This one is by Brian Earp. The substantive criticisms aren't all that different from those you will have seen before, but they are made rather well and quite concisely.
The tone is a bit more hostile than necessary - Earp obviously found Harris and/or his book very irritating - but it's relatively mild for the internet (and compared with some of what we've seen in recent years, in some the debates I've been involved in, it's very mild indeed!).
Earp includes a link to a video where he questions Harris on what is original in his thesis. Contrary to the (again unnecessarily hostile) title of the video, Harris doesn't "evade" the question, which suggests some kind of dishonesty, but nor does he give an answer that I find especially satisfying.