Well, it looks like this bet thingie isn't going anywhere. No one is signing up to be the intermediary, and the Impact Factor lacks openness.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]>wrote: > 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 Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:26 PM, blaze spinnaker <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_ranking >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor >> >> How about using something like that? It has to have some minimum impact >> factor? >> >> How about an impact factor of at least 15? >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Ok, I posted it at the forum Intrade Gateway. We'll see if anyone is >>> willing. >>> >>> >>> >>> http://intrade.freeforums.org/re-anyone-willing-to-make-a-bet-the-ecat-is-not-real-t31.html >>> >>> How would we come to an agreement on which publications are acceptable? >>> I can see why you wouldn't want Journal of Nuclear Physics. But throwing >>> out American Chemical Society? Where's the legitimate cutoff point? >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:03 PM, blaze spinnaker < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Ahhh, action. I love it! >>>> >>>> A peer reviewed publication, that's very interesting. I think we'll >>>> need to define which publications that might be, but other than that I'm in >>>> if you are. >>>> >>>> As for someone to hold it, maybe we can post on intrade.freeforums.orgfor >>>> someone to hold it. Or who knows, maybe someone here might hold it >>>> (Paypal?) >>>> >>>> Glad to see you around! Really really miss intrade (obviously!) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello Blaze. I'm very pleased to see you posting here on Vortex. >>>>> You may remember me on Intrade as ko, the guy who kept posting Cold Fusion >>>>> articles. And I won quite a bit of money when the contract I posted was >>>>> verified by Carl. >>>>> >>>>> So, yes. I'm very interested in such a bet. In particular I like the >>>>> 10:1 odds. But we need to find an unbiased 3rd party to hold the money >>>>> and make the decision. Who would that be, now that Intrade is defunct? >>>>> >>>>> Also, the parameters of the decision are different than I would settle >>>>> upon. I don't hold Gibbs all that high in esteem. >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps something like, the 7 scientists who verified the energy >>>>> density of the Ecat get their paper published in a peer reviewed >>>>> publication? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> How I Made Money from Cold Fusion >>>>> Saturday, January 23, 2010 12:28:49 PM · by Kevmo · 28 replies · >>>>> 1,013+ views >>>>> Exclusive Article for Free Republic | 1/23/10 | Kevmo >>>>> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2435697/posts >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:37 PM, blaze spinnaker < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> As a possible set of parameters to this bet: >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm willing to bet my 5000 against anyone's 500 that Mark Gibbs >>>>>> doesn't publish an article in Forbes this year that states he personally >>>>>> believes without a doubt that LENR+ is real and has a power density >>>>>> matching what Levi/Essen published (within some reasonable margin of >>>>>> error). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 3:27 PM, blaze spinnaker < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Is anyone willing here to bet me $$$ that the eCat will not be >>>>>>> proven this year? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm open to discussing the parameters of this bet. Ideally we'd >>>>>>> mutually agree on a 3rd party to hold our money and be an impartial >>>>>>> judge >>>>>>> as to who wins by EOY. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let me know. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Blaze. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
