|
Re: those aren't refereed papers |
And what this has to do with the validity of the hypothesis and correct prediction? We observed correctly the anomalous stress waves before EQs and we correctly predicted them. Must it be judged in journals to be true? NOT! The true is independent on the people. It can be tested only by prediction of the reality. If the prediction is correct, than the hypothesis is true. Because 1+1=2 and 2+2=4 independently on the number of journals and their Impact Factor. Follow Ups: ● Re: those aren't refereed papers - Skywise 19:56:43 - 8/20/2012 (80151) (0) ● web links, then? - John Vidale 19:54:06 - 8/20/2012 (80150) (1) ● Re: web links, then? - Pavel Kalenda 21:01:06 - 8/20/2012 (80152) (1) ● it's not that hard - John Vidale 22:10:24 - 8/20/2012 (80153) (1) ● Re: it's not that hard - Pavel Kalenda 11:15:31 - 8/21/2012 (80155) (1) ● email - John Vidale 11:40:47 - 8/21/2012 (80156) (1) ● got it - John Vidale 22:23:32 - 8/21/2012 (80160) (1) ● Re: got it - Pavel Kalenda 23:31:19 - 8/21/2012 (80162) (1) ● that signal is way too big - John Vidale 23:53:44 - 8/21/2012 (80163) (1) ● Re: that signal is way too big - Pavel Kalenda 00:30:55 - 8/22/2012 (80164) (1) ● confusing - John Vidale 09:56:57 - 8/22/2012 (80168) (3) ● Re: confusing - Pavel Kalenda 02:13:23 - 8/23/2012 (80177) (1) ● Re: confusing - Skywise 09:30:01 - 8/23/2012 (80181) (0) ● Re: confusing - Pavel Kalenda 13:38:38 - 8/22/2012 (80171) (1) ● Berger - John Vidale 15:11:57 - 8/22/2012 (80172) (1) ● Re: Berger - Pavel Kalenda 00:29:24 - 8/23/2012 (80176) (1) ● move discussion to new thread? - heartland chris 06:33:14 - 8/23/2012 (80179) (1) ● no point - John Vidale 09:30:51 - 8/24/2012 (80193) (0) ● typo correction - John Vidale 10:01:33 - 8/22/2012 (80169) (0) |
|