On Feb 16, 4:58*pm, Bob Berger wrote:
In article ,
Mike Vandeman says...







On Feb 16, 8:39=A0am, Shraga wrote:
On Feb 15, 10:15=A0pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:

On Feb 15, 5:57=A0pm, Shraga wrote:

On Feb 15, 4:17=A0pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:

On Feb 14, 11:17=A0am, Shraga wrote:
Anyway, if there is truly nothing wrong with this so-called
"literature review," then you should have no problem getting it
published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Please post the citation when you're done.

I did already. Sorry to disappoint you::

Vandeman, Michael J. ), 2008. The Impacts of
Mountain Biking on Amphibians and Reptiles. In Urban Herpetology.. J=
.
C. Mitchell, R. E. Jung Brown, and B. Bartholomew, editors. Society
for the , Herpetological Conservation
3:155-156; expanded version also available athttp://mjvande.nfshost=
.com/herp.htm.

Did I write "book chapter?" No, I didn't. I wrote "peer-reviewed
journal."

You're redirecting again to hide the fact you can't publish a paper i=
n
a referred journal. Still, that's not even relevant, because we're
discussing THIS paper:

http://mjvande.nfshost.com/scb7.htm

It's the same paper, just shortened to fit in the book. It was also,
of course, peer-reviewed. If it were really "a load of garbage", it
wouldn't have been published. DUH!

It's not worth having a discussion with you if you can't even figure
out which paper we're discussing.

You couldn't "discuss" your way out of a paper bag. You haven't even
READ the paper you claim to be "discussing". The fact that you are
afraid to give your real name says it all: you are bluffing, and don't
know what you are talking about. You can't even come up with your own
criticisms! You plagiarized someone else's! And someone who obviously
didn't read or understand my paper. All of your hot air is simply a
smoke screen to avoid admitting that I am right: mountain biking is
extremely dangerous and destructive, and should be banned everywhere!

I want to see you publish THAT paper in a peer-reviewed journal. My
point is, you can't, because it's a load of garbage, as you well know=
.

How would you know? You haven't read it. My paper proves that "a load
of garbage" can get published in a "peer-reviewed" journal, when the
reviewers are either idiots, biased, or both. If you were as smart as
you THINK you are, you would already know that. Or are you too
dishonest to admit that?

Your "paper" proves only your inability to get published in a journal
and nothing more.

It's much more difficult to get a chapter in a BOOK, as I did, than to
publish in a journal.
I was INVITED to contribute to the book, because
they recognize that I am the world expert on mountain
biking impacts,

Would you please list a few credible academic institutions and/or scientific
organizations that in published documents have listed you as "the world expert
on mountain biking impacts"; and please provide links to copies of those
documents. I'm thinking of institutions and organizations like, for example,
Princeton University, Stanford, or the American Academy of Sciences.

which you also know but are afraid to admit. You are pathetic.

May I also ask you to explain a seeming inconsistency in what you wrote above.

First, you wrote: "It's the same paper, just shortened to fit in the book.. It

was also, of course, peer-reviewed. If it were really "a load of garbage", it
wouldn't have been published. DUH!"

Then you wrote," My paper proves that "a load of garbage" can get published in a
"peer-reviewed" journal, when the reviewers are either idiots, biased, or both."

I have a better idea: you tell ME who the world experts are. But if
you could have done that, you would already have done so! So it is I,
after all. QED