Come on, that's a pretty severe false equivalence. At this rate, I'm surprised you didn't include flat Earthers.
These theories are not even equivalent to each other - there is much more and better evidence, and much less counterevidence, for the Moon landings than for what the official 9/11 explanation rests on, while the "ClimateGate" would require orders of magnitude more conspirators than the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis. This is at best a really fallacious argument, or at worst a cynically manipulative one.
Not all conspiracy theories are equally obviously untrue, and some aren't untrue at all, even some that require large groups of medical scientists, like the Tuskegee experiment. That's why betting on assumptions is just not good enough when getting to the bottom of such cases.