The problem with science today is EXACTLY what you have engaged in: Getting paid for pushing a political agenda. You begin with a foregone conclusion and any deviation from the foregone conclusion during your research means you're fired.

This is not science. It's an exercise religious apologetics with a political twist and an errant hermeneutic.

This wasn't a real debate. It was yet another exercise in political propaganda made to look like real science.

The bottom line is that there is ample facts that the virus was lab-grown from eye-witnesses and other testimony of people closely involved with the event. How does your "science" account for eye-witness testimony?

Congratulations on winning the money; but can your pseudo-science overcome what really happened?