by March 6.
This is what you believe, that "more extensive analyses, significant additional data and through investigations" occurred. But the evidence suggests otherwise (emphasis added)...
Most of the questions surrounding “Proximal Origin” concern a Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference called by Fauci and joined by his boss, NIH then-Director Francis Collins, and other top scientists, including Andersen and a number of his “Proximal Origin” co-authors.
As emails obtained from Freedom of Information requests revealed, Fauci arranged the call just days after receiving an email from Andersen expressing concerns he shared with several other prominent virologists that parts of the virus looked engineered. Andersen wrote that he and a few fellow researchers “all find the [SARS-CoV-2] genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”
If that claim ever reached the public, it might have permanently altered the discourse surrounding the origins of the pandemic. But after the conversation with Fauci, it never did get out. Instead, Andersen, Holmes, and Gary (in addition to Andrew Rambaut) began circulating a draft of “Proximal Origin” three days later, making claims that contradicted the findings Andersen had presented to Fauci in his initial email less than a week prior. In a Feb. 4 email to Peter Daszak, Andersen communicated that he and his co-authors had already begun circulating drafts of a paper proposing the exact opposite—that COVID-19 had emerged naturally—which would become “Proximal Origin.”
So there wasn't "a couple of weeks" of "objective" analysis. No, just THREE DAYS after meeting with Fauci, there was already a draft of Proximal Origin circulating that sought to "disprove" the lab-leak theory. It's astounding that Andersen and his fellow researchers "all [found] the [SARS-CoV2] genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory", and then just three short days later after meeting with Fauci, they were circulating a draft of paper that said the exact opposite.
