It's as if The Intercept seems intent on jettisoning credibility with each "bombshell" story.
We know for a fact the virus was present in the Wuhan lab.
We know for a fact it hasn't been identified in bats in the wild.
Is there a different theory as to the origins?
This is a reasonable question and should be answered rather than downvoted. A study released a few months ago (https://www.hackerneue.com/item?id=30487145) found that two strains of SARS-CoV-2 emerged at the Wuhan market in November-December 2019, Lineage A and Lineage B. From the submitted article, "it’s extremely improbable that two distinct lineages of SARS-CoV-2 could have been derived from a laboratory and then coincidentally ended up at the market."
The fact is there was never any evidence to support it.
So it having unnatural origin is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence.
Speculate. Covid shows how easy it is to do just that even if you have current knowledge.
It's not impossible that origin is other than zoonotic however it's very unlikely because that exactly how (nearly?) all viruses came to us.
The problem I have with lab leak idea is not so much that it's not proven, but that it's not falsifiable. You can't prove it's wrong because someone can always tell "maybe they covered it better than we thought!".
If their thesis is supportable, they don't need to do that.
I'll pay attention when somebody writes a dispassionate article without all the propaganda.