A recently published review by Herendeen?et al.?is misleading, self-centered, self-praising, and self-conflicting. They excluded the famous early angiosperm?Archaefructus?from their list of exemplar angiosperms, which contained only fossil plants they published themselves, leaving the impression that they were only authoritative on the origin and early history of angiosperms. Their 57-year-old “No Angiosperms Until the Cretaceous” conception does not reflect the truth about the origin and early history of angiosperms. Reinforcing such vapidly repeated statement does not help resolving any problem in science but leads to no solution for the origin of angiosperms. The authors tried to establish a criterion identifying a fossil angiosperm but their own exemplar angiosperm?Monetianthus?overturns their own criterion. Apparently, such a review does not positively contribute much to science.
展开▼
