Ed Conrad <edconrad@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<61ppnvgibnfoj43ence9h5uvf0kiiv571b@4ax.com>...
Well, Ed, I see you have again retreated from the issue of the skull
in the boulder.
You won't be allowed to do that, Ed, but let me point out to you that
your failure to address it as well as your continued representation of
it as a "fossil" demonstrates intent to deceive.
You're a liar, Ed, and we're about to see more evidence for that.
http://www.edconrad.com/images/krogwskull.jpg
Wilton Krogman, one of the world's foremost experts
on human anatomy, holds what hehad identified as
a petrified human calvarium, a skull with the eye sockets
broken off.
In fact, Krogman did not IDENTIFY this specimen as anything. While he
allowed that it bore a superficial resemblence to a calvarium, he did
not accept that this was, in fact, a calvarium and he viewed you, Ed,
as something of a lunatic. He recommended specific testing OTHER THAN
WHAT YOU CLAIMED HE RECOMMENDED and you did not follow his
instructions.
He is shown at his desk at the Cooper Clinic
in Lancaster, Pa., where moments later he beckoned
a colleague -- a medical doctor -- to examine "the oldest
human skull ever found."
If this is so, Ed, why are you so reluctant to identify this alleged
"medical doctor" so we can actually ask him?
Every Krogman colleague to whom I spoke so far seems to be completely
unaware of this.
Meanwhile, Krogman never wrote of your specimens in any journal, never
seemed to speak of them much (except in relatively polite, but still
derisive terms) and never encouraged further study, funding or
assisted you in obtaining the appropriate support for research.
If Krogman was so excited by your finds and so convinced that you were
on to something (as opposed to ON something), why didn't he do those
things, Ed? Those are the things we would expect of a scientist,
after all.
By the way, Ed, are you aware that a former student and associate of
Krogman's actually reads some of these groups and posts on occasion?
http://www.edconrad.com/images/z11calv.jpg
<
A CATscan was performed on this specimen with
favorable results.
<
http://www.edconrad.com/images/catcalv.jpg
This looks like a copy of something, Ed, but hardly a CATscan of the
specimen.
Meanwhile, Haversian canals were identified
in the cell structue, the tell-tale sign of bone.
Who did that, Ed? Who conducted these tests? Where might we
reference the results independently?
And dried blood was found on the specimen
during testing at American Medical Laboratories
in Chantilly, Va.
The American Medical Labs doesn't test rocks, fossils or rocks that
look like fossils, Ed.
http://www.edconrad.com/images/z11calv.jpg
<
This is the official report from AML which had
performed Calculus Analysis by Crystallography.
This is an "official report" on a kidney stone passed by a LIVING
human, Ed.
The "Final Report," dated April 21, 2000," was issued
by Dr. Nathan Sherman, director of laboratories.
I now have a phone number and mailing address for Dr. Sherman, and I
will be contacting him for his side of this story.
"The specimen consists of 1 irregularly
shaped, brown calculus weighing less
than 0.0010 grams and measuring 1X1X0.5
mm. No nidus is observed. The calculi indicates
a composition of dried blood intermingled with a few
small crystals resembling calcium oxalate dihydrate."
http://www.edconrad.com/images/z12calv.jpg
http://www.edconrad.com/images/z13cav.jpg
A perfect description of a kidney stone, Ed.
who's the true scientist and who's the pseudo/
YOU know!
And it sure ain't me.
That's right, Ed. You are NOT A "true scientist." You are no kind of
scientist at all.
Scientists usually aren't liars and frauds, Ed. You are a liar and a
fraud.
