Re: Pentcho Valev - why not peer reviewed publication?

[hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat]

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 06:50:09 -0700 (PDT), Pentcho Valev
<pvalev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>On Jul 16, 4:53 pm, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichol...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>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 PentchoValev - why not peer reviewed publication?"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.

w.
>
>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?
>
>Pentcho Valev
>pvalev@xxxxxxxxx