Appeal to authority does not get you points in an debate on facts. Especially when said facts would be rather inconvenient to have internationally recognized.

Furthermore, I'm sorry but I don't give a damn how many Ph.D's you've got. Congratulations. You've mastered thriving in the politics heavy realm that is academia.

There is no way in hell you're going to convince me that a plague coming out of a geographical area containing a BSL-4 and BSL-2 lab had absolutely no bearing on the matter. Heck, the argument can even be turned around just as readily. What are the odds against this happening anywhere else but the nearest Wet Market to two major virology labs engaging in research with regards to host species jumping of bat coronaviruses?

When you have the original purported host animal only present in any great numbers at the WIV or WHCDC, and research being conducted at both places with regards to how transgenic host jump takes place. Where you've got precedent for highly virulent pathogen containment breach. At this point the "conspiracy theory" label itself is doing more heavy lifting than the actually impressive number of "circumstantial" pieces of evidence in that there is not one single convincing argument for why the host jump didn't take place anywhere but in relatively close proximity to areas actively engaged in this type of research.

It is not a conspiracy theory to follow smoke to a fire. Therefore when faced with a novel plague, popping up in close proximity to institutions in which virological research happens should not be treated any differently.

To suggest otherwise is to bury your head in the sand. Read some of these research papers for heaven sake. Or look at what's at risk one way or another. If it's the labs, China has another black eye and chances being held internationally responsible depending on what's provable. The international histological community will be in for increased scrutiny/hardship/onerous regulation in the future, so on, ethical debates to be settled, and so on.

On the other hand, gee whiz, if we just blame the wet market, we can keep doing everything we're doing and it's just a fluke! Maybe pass some token hygiene regulations or something, then egg need not settle on anyone's face!

Furthermore, epidemiology is at it's core a data centric practice, and is thus very steerable due to GIGO. If there is data that has been hidden, it completely changes the outcome, and we know that China is not best friends with the concept of transparency.

There's Hanlon's Razor, and then there's turning off any semblance of critical thinking because someone credentialed told you to. It doesn't even change anything except the politics/optics of the entire, which should be your first hint an effort at perception management is underway.

You believe what you want. I've read up on https://project-evidence.github.io/ and their absolutely abhorrent original name aside, I was directly aware of at least half of the evidence papers they've referenced through HN, and the conclusions that just the coincidences in that lead to should give anyone reasonable pause. The world is small, and this level of "coincidental" locality may not make it easy on policy makers, but it should not be dismissed out of hand. Those who do not fight to get the whole truth will spend their lives being driven by those who must keep it from being known. It's more important for you to have all the info and make a decision on it, than to have some authority figure tell you what they want you to believe.

At best, I buy that it was not a byproduct of direct intended human engineering. I do not accept that a lab had nothing to do with it. Especially given the knock on effects of what would be at stake if it were proven to be the case. The investigation needs to happen.