Most of what I recalling at the time doesn't match that description. It was more disparaged as pointless speculation mostly being used to fuel political finger pointing when people had far more important things to figure out.

Sampling bias acknowledged.

Was the idea that we should inquire about the virus’ origin dismissed as such, or just the idea that there is already strong evidence of any particular origin story?

It reminds of how hostile people became when you merely questioned the effectiveness or need of the lockdowns last year.

I think many academics and scientists are so emotionally invested in the side they took they will defend it no matter of the evidence.