The latest effort is the "old river gravels", not only has she failed to make a case that the observations cannot be explained by known physics but she also has failed to show why Petersen's hypothesis would predict or explain this. Not surprisingly since she already ignored addressing another observation of the geographical distribution of the snails. It appears that Petersen's theory lacks prediction and explanation.
Not much remains then other than his observations of things he feels cannot be explained by modern science. But it is up to Petersen to make a convincing argument for this. Defenders of Petersen, such a Janet, have quickly resorted to accusing researchers of various improper behaviors. So all in all, not much of Petersen's argument(s) appear to be left standing: no prediction, no explanation and lots of ad hominem. The fine ingredients of pseudo-science.