Counter proposal: When you allege that all relevant experts (say all virologists) are lying because most have reached a conclusion you (a non expert) disagree with, then your ‘conspiracy hypothesis’ is indeed a ‘conspiracy theory’. https://twitter.com/bretweinstein/status/1262480202124283904

Bret is 90% sure that the ‘Wuhan Enigma Syndrome’ is a lab cultivated virus, that this is the only reasonable reading of the current evidence, and that it likely accounts for important features of the virus. The majority of virologists disagree with all of these conclusions.

Bret has explained that this is because they are self interestedly covering for their profession & are compromised by industry/political connections. The alternative, that his non-expert assessment of the evidence might be the issue, barely gets any consideration.

Bret, like so many other people, pays lip service to acknowledging a lack of expertise, issuing useful disclaimers which are then almost immediately discarded as he advances his views. There is little hesitancy in his assertions that virologists are engaging in a mass coverup.

No one likes the label ‘conspiracy theorist’ because of the associations it implies but when you are at the stage of issuing your bespoke preferred conspiracy terminology, you usually are a member of that class.