1. This isn't the product of researchers. It's the product of an algorithm that also happens to be a product that is being advertised.
From the "About Rootclaim" page:
"Proven probabilistic inference models – The model breaks down highly complex issues into small questions that are each answerable by humans, and then uses these answers to reach mathematically indisputable conclusions.
Openly crowdsourced evidence and claims – Anyone can impact an analysis by contributing evidence, rational explanations, past examples and statistics. Unlike polling or voting, a strong claim by one person can beat many widely supported weaker claims."
2. Reputable researchers publish before going to the media. Would this analysis pass peer review?
3. The company is a startup, and is looking for press.
4. Like many conspiracy theories, this claim is not easily falsifiable. No matter how transparent the Wuhan Institute of Virology tries to be, as an institution associated with the Chinese government, accusations of a coverup will be nearly impossible to conclusively refute. International trust in anything related to the Chinese government is currently very low.
- there is a long track record leading to this low trust. Based on this we should place a very low prior belief in what ccp says
The claim that the virus originated in nature and spread through unknown intermediaries to humans in Wuhan, of all places, is equally hard to falsify.
Previous outbreak of SARS could be traced to bats in Southern China, MERS could be traced to camels.
The hypothesis that the virus escaped from a lab that hosted samples from Southern China is at least plausible.
This technique looks reminiscent of "superforecasting".
Caveat that their conclusion hinges on their assumptions, and we would expect that about 2/10 of their 80% predictions would actually be false if we could score them all.