A famous journal asked a "peer" to review my article.
The "peer" claimed that blood vessels don't fossilize, and that my
micrographs show nothing but minerals. Do you agree? The micrographs
are at:
http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=13&f=1588634646&p=6

"Lin Liangtai" yahoo.com.tw> wrote in message
news:1194093764.362980.188170@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

What journal? Who was the peer?

Lin Liangtai wrote:

If you want the answer to this question, why have you not included
sci.bio.paleontology or other paleobiology lists on your search? The
other three groups: alt.philosophy, misc. education and k12.chat.teacher
have no relevance to your inquiry.

The phrasing of your question is non-sensical; saying alleged fossils
consist of nothing but minerals is begging the question.

Micrographs cannot prove the organic or inorganic origin of any sample;
you need chemical quantitative data to prove things one way or the other.

Suggest you do a search of GeoTimes for a female researcher working on
dino bone marrow, and see what she has discovered.

"Jo Schaper" 56socketdot.net> wrote in message
news:13ipa8lhhp8nu85@corp.supernews.com...

And in the specific case of Mr. Conrad, I suggest his peer is nonetheless
than that famous,
Chinese, anthropological voyeur...Peeking man.

Regards,

Edward Hennessey

On Nov 4, 1:59 am, Jo Schaper 56socketdot.net>
wrote: