Well, Blaze. You have ignored this twice now once I brought up the fact that Impact Factor looked meaningless. Yet you are posting on other threads, with the outward appearance of one who is coming up to speed on LENR.
My first conclusion is that you are backtracking from your original challenge. And what an incredible backtrack it has been! From offering 10:1 odds against Rossi, you're now at 1:1 and even 1:2. All that happened within about a week, so my expectation would be that you're at 1:4 or so. Again, as I've posted before, it's good to see the intellectual light go on over your head. But it has been at my expense, pulling money from my pocket. So I'm ambivalent. Oh well. Welcome to the club. On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > I posted that the Impact Factor looked meaningless. I can't see if > reasonable journals have a factor of 1, or 10 , or 100 or XYZ. There was > never an answer to my post. > > > Kevin > O'Malley<http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.com&q=from:%22Kevin+O%27Malley%22> > Fri, > 28 Jun 2013 22:53:40 > -0700<http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.com&q=date:20130628> > > So far I can't get a handle on what Impact Factor really is. Reuters > charges for their information. I need to see where various journals are in > this ranking, such as Naturewieessen, American Chemical Society, Journal of > Analytical Chemistry, Physics Letters A, Journal of Nuclear Physics,Nature, > Journal of Electrochemistry and various other journals. In particular, I > would like to know the rankings of the journals mentioned on page 18 in > this paper from Jed Rothwell's LENR-CANR.org website: > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf > > > > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:54 PM, blaze spinnaker > <blazespinna...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >>> ***I accepted your original offer of 10:1. But you are not a man of >>> your word. >>> >> >> Dude, you and I both know those bets are not forever. New information >> arrives which forces us all to adjust our probabilities. >> >> BUT! >> >> If you still want to go with the original bet at 10:1 where the arvix >> report must be published in a journal of impact factor > 15 (as I stated), >> I'll take your money though. >> > >
