An expert’s opinion on “Clarifying tetrapod embryogenesis, a physicist’s point of view”.
You know what, I’m happy. And I have to pay a few beers to PZ Myers, this is a public statement.
Hopefully some other biologists will help me complete the list of errata I’m preparing for The European Physical Journal – Applied Physics Editor-in-Chief, Dr Bernard Drévillon.
Comments are open and free. Especially to people who would like to support Fleury’s point of view.
Filed under: thankx |
Clarifying tetrapod embryogenesis, a biologist's reply 
Hey,
I’m a grad student working specifically on segmentation, of which there was a (mercifully short) passage in the paper. I am most willing to help you with the (legion) errors in these few paragraphs – I can see where he’s made his “mistakes” (inverted commas because I smell deliberate ignorance here), and I know of more recent research that refutes them.
Let me know.
Welcome Confused, (are you ConfusedDave from Pharyngula?)
Chose your poison. You may post directly in the comments here and every Oops! will go up to a post; with credits of course.
Or you may just make a review of these paragraphs which concern your field, e-mail it to me and I’ll post it as your contribution. [oldcola at gmail dot com]
Your help is much appreciated (I feel really lonely here).
I’m going through chapter 4 at the moment, checking for distortions of bibliographic reports, like this one.