The underlying problem here is that you are giving your own personal guess more credence than the educated opinions and conclusions of experts. If at the end of the day you're going to choose to ignore references cited by others, not cite any yourself, and stick to your own beliefs without any justification, why bother posting in the first place?
It's completely astounding to me that you think you have the knowledge and skills to make such an inference. Why bother with virology and epidemiology when we have you?
Aside from that, your thought process is flawed:
1) You've arbitrarily predicted (and stated as fact) that the outcomes of COVID will be (or "are", as if this is retrospective) similar to those of SARS, for reasons you haven't explained
2) You've been presented with scientific evidence that the outcomes of COVID are different from SARS
3) The only reasonable conclusion is that you were wrong at (1), yet somehow you conclude the opposite.
That's not an argument--that's a statement of belief with nothing to back it, and it's wrong. You believe it because it seems intuitive, but intuition does not equal truth.
You've already been provided with two specific example diseases that start as a mild viral infection but then later on become much more severe and even deadly.
And you've been moving the goalposts, too. First it was "organ damage", then it was "organ failure", then you got called out on that and moved it to "severe organ damage".