Why are the lab escape denialists telling such brazen lies? gmwatch.org/en/news/latest… Or how Peter Daszak is “Patient Zero for misinformation” but a media darling! #COVID19 #coronavirus 
Daszak has been all over the world’s media decrying suggestions that SARS-CoV-2 might have come out of a lab as “preposterous”, “baseless”, “crackpot”, “conspiracy theories”, and “pure baloney”. And he has backed up these complete dismissals with a welter of questionable claims.
The mainstream media have challenged very few, if any, of Daszak’s assertions. But a number of well-informed scientific commentators are far from willing to give Daszak a free pass. Prof @R_H_Ebright has publicly accused Daszak of lying brazenly and “on a Trumpian scale” #COVID19
@R_H_Ebright .@BretWeinstein calls him “Patient Zero for misinformation.” And another well known biologist-communicator @jjcouey bluntly labels him “a liar”. “His opinion is conflicted in the worst ways and he should not be the expert to whom we are listening. But we see him everywhere”—Couey
@R_H_Ebright @BretWeinstein @jjcouey When the virologist Dr Jonathan Latham (@BioSRP) briefly commented on a recent Daszak @guardian article, offering a link to a highly praised analysis he recently co-authored with a fellow molecular biologist, his comment was promptly deleted from the @guardian website. #COVID19
@R_H_Ebright @BretWeinstein @jjcouey @BioSRP @guardian Looking at the @guardian community standards, it’s clear that @BioSRP's brief comment does not violate ANY of them. But Daszak and what the journalist @samhusseini calls the “loud crowd” (also involved in dangerous work w/ viruses) have successfully circled the wagons on #COVID19
@R_H_Ebright @BretWeinstein @jjcouey @BioSRP @guardian @samhusseini In this article we take apart the false narrative Daszak has been promoting with the help of the forensic analysis of @R_H_Ebright + other critical sleuthing by @ydeigin @BillyBostickson @Harvard2H @WhoWuhan @RolandBakerIII & many others — see SOURCES at the end of the article.
