| Description | Gold has no quarrel with the decision that the enclosed [paper entitled 'Brontides...' and 'Aerial Explosions...] should be published elsewhere; indeed it will in any case as part of a review of all historical evidence in this field.
However, the reviewers comment, and he supposes Abelson's own, were based on the original manuscript and not on the revised version that Abelson's office received on 26 April. Gold spoke to someone in his office at that time and asked to make sure that any referees were given the new manuscript and tp disregard the old. It appears that for some reason this did not work. Not one of the comments would be applicable to the new version.
Asks if the referees reports have in fact been obtained for the new version, and somehow failed to connect up correctly, Gold would quite like to see them anyway. If not, asks to regard this case as closed. |