| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Geology Forum » PLEASE CALL THE EVOLUTION PSEUDOSCIENTISTS FOR DINNER...
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| ... |
 Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 1:38 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
<
HONEST SCIENTIST IN ED CONRAD'S CORNER
<
< http://www.edconrad.com
======================================<
SUBMITTED BY LIN LIANGTAI OF TAIPEI, TAIWAN
<
An updated evaluation of a "Carboniferous human
calvarium fossil”
<
Last update: May 4, 2008 (sixth edition)
<
http://www.edconrad.com/pics/OldestHumanSkull.JPG
http://www.edconrad.com/pics/Calvarium5.jpg
http://www.edconrad.com/pics/Calvarium10.jpg
< (To view any photos or videos contained within, click on
http://groups.google.com.tw/group/mummy-dinosaur-carved-by-men/web/me...
<
SUMMARY
<
The author has examined through microscopes more than 30 thin sections
cut From “rocks” that Mr. Ed Conrad discovered and sent to the
author.
<
Without exception, they are all found to be fossils, including the
subject “calvarium fossil”. The object is a Carboniferous human
calvarium fossil for the following reasons:
<
(1) its computed-tomography images bear close resemlance to those of a
calvarium;
<
(2) it contains fossilized osteocytes, Haversian canals, osteons, red
blood cells and various blood vessels in the specimens and thin
sections ;
<
(3) it contains remains of neurons and neuroglial cells that exist
only in the central nervous system;
<
(4) No other animal has an organ or body part that matches its inner/
outer shape and size;
<
(5) Its inner cavity has a capacity of at least 1,025 cc.;
(6) It was found between coal veins near Mahanoy (City),
Pennsylvania, where geological structure has been dated to be around
300 million years old.
<
Some of the fossil’s blood vessels have turned into coal, suggesting
it once existed in a coal region. In addition to the subject fossil,
there are at least two other pieces of evidence for human existence in
the Carboniferous age.
<
INTRODUCTION
<
A “calvarium fossil” (Fig. 1, Video 1, Video 2, Video 3, Video 4),
discovered between anthracite veins (Fig. 2-6, Fig. 2-7, Fig. 2-8,
Fig. 2-9) and owned by Mr. Ed Conrad of Shenandoah, Pennsylvania,
U.S.A., has been considered for over 25 years to be just a rock, while
its owner keeps maintaining that it is a Carboniferous human
calvarium
fossil. This article attempts to evaluate the object by answering the
following questions n this article’s Discussion section:
<
1. Is it a fossil?
<
2. Is it a calvarium fossil?
<
3. Is it a human calvarium fossil?
<
4 Is it a Carboniferous human calvarium fossil?
<
5. Are there other evidences for human existence in the Carboniferous
age?
<
6.Was there high-technology civilization in the Carboniferous age?
<
7. Further discussion/Attempts to disprove myself
<
7-1 Couldn’t it be a rock?
<
-- 7-2 Couldn’t it be something other than a calvarium fossil?
<
-- 7-3 Couldn’t it be a non-human calvarium fossil?
<
-- 7-4 Couldn’t it be later than the Carboniferous age?
=====================================<
A calvarium is a skull without the lower jaw/the facial parts, whereas
cranium refers to skull bones that enclose the brain (Ref. 1). A
calvarium could contain degraded brain remains.
<
MATERIAL AND METHODS
<
Material A-1:
<
On the author’s request, the owner of the “fossil” cut a small
specimen from the object, took pictures of the spot where the specimen
was cut
<
(Fig. 2-2), and sent the specimen to the author by post.
<
The specimen arrived in the following conditions:
<
1. A chunk of “fossil” about 1.5 cm long, 1 cm wide, and 0.5 cm
thick.
<
2. Three small fragments that crumbled out of the above chunk when
the author took up the chunk to look at it for the first time. The
three fragments measure about 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm x 0.2 cm each.
<
3. Dozens of small grains, each measuring less than 0.2 cm in any
dimension.
<
Above three kinds of specimens were taken to the geology department of
National Taiwan University. They were made into three thin sections
(Thin Section 1, 2 and 3 respectively) in the following methods,
which
involved no artificial staining of colors:
,
1. Thin section 1 (Fig. 4): Specimen 1 was cut for transverse and
longitudinal sections, which were then ground and mounted onto a glass
slide, namely thin section 1. One third of Specimen 1 was left from
the process of making the thin section (Fig. 5, Specimen 1 remnant).
<
2. Thin section 2 (Fig. 6): Fragments of Specimen 2 were cut, ground
and ounted onto a glass slide.
<
3. Thin section 3 (Fig. 7) : Small grains of Specimen 3 were placed in
a mold, glued firmly together, ground to a thickness of about 0.03 mm,
and then mounted onto a glass slide, namely thin section 3. This thin
ection was not covered with glass, but was coated with a thin layer
of wax n its top side.
<
Specimens 1, 2, 3, and thin sections 1, 2, 3 were viewed through a
stereo -microscope, a digital microscope (ref. 11), and a transmitted-
lighT microscope. The remnant from specimen 1 and thin section 3 were
also Viewed with a scanning electron mircoscope (Hitachi model
S-3400N). The scanning electronic microscope also analysed the
remnant’s chemical composition in a tiny spot (Fig. 8, EDS report).
Besides the digital microscope, a camera (Canon model EOS 350D) was
used to capture images
from the stereo-microscope and the transmitted-light microscope.
<
MATERIAL A-2:
<
On March 17, 2008, Mr. Ed Conrad cut another specimen from the object
(Fig. 2-10) and sent it to the author (Fig. 2-11, Fig. 2-12). This
specimen measured roughly 5.5 cm X 4 cm X 3 cm. This specimen’s
original location n the “calvarium fossil” is visible in Video 1.
<
This specimen, named K2 (Fig. 2) by Mr. Conrad, was taken to the
geology department of National Taiwan University, where it was cut in
three different directions. Three thin sections were then obtained and
named here
as SK2-1, SK2-2, SK2-3 (Fig. 3). The specimen and its
three thin sections were viewed with various microscopes, such as
stereomicroscope,
transmitted-light microscope, digital microscope, and Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM). Their images were captured with the digital
microscope, SEM, and Canon camera Model EOS 350D.
<
Material B: the “calvarium fossil”
<
On March 28, 2008, the author had the “calvarium fossil” scanned by
the Computed Tomography system of Alberta Research Council in Canada.
The resulting computed-tomography videos are listed in Result A.
<
The author had also asked the owner of the “fossil” to measure the
object (Fig. 2-3) and got the following data:
<
Outer dimensions of the object: 22.8 cm (maximum length) by 17.8 cm
maximum width) by 13.3 cm (maximum height)
<
The owner advised the author that on the top side of the object,
there seems to be a 6-mm-thick coating of foreign substance. To be on
the safe side, the author subtracts twice that thickness6mm x 2from
the above outer length , outer width, and subtracts 6 mm from its
exterior maximum height. Hence, the following figures are obtained and
used for calculating its cranial capacity:
<
Outer dimensions: 21.6 cm (Length) by 16.6 cm (Width) by 12.7 cm
(Height) Inner cavity dimensions: 15.9 cm (maximum length) by 10.8 cm
(maximum width) by 11.4 cm (maximum depth/height), as measured by its
owner.
<
Based on the above data, the author calculated the cranial capacity of
the object as follows:
<
1. By Lee Pearson Formula, given by Williams et al (1995) and
Manjunath (2002b) (ref. 2):
<
For males: 0.000337 x (L-11) x (W-11) x (H-11) + 406.01
<
This formula uses outer dimensions, and those dimensions are expressed
in millimeters in this formula. So, the following calculation is
done:
<
0.000337 x (216-11) x (166-11) x (127-11) + 406.01=1,648 cc
<
For females:
<
0.0004 x (L-11) x (W-11) x (H-11) + 206.60
<
Hence, the following calculation is done:
< 0.0004 x (216-11) x (166-11) x (127-11) + 206.60 =1,681 cc
<
Mean cranial capacity: (1648+1681) divided by 2 makes 1,665 cc.
<
As the gender of the “cranium” is unknown, only the mean figure is
considered here for convenience.
<
2. By Spheroid Formula, given by Manjunath (2002b, ref. 3)
<
0.5238 x length x width x height(depth)= cranial capacity
<
Above length, width, and depth are measurements of the cranial cavity
and expressed in centimeter.
<
Hence the calculation 0.5238x15.9x10.8x11.4=1,025 cc.
<
REULTS
<
A. Animated Computed Tomography images in all three planes
(horizontal, coronal, and sagittal planes) of the whole object are
contained mainly in the following videos: Video 1, Video 2, Video 3,
<
Video 4.
<
B. The EDS report (Fig. 8, Energy Disperse Spectrum report), done by
the scanning electronic microscope, reveals that the object consists
of oxygen (46% by atom number), carbon (30%), silica (14%), and small
quantities of Fe, Na, Mg, and Al.
<
C. SEM images of Specimen 1 remnant and thin section 3 reveal numerous
remains of bone cells (osteocytes, Fig. 1-0), blood vessels, and red
blood cells ( Fig. 9-1, Fig. 9-2, Fig. 9-3, Fig. 9-4, Fig. 9-5, Fig.
9-6, Fig. 9-7, Fig. 9- .
<
D. Various images of the object also show (1) branching blood vessel
remains (Fig. 1-0-0), Haversian canals and osteons (Fig. 1-1, Fig.
1-2, Fig. 1-3, Fig. 1-4, Fig. 1-5); (2) degraded remains of neurons,
neuroglial cells and nerve fibers (Fig. 10-1, Fig. 10-2, Fig. 10-3,
Fig. 10-4, Fig. 10-5, Fig. 10-6, Fig. 10-7, Fig. 10-8, Fig. 10-9);
(3)
blood vessel’s transverse section remains (Fig. 11-1, Fig. 11-2, Fig.
11-3, Fig. 11-4, Fig. 11-5); (4) various fossilized
tissues (Fig. 12-1 to Fig. 12-6).
<
E. Specimen 1 is found to have at least three black areas. One such
black area shows brilliant black vitreous luster under naked eyes and
microscopes (Fig. 5).SEM and light microscopies reveal that the shiny
black area contains arbonized blood vessels and erythrocytes (figures
9-4 to 9-.
<
F. The estimated cranial capacity of the “calvarium” ranges from 1,025
cc to 1,665 cc as calculated in the preceding paragraph.
<
DISCUSSION
<
1. Is it a fossil?
<
Yes. Its computed-tomography images (Video 4) don’t look like any
rock. No rocks or plants contain all at the same time the remains of
neurons, mly-chosen, freshly-cut thin sections, not from re-worked/
contaminated tissues. Their colors are not artificially stained.
<
2. Is it a calvarium fossil?
<
Yes. Its computed-tomography images bear close resemblance to those f
a calvarium on the organ level (Video 4). On the cell level, it
contains remains of osteocytes, neurons, and glial cells as listed in
Results C and D Those remains point to a calvarium fossil that once
contained brain tissue. No other animal organs or body parts have
inner/outer sizes and shapes similar to this fossil’s shapes and
sizes
(Fig. 1).
<
3. Is it a human calvarium fossil?
<
Yes. Its cranial capacity of at least 1,025 cc is surpassed only by
cetaceans, walrus, elephants, and/or dinosaurs (ref. 4). However,
those four kinds of animal have no crania/organs that match the
subject fossil in cranial shape and size. As each order of animal has
a different shaped skull (ref. 5), the subject calvarium fossil can
be identified as a human calvarium fossil by forensic experts on
human Skulls. One such expert is Mr. Wilton Krogman. He had
physically examined the calvarium fossil. His broad smile in the
photo (Fig. 1) says that he confirmed it was a human calvarium
fossil.
<
The calvarium fossil matches humans’ cranial size, cranial capacity
and cranial shape in the following ways:
<
3-1 Cranial size (outer dimensions):
< Neanderthal: 24.1cm (length) x 14.6 cm (width) x
17.8 cm (height) (ref. 6)
< Subject fossil: 21.6 cm (length) x 16.6 cm (width) x
12.7 cm (height)
< 3-2 Cranial capacity:
<
< Neanderthal: 1,750 cc (ref. 7)
<
< Modern Human: 1,350-1,400 cc (ref.
<
< Java man: 940 cc (Homo Erectus, Trinil 2, Pithecanthropus
I, ref. 9)
<
< Subject fossil: at least 1,025 cc (by Spheroid Formula)
<
By the Lee Pearson Formula, the subject fossil has a cranial capacity
of 1,665 cc. The vast difference between 1,665 cc and 1,025 cc may be
due to the following factors:
<
A. The Lee Pearson Formula uses the skull cap’s outer dimensions,
while the Spheroid Formula uses its inner dimensions. In this case,
the calvarium’s inner width is only 60% of its outer width, because
the fossil retains brain remains in its inner cavity (See the bottom
view of the fossil in Fig. 1).
As a result, the Lee Pearson Formula produces the result of 1,665
c.c. while the Spheroid Formula produces the result of only 1,025
c.c;
<
B. The calvarium was broken in the facial part;
<
3-3 Cranial shape:
<
< Human: well-rounded cranium (ref. 10)
<
< Java man: flat, very thick cranium (Homo Erectus, Trinil
2, Pithecanthropus
I) (Fig. 2-1 & ref. 9)
<
< Subject fossil: More rounded than the above Java
man
(Fig. 1 vs. Fig. 2-1)
<
< The above analysis shows the subject fossil matches human skull
caps in cranial size, cranial capacity, and cranial shape.
<
4. Is it a Carboniferous human calvarium fossil?
<
My judgment says yes. For over 27 years, its owner has attested many
times that all his fossils were found between coal veins near
Shenandoah/ Mahanoy (City), Pennsylvania (Fig. 2-6, Fig. 2-7, Fig.
2-8,
<
Fig. 2-9). That is in the anthracite region, the only one in the U.S.
proper. It’s in a most-studied geological area of the Carboniferous
age. That is to say animal fossils found there should have lived there
in the Carboniferous age. The owner’s attestation is mirrored in
Specimen 1 remnant. Under naked eyes and transmitted-light
microscopes, the specimen looks black and shiny in some areas (Fig.
5). Under SEM and a digital microscope (ref. 11), the
shiny black area of Specimen 1 revealed its blood vessels that have
carbonized into coal (Fig. 9-5). The shiny black color is a sign of
vitraina thin, bright, horizontal band in bituminous coal that
usually breaks with a conchoidal fracture. The fossil’s black and
shiny look suggests its
origin in a coal region.
<
Its owner has two other fossils that are also coalified. One such
fossil is a coalified adze handle (Fig. 14). Another is a fossilized
small toe complete with skin tissue, finger nail, tendon,ligaments,
and the middle phalanx (Fig. 15-1, Fig. 15-2, Fig. 15-3, Video 15-4,
Fig. 15-5). The mummified toe fossil shows signs of carbonization on
the toe tip’s bottom side (Fig. 16).
<
Before Mr. Conrad found the subject calvarium fossil, he had
discovered many “fossils” at the same place. Why would he discover the
subject fossil anywhere else when many more of such "fossils”, are
still exposed out there, outcropping from the big boulders in the
region (Fig. 17-1, Fig. 17-2) ? Such outcropping fossils include
another mummified skull fossil (Fig. 2-13).
<
Mr. Conrad’s fossils include unimaginable fossilized organs such as
human liver, human finger, human long bone, mammalian limbs, etc.
(Fig. 18-1, Fig. 15-1, Fig. 18-2, Fig. 18-3, Fig. 18-4, Fig. 18-5).
<
This fossil brings up many questions to current theories about human
origins. If we avoid them, we are only fooling ourselves. If we face
them, they will bring us new
horizons for human civilization.
<
5. Are there other evidences for human existence in the
Carboniferous age?
<
Certainly. They are all shown in my albums ( here ).
<
Two other pieces of evidence for human existence in the Carboniferous
age include: (1) A human cerebral hemisphere fossil (Video 5, Video
6) and (2) A human toe fossil (Fig. 15-1, Video 7, Video .
<
6. Was there high-tech civilization in the Carboniferous age?
<
Modern humans took no more than 8,000 years to develop from low-tech
society to high-tech society. I have written about similar subjects
in
Gogle’s talk.origins newsgroup.
<
7. Further Discussion/Attempts to disprove myself
<
< 7-1
<
< Couldn’t it be a rock?
<
< Its CT images (Video 9, Video 10) don’t resemble any rock.
<
Besides my pictures, there are pictures by Mr. Andrew MacRae, Mr.
(Paul) PZ Myers and Mr. Ed Conrad on the internet. Their pictures
“also” show Haversian canals and osteons, which are distinguishing
features of fossil bone micro-structures (Fig. 20-4, Fig. 20-5, Fig.
20-6).
<
Few rocks have a shape and size that fully matches human skull
interior and exterior. To put it simply, there has never been a rock
that resembles a human skull cap from the organ level ( showing
cranial cavity), through the tissue level ( showing Haversian
canals, osteons, branching blood vessels), down to the cell level
(showing remains of bone cells, red blood cells, neuroglial cells and
neurons).
<
More than twenty of Mr. Conrad’s “rocks” (see here) contain remains of
red blood cells. Making no exception, the subject fossil contains all
the above-mentioned features in natural condition/position. Most of
them are found where they should be. I have cut more than 30 thin
sections from the “rocks” and taken more than one thousand
microscopic pictures of the twenty fossils the owner has sent me.
<
Most of the jagged minerals found in the fossils are found trapped in
degraded organic tissues such as blood vessels. These degraded blood
vessels could not have gone into rocks/minerals, begun the
fossilization process there and still remained jointed in natural
posture. The minerals were not found in
a
continuous formation, but the organic tissues/organs were found in a
continuous formation, retaining their original outer shapes (of small
toe, calvarium, handle, liver, etc.)
and cell structures.
<
Plant fossils are characterized by regular radial wood structures
(year rings, rays, tracheids, etc.) in their transverse sections.
Animal fossils are very complex in transverse section. The subject
fossil shows complexity and its cell remains are too large to be fungi
or bacteria. There is simply not a rock that contains numerous look-
alikes of neurons, neuroglial cells, osteocytes, osteons, Haversian
canals, red blood cells, blood vessels, and match the human skull caps
in size and shape, all at the same time.
<
7-2
<
Couldn’t it be something other than a calvarium fossil?
<
Large calvarium is a very different organ from all other animal
organs. Video 4 contains images resembling a calvarium’s temporal line
and cranial sutures.
<
The subject fossil has a deep, wide inner cavity that roughly
matches the fossil’s outer shape and size. Its large size and
distinct shape cannot be found in any organs or body parts other than
skulls. It contains degraded remains of neurons and neuroglial cells,
which are not found in any organ except in brains/spinal cords.
<
Those degraded neurons and glias could only have come from a
calvarium, because the subject fossil does not look like a vertebra at
all. It is unlikely for many bone cells, neurons, neuroglial cells,
and blood vessels to leave a skull, get into another skull, and get
preserved there in continuous formation.
<
7-3
Couldn’t it be a non-human calvarium?
<
All crania have different, distinctive shapes among different orders
of animal (ref. 5). The author has compared the fossil with various
animal skulls and found
only human skulls matched the fossil. The No. 1 distinction of human
skulls lies in their large cranial capacity. No other animal has a
skull that remotely matches human skulls in cranial capacity,
cranial shape and cranial size.
<
7-4
<
Couldn’t it be later than the Carboniferous age?
<
I cannot believe that Mr. Conrad found his fossils in a foreign
country or even in another state, as hundreds of such fossils have
been found there and many fossils were still outcropping there. Such
outcropping "fossils”
include a “mummified skull fossil” that is still embedded in a
boulder weighing over 250 kilograms (Fig. 2-13). Why would he lie
about their place of origin when he cared most about hundreds of
“rocks’” being recognized
as fossils?
,
When his rocks have been demonstrated to be fossils,
that means he was right all along, including the fossils’ place of
origin.
<
Even if it were not from the Carboniferous age, it would still be the
oldest human skull cap in the world, as its original blood vessels
have carbonized into shiny bituminous coal/anthracite (Fig. 5).
Bituminous coal found
east of the Rocky Mountain in the U.S.A. is at least ten million years
old.
<
No other human skull cap has ever been found to be so old in the
whole world.
<
CONCLUSION
<
The author has examined through microscopes more than 30 thin
sections cut from “rocks” that Mr. Ed Conrad discovered and sent to
the author.
<
Without exception, they are all found to be fossils, including the
subject “calvarium fossil”. The object is a Carboniferous human
calvarium fossil for the following reasons:
<
(1) its computed-tomography images bear close resemlance to those of a
calvarium; (2) it contains fossilized osteocytes, Haversian canals,
osteons, red blood cells and various blood vessels in the specimens
and thin sections ;
<
(3) it contains remains of neurons and neuroglial cells that exist
only in the central nervous system;
<
(4) No other animal has an organ or body part that
matches its inner/outer shape and size<
<
(5) Its inner cavity has a capacity of at least 1,025 cc.;
<
(6) It was found between coal veins near Mahanoy (City), Pennsylvania,
where geological structure has been dated to be around 300 million
years old.
<
Some of the fossil’s blood vessels have turned into coal, suggesting
it once existed in a coal region. In addition to the subject fossil,
there are at least two other pieces of evidence for human existence
in the Carboniferous age.
+
REFERENCES
<
Ref. 1: Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull
<
Ref. 2: “Estimation of Cranial Volume in Dissecting Room Cadavers” by
K.Y. Manjunath, J. Anat. Soc. India 51(2) pp.168-172 (2002)
<
Ref. 3: Same as ref. 2.
<
Ref. 4: Brain Facts and Figures in an article at URL:
<
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/facts.html
<
Ref. 5: On-line article at URL: http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/bex/31..pdf
<
< (Page 4 of a teaching plan for grade three of primary
schools)
<
Ref. 6: On-line material at URL: http://www.boneclones.com/BH-019.htm
<
Ref. 7: Neanderthal physical traits in a Wikipedia article at URL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal (See anatomy section)
<
Ref. 8: Same as ref. 4.
<
Ref. 9: On-line article at URL: www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/java.html
<
Ref. 10: Same as ref. 9.
<
Ref. 11: Digital microscopeDino-Lite AM-313T5 made by AnMo
Electronics Corp. http://www.anmo.com.tw/
<
=================================<
SOME WORLD NEWSPAPERS
TAIWAN
Apple Daily [In Chinese]
Central Daily News
China Post
China Times
The Journalist
Liberty Times
Sino [Japanese & English available]
The Student Post [English available]
Taipei Soir
The Taipei Times
Taiwan Economic News
Taiwan News
United Daily News [In Chinese]
Quote: JAPAN
Asahi Shimbun / Asahi Evening News (Tokyo)
Chunichi Shimbun, The (Nagoya)
Daily Yomiuri, The (Yomiuri)
European and Pacific Stars and Stripes
Hokkaido Shimbun
Hokkoku Shimbun (Kanazawa City)
Japan Times (Tokyo)
Kyodo News
Kyoto Shimbun
Mainichi Shimbun (Osaka)
Nihon Keizai Shimbun
Toyama Shimbun
Yamanashi Nichinichi
Yomiuri Shimbun (Tokyo)
Asian Wall Street Journal
China Daily
China News Digest
China News Services
China Online
Guangzhou Morning Post
Hong Kong Commercial Daily
Hong Kong Standard
Inside China Today
Latelinenews
People's Daily
Shanghai Daily
Sing Tao Electronic Daily (Hong Kong)
South China Morning Post (Hong Kong)
Ta Kung Pao
Xinhua News Service
Quote: INDIA
Ananda Vikatan
Andhra Pradesh Times
Asian Age, The
Business Standard
Deccan Chronicle
Deccan Herald
Deepika Daily
Dinamani Tamil Daily
Economic Times, The
Hindu, The
Hindu Business Line, The
Hindustan Times , The
India Daily
India Express
Kaumudi
Naidunia-Indore
News India-Times On the Web
Pioneer, The
Rediff
Statesman, The
Telegraph, The
Times of India, The
Tribune, The
Quote: FRANCE
L'Alsace Journal (Alsace)
Le Bien Public (Bourgogne)
Charente Libre (Charente)
Le Courrier de Mantes (Mantes)
Le Courrier Picard (Picardie)
La D?che du Midi
Dernieres Nouvelles d'Alsace (Alsace)
Les Echos
L'Est R?blicain (Nancy)
Le Figaro (Paris)
France-Amerique (Paris)
International Herald Tribune (English) (Paris)
Le Monde (Paris)
Le Monde Diplomatique (France)
Le Telegramme - Bretagne On Line (Brittany)
Liberation (Paris)
Monaco Actualite (Monaco)
Nice-Matin (Nice)
Le Nouvel Observateur (Paris)
Ouest France (Brittany, Rennes)
Le Parisien (Paris)
Le R?blicain Lorrain (Lorraine, Metz)
Regards (Paris)
Sud Oest (Aquitaine, Bordeaux)
La Tribune (Paris)
Voix du Nord
Quote: AUSTRALIA
Age, The (Victoria, Melbourne)
Australian Financial Review (Sydney)
Australian, The (Sydney)
Border Mail, The (New South Wales, Albury)
Bryon Shire Echo, The (New South Wales, Byron Bay)
Canberra Times (Canberra)
Courier Mall (Queensland)
Cumberland Newspapers
Daily Telegraph (New South Wales)
Gold Coast Bulletin, The (Queensland)
Herald Sun (Melbourne)
Mercury, The (Tasmania, Hobart)
Sunday Herald Sun (Melbourne)
Sunday Mail, The (Queensland)
Sunday Times, The
Sunday Tasmanian, The (Tasmania, Hobart)
Sydney Morning Herald Sun (Sydney)
Warrnambool Standard (Victoria)
Weekly Times, The (Victoria)
West Australian, The (Western Australia, Perth)
Quote: ITALY
Alto Adige (Bolzano)
Brescia Oggi (Brescia)
Il Centro (Abruzzo, Pescara)
Chiamami Citt?/a> (Rimini)
Corriere del Giorno (Taranto)
Corriere della Sera
Dolomiten
L'Eco di Bergamo (Bergamo)
Il Foglio
Gazzetta de Mantova (Mantova)
Gazzetta di Reggio (Reggio)
Giornale (Bologna)
Internazionale
Il Giornale di Vicenza (Vicenza)
Il Manifesto (Rome)
L'Arena (Verona)
La Nazione (Florence)
Nuova Ferrara (Ferrara)
La Nuova Sardegna (Sassari)
La Nuova Venezia (Venezia)
Il Piccolo di Trieste (Trieste)
La Provincia Pavese (Pavia, Pavia)
La Repubblica
Il Resto del Carlino (Bologna)
La Stampa (Turin)
Il Tirreno (Livorno)
La Tribuna di Treviso (Treviso)
L'Unione Sarda (Cagliari)
Quote: RUSSIA
Evening Kazan (Tatarstan, Kazan)
Itar-Tass (Moscow)
Izvestia (Moscow)
Kazanskii Universitet (Moscow)
Kommersant Daily (Moscow)
Komsomolskaya Pravda (Moscow)
The Moscow Times (Moscow) (English)
Moskovskii Komsomolets (Moscow)
Nezavisimaya Gazeta (Moscow)
Novosti (Vladivostok)
Pravda (Moscow)
Russia Today
St. Petersburg Times (St. Petersburg)
Trud (Moscow)
Vladivostok News (Vladivostok) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat May 17, 2008 1:27 am
|
|
