On 18 Jul, 14:50, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Jul 16, 4:53 pm, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichol...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote in sci.astro:

PentchoValev - why not peer reviewed publication?"

Instead of endlessly pumping out the same material to people in this
group who don't seem interested or convinced by what you write why not
just prepare an article for peer reviewed publication.

If the evidence is as overwhelming as you would have us believe the
well known scientific journals would jump at the opportunity to
publish your work.

Martin Nicholson
Daventry, England

They did jump but for different reasons. Philip Ball, the editor of
Nature, even found it suitable to convert so much jumping into money
and wrote a book about me:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sun-Moon-Corrupted-Philip-Ball/dp/1846271088
"The Sun and Moon Corrupted" by Philip Ball

I am trying to counteract but without much success:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thre...

So my countless attempts to publish in "peer-reviewed" journals
brought calamity on me and fortune on Philip Ball. Why should I
continue?

Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com

10/10 for bothering to reply to my question - I didn't think you would
so thank you.

I still don't understand why you bother posting similar material to
these groups again and again and again. The people here are not the
people you need to convince and the danger is that you are seen as
obsessed with the matter to the exclusion of many other, equally
interesting, scientific issues/cover-ups/errors.

Please share your motivation with the group.