Oddly Vanity Fair has done the best deep-dive I've seen on this. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/03/the-virus-hunting-no...
Well, there's evidence of transmission from mammals to people — "Sequencing has subsequently shown that mink-to-human transmission also occurred."
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abe5901
There's evidence of novel coronaviruses occurring in mammals and then infecting people — "In May [2021], researchers reported that two coronaviruses in dogs recombined in Malaysia. The result was a hybrid that infected eight children."
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/14/science/bat-coronaviruses...
There's evidence of "vendors selling live mammals, including raccoon dogs, hog badgers, and red foxes, immediately before the COVID-19 pandemic" at a Wuhan market.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8715
There's "Multiple positive samples … from one stall known to have sold live mammals, and the water drain proximal to this stall, as well as other sewerages and a nearby wildlife stall on the southwest side of the market, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2."
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8715
Please be more specific.
I think the problem is that there is very little evidence exists for the other explanations - and an absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
The lack of non-circumstantial evidence for the "Lab Leak" theory can be partially explained by the fact that China blocked investigations within the lab until 2021, and there are obvious and strong geopolitical reasons why they would want to destroy evidence if the 'lab leak' theory WAS true. This is from a country already known to perform cover-ups.
So this is the problem - if the hypothesis was true, any biological evidence would have most likely been intentionally destroyed, which means we can't really apply 'Hitchens Razor'.