In part, presumably, because Ebola appearing in Atlanta would be extraordinarily unusual. East Asia has a history of novel respiratory diseases, the same way that other parts of the world have a history of mosquito-borne blood diseases.
Put another way: everything we know so far is circumstantial, and some pieces of circumstantial evidence are (or would be) stronger than others. An Ebola outbreak next to a BSL 4 lab in the United States would be a significantly stronger piece of circumstantial evidence than a coronavirus outbreak in a transportation hub city in East Asia.
> DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): This project will examine the risk of future coronavirus (CoV) emergence from wildlife using in-depth field investigations across the human-wildlife interface in China, molecular characterization of novel CoVs and host receptor binding domain genes, mathematical models of transmission and evolution, and in vitro and in vivo laboratory studies of host range. Zoonotic CoVs are a significant threat to global health, as demonstrated with the emergence of pandemic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in China in 2002, and the recent and ongoing emergence of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV). Bats appear to be the natural reservoir of these viruses, and hundreds of novel bat-CoVs have been discovered in the last two decades. Bats, and other wildlife species, are hunted, traded, butchered and consumed across Asia, creating a large scale human-wildlife interface, and high risk of future emergence of novel CoVs. This project aims to understand what factors increase the risk of the next CoV emerging in people by studying CoV diversity in a critical zoonotic reservoir (bats), at sites of high risk for emergence (wildlife markets) in an emerging disease hotspot (China).
For a novel coronavirus to emerge in the part of the world containing the institute is not sufficient to implicate them. They are set up to do research in that part of the world, because such viruses are known emerge in such places. And yes, their research involved a lot of testing and categorization that requires some proximity to the wildlife and markets.
> The three specific aims of this project are to: 1. Assess CoV spillover potential at high risk human-wildlife interfaces in China. This will include quantifying he nature and frequency of contact people have with bats and other wildlife; serological and molecular screening of people working in wet markets and highly exposed to wildlife; screening wild-caught and market sampled bats from 30+ species for CoVs using molecular assays; and genomic characterization and isolation of novel CoVs.
And Daszak's role as part of the WHO investigation is similarly plausible. If you (unwisely, but just as a thought experiment) assume for a moment that it is impossible for the source to be a lab leak, he would be a perfect choice -- he is connected to some of the most relevant and nearby research!
I am supportive of further/proper investigation into the lab leak hypothesis, and do think some degree of public and political pressure is required.
But the tenor of the "lab leak" conversation I have with friends and that I see online (including here) is more like that of Russiagate (a mostly unsubstantiated, years long, liberal media conspiracy theory). Alternatively, it's like the idea that Iraq had WMD (some plausible concern, but info published from unnamed intelligence sources, using tiny amounts of raw and unverified intelligence data, taken from the least trustworthy informants imaginable, all to satisfy a pre-existing conservative grudge). I have seen people say the lab leak story reminds them of the doubts about WMD in Iraq, which is ironic, because again, I see it as more like the invention of WMD in Iraq.
[1] https://reporter.nih.gov/search/xQW6UJmWfUuOV01ntGvLwQ/proje...
So lets change the example sense you will fixate on Ebola as being rare. Bird flu was a big thing people were freaking out about a few years ago and it even made a real appearance in Georgia.
I stand by what I said if a new bird flu variant showed up in Atlanta, the media would be showing alot more skepticism and be looking at a lab leak far more seriously by the CDC just based on the geography. If we found out a few CDC workers had bird flu symptoms before the outbreak started, that the government started destroying evidence and blocking investigations, and a few researchers just "vanished", we would be looking at bare minimum a cultural understanding that there was a Jeffrey Epstein level of corruption and conspiracy in front of us.
Lets rewrite what you wrote.
"An Coronavirus outbreak next to a BSL 4 lab in China would be a significantly stronger piece of circumstantial evidence than a bird flu outbreak in a transportation hub city in the Southeast United States".
Unfortunately at this point its become political, the "its a lab leak" is a point that favors conservatives/Republicans/Trump, so a large amount of the population would refuse to believe it no matter what at this point even if proof was uncovered, and at best are heavily biased to disbelieve it.