Sujet: Re: Pentcho Valev - why not peer reviewed publication?
De: pvalev (l' arobase) yahoo.com (Pentcho Valev)
Groupes: sci.astro, sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics, fr.sci.physique, fr.sci.astrophysique
Organisation: http://groups.google.com
Date: 18. Jul 2008, 15:30:26
On Jul 18, 4:10 pm, hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 06:50:09 -0700 (PDT), 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PentchoValev - why not peer reviewed publication?"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
Hmmm. 27 used ones on offer at Amazon.
Everybody wants to get rid of, obviously.
You are not that interesting, Pentcho.
Yes in the intepretation of Philip Ball I am not at all interesting.
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
I am trying to counteract but without much success:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thread/66743bacba47371c?
So my countless attempts to publish in "peer-reviewed" journals
brought calamity on me and fortune on Philip Ball. Why should I
continue?
