--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:> It isn't a review. Hancock is cited
there as a source of scholarly ideas.
It is a review. Please see pp. 367-369 of the Journal Geological
Society of India, Vol. 60, Oct. 2002. It is Piotr's opinion that
Hancock is cited as a source of scholarly ideas. Not BP
Radhakrishna's. The editorial has distinct sections: book review,
reference to new archaeological site in Gulf of Cambay and thoughts
on further developing geoarchaeology in Bharat.
BPR ain't no promoter. In my view, he is one of the acknowledged
authorities in quatenary geology in the country. Surely, Piotr is
entitled to his views.