If you don't realize the many peer review processes this data has to go through not to mention the additional peer reviews the manuscript has to go through then this is a pointless conversation because you are incorrectly grouping them all together. Assuming the peer review is even correct (I saw this same post and it wasn't conclusive to me), we have no idea what peer review he was referencing. Your basis is very thin to all the points you have made. I'd have no problem with these comments if it was acknowledged that this is your opinion yet you state as fact repeatedly
are you now modifying your prior statements of substantial setback to possibly covid delays in the regular course of business? you are all over the map here