Do you not think people come from out of town, sometimes from quite far out of town, to sell food at a city market? That's how they work here in Baltimore, and anyone who's ever been to Lexington Market, or even seen a picture of what the crowds are like there (1), can have no trouble imagining how effective a transmission vector it would be for any contagious pathogen hitching a ride in an out-of-town vendor there. Why should things work differently in Wuhan?

"Held accountable" is a rhetorical phrase that was much used then, too. (2) So it's an interesting thing to find in an argument that this situation and that one are totally unalike.

(1) https://www.wypr.org/sites/wyprmain/files/styles/x_large/pub...

(2) https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/28/iraq.brianwhit...

This market is not known to have sold bats and by all accounts it did not. Consuming bats is a southern thing not a central thing.

Your theory also doesn't along with the evidence, that the first known cases had a significant population with no known connection to the market, 27 with connection, 14 without; and that other than the market there are no other obvious connections. If it were just some hawker you'd expect a much stronger connection to the market. And over a longer period.

I had a theory around guano used for fertilizer acting as a fomite, but found some research an hour ago that suggests SARS doesn't remain viable via that route, so SARS-CoV-2 probably doesn't either.

Do we know that bats are the only (or only likely) nonhuman host? Was there a significant population of cases with a known connection to the lab?

Pangolins Malasia I think are the next closest source genetically. China imports from there as well as Africa for TCM so but the known strains from bats are still match much much better.