peer review.

[Apollo20]

My publications:




1. United-Atom Treatment of the Rydberg States of Linear Molecules with Pi-2 Cores. Chem. Phys. Let. 34(3), 581, (1975)
2. Rydberg States of Carbon Dioxide and Carbon Disulphide. J. Mol. Spect. 59(2), 312, (1976). (Co-author)
3. Rydberg States of Carbon Diselenide. J. Mol. Spect. 61(3), 459, (1976). (Co-author)
4. The Analysis of Polymer Degradation Products by UV-Photoelectron Spectroscopy. Physica Scripta 16, 339, (1977). (Co-author)
5. Acquisition of Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry Facilities. OHRD Report C78-112-H, (June 1978).
6. An Investigation of Preconcentration Techniques for Neutron Activation Analysis of Trace Elements in Water. OHRD Report 78-458-H, (October 1978).
7. The Determination of Trace Elements in Residual Fuel Oil. OHRD Report 78-477-K, (November 1978).
8. Boron Interference in Neutron Activation Analysis. OHRD Report 78-626-K, (December 1978).
9. Sodium Hydroxide Interference in the Determination of Carbon-14 by Liquid Scintillation Counting. OHRD Report 79-21-K (January 1979).
10. The Determination of Boron Isotopes in Moderator Heavy Water by Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry. OHRD Report 79-115-K, (March 1979).
11. Analysis of Generator Core Monitor Samples. OHRD Report 79-189-H, (April 1979).
12. Analysis of Pickering NGS “A” Irradiated Fuel Bay Water. OHRD Report 79-297-H, (June 1979).
13. The Acquisition of Surface Analysis Facilities. OHRD Report 79-265-H, (July 1979).
14. Analysis of Water Samples from BNPD Site 2. OHRD Report C79-124-K, (June 1979).
15. An Assessment of the TAGA – a Trace Atmospheric Gas Analyzer. OHRD Report 79-482-H, (October 1979).
16. Neutron Activation Analysis of NBS Coals. OHRD Report C79-183-K, (November 1979).
17. The Electronic Spectra of HCl and HF. Can J. Phys 57(10), 1650, (1979). (Co-author).
18. Bruce NGS “A” Particulate Analysis. OHRD Report 80-24-K, (February 1980).
19. Low Level Gamma Counting. OHRD Report 80-97-H, (March 1980).
20. Uranium and Thorium in Concrete. OHRD Report 80-130-K, (March 1980).
21. Analysis of Bruce NGS “A” Particulate Samples Collected Nov/’79, Feb/’80 and April/’80. OHRD Report 80-234-K, (June 1980).
22. Analytical Applications of Delayed Neutron Counting. OHRD Report 80-360-K, (September 1980).
23. Nitrogen-16 Monitoring. OHRD Report 80-424-K, (October 1980).
24. The Determination of Plutonium, Americium and Curium. OHRD Report 80-509-K, (January 1981).
25. Analysis of Pickering NGS “A” Unit 4 N2 Annulus Gas Filter Deposit. OHRD Report C81-04-K, (January 1981).
26. Radionuclides in Flyash. OHRD Report 81-98-K, (August 1981).
27. The JAMP-10 Scanning Auger Microprobe – A New Facility for Surface Analysis at Chemical Research. OHRD Report 81-286-K, (August 1981).
28. Energy Dispersive X-Ray Analysis of Mixtures of Iron, Uranium and Zirconium Oxides. OHRD Report C81-148-K, (September 1981).
29. Quantitative Auger Electron Analysis. OHRD Report 82-108-K, (March 1982).
30. Radon Emanation from Flyash. OHRD Report 82-242-K, (June 1982).
31. Ion-Sputtering in the JAMP-10 Scanning Auger Microprobe. OHRD Report 82-472-K, (November 1982).
32. The Neutron Absorbing Capacity of Gadolinium Nitrate. OHRD Report 83-42-K, (May 1983).
33. Calibration of the EDAX X-RAY Spectrometer. OHRD Report 83-226-K, (May 1983).
34. The Determination of Radionuclides in Flyash Leachates by Gamma-Ray Spectrometry. OHRD Report CM82-2506-K, (May 1983).
35. The Ion -Tech Sputtering System. OHRD Report 83-477-K,
(December 1983).
36. Gamma-Ray and Auger Electron Analysis of Some Pickering NGS Unit 1 Corrosion Coupons. OHRD Report 83-529-K, (December 1983).
37. The Analysis of Pickering NGS “A” Unit 2 End Fitting Liners. OHRD Report 84-77-K, (March 1984).
38. Analysis of Oxide Scales Formed on Feeder Pipes from Pickering NGS “A” Units 1 and 2. OHRD Report 84-262-K, (August 1984).
39. Radionuclide Depth-Profiling. OHRD Report 84-359-K, (November 1984).
40. Determination of Radium-226 in Flyash Leachates and Ground Waters. OHRD Report 85-35-K, (February 1985). (Co-author).
41. The Determination of Particle Size, Specific Activity and Chemical Composition of Particulate Material Collected on March 24, 1985, from an End Fitting Removal Trough at Pickering NGS Unit 1. OHRD Report 85-202-K, (July 1985).
42. The Effects of the CANDECON Decontamination Process on the Surface Oxides on Pickering Units 1 and 2 Feeder Pipes. Co-authored Paper Presented at the 6th Annual Canadian Nuclear Society Conference, Ottawa, 1985.
43. The Characterization of Carbon-14 Containing Particulate Material from the Gas Annulus Systems of Pickering NGS “A” Units 1 and 2. Part 1. OHRD Report 86-73-K, (April 1986).
44. Carbon-14 Task Force Interim Report to the Nuclear Integrity Review Committee. RMEP-IR-03400.1-2. (May 1987). (Co-authored).
45. The Gasification of Carbon-14 Particulate in Pickering Units 1 and 2 with Carbon Dioxide Filled Annulus Gas systems. OHRD Report C87-51-K, (June 1987).
46. Freon Distillation of Carbon-14 contaminated Components from Pickering NGS. OHRD Report C87-60-K, (July 1987).
47. The Gasification of Carbon-14 Particulate in Pickering Units 1 and 2 with Carbon Dioxide Filled Annulus Gas Systems: Addendum. OHRD Report C87-62-K, (July 1987).
48. The Characterization of Carbon-14 Containing Particulate Material from the Gas Annulus Systems of Pickering NGS “A” Units 1 and 2. Part 2: Supplementary Data and Final Conclusions. OHRD Report 86-217-K, (October 1987).
49. The Analysis of Samples Associated with the Removal of a Pressure Tube from PNGS Unit 3. OHRD Report C87-97-K, (November 1987).
50. The Analysis of Smears Taken on Two Calandria Tubes (K05 and C08) at NPD after the 1987 Shutdown. OHRD Report C88-44-K, (May 1988).
51. An Investigation of the Radiolytically Enhanced Oxidation of Carbon-14 Particulate. OHRD Report 88-160-K, (August 1988).
52. The Characterization of Heavy Water Upgrader Deposits. OHRD Report 88-250-K, (October 1988).
53. Analysis of Particulate Material Found in a Shut-Off Valve from the Bruce “B”, Unit 8, Gas Annulus System. OHRD Report C89-17-K, (February 1989). (Co-authored).
54. The Identification of Nitrogen-13 in the Gas Annulus System of Unit 3 at Pickering NGS. OHRD Report C89-31-K, (March 1989).
55. The Distribution of Carbon-14 in the Oxide Layer on the Outer Surface of an Irradiated Zr-2.5% Nb Pressure Tube from Pickering Unit 3. OHRD Report 89-176-K, (August 1989).
56. The Characterization of Carbon-14 Rich Deposits Formed in the Nitrogen Gas Annulus Systems of 500 MWe CANDU Reactors. Radiochimica Acta 47, 209, (1989).
57. Deposit Formation in CO2 Annulus Gas Systems. OHRD Report 89-302-K, (March 1990).
58. Tests on “Cold Fusion” in an Electrochemical Cell. OHRD Report 90-28-K, (April 1990), (Co-authored).
59. The Characterization of a Deposit Removed from the Annulus Gas System of Bruce NGS Unit 3. OHRD Report 90-239-K, (November 1990).
60. 1990 RPAC: Program Area 53 – Nuclear Structures and Systems. OHRD Report X90-7-R, (December 1990).
61. The Detection and Interpretation of Carbon-13 Isotope Effects in the Oxide Scales of Irradiated Zr-2.5 wt% Nb Pressure Tubes. OHRD Report 91-93-P, (June 1991).
62. The Characterization of Particulate Material Removed from the Pigtails and Bellows of Pickering NGS Unit 3. OHRD Report C90-34-K, (August 1991).
63. The Characterization of Particulate Material from three Bruce Unit 1 Calandria Swabs. OHRD Report C91-46-K, (August 1991).
64. The Characterization of a Bruce Unit 2 End Fitting Smear. OHRD Report C92-10-K, (February 1992).
65. Water Absorption in the Pickering Unit 3 Annulus Gas System. OHRD Report 92-2-K, (April 1992).
66. Trace Organic Compounds in CO2 Annulus Gas Systems. OHRD Report 92-187-P, (August 1992).
67. Modification of Radiolytically Deposited Carbon by the Inclusion of Hydrogen and Oxygen. Carbon ’92 Conference, Essen, (1992). (Co-authored).
68. Measurement of 14C and Other Long-Lived Radionuclides in Irradiated Zr-2.5 Nb Pressure Tubes from Pickering Units 3 and 4. COG Report COG-93-22, (June 1993). (Co-authored).
69. Hydrogen Ingress in Pressure Tubes. Ontario Hydro Research Review Number 8, 17, (1993). (Co-authored).
70. Characterization of the Tritium Activity in Urine and Deposits Removed from Valve MV309, Pickering NGS, Unit 7. OHT Report A-NBP-94-47-K, (May 1994).
71. A Review of OHRD/OHT Research on Carbon-14 in Annulus Gas Systems. OHT Report A-NBP-94-201-CON, (Jan 1995).
72. The Effect of Nitrogen Impurities on CO2 Annulus Gas Chemistry. OHT Report A-NFC-95-19-P, (April 1995).
73. Post Irradiation Investigations of Corrosion and Deuterium Pickup by Zr-2.5 wt% Nb Alloy Pressure Tubes: 14C, 13C and 11B tracers in Outside Surface Oxides. J. Nuc. Mat. 226, 263, (1995). (Co-authored).
74. An Investigation of Pressure Tube Oxide Spalling Using Zr-Nb Activity Data for Bruce “A” Unit 3. OHT Report A-NFC-96-62-P, (June 1996).
75. The Measurement of the Isotopic Composition of Water Vapour in CANDU Annulus Gas Systems. OHT Report A-NFC-96-114-P, (July 1996).
76. Post Irradiation Investigations of Corrosion and Deuterium Pickup by Zr-2.5 wt% Nb Alloy Pressure Tubes: Isotope Tracers in Inside Oxides. OHT Report A-NFC-96-200-P, (December 1996).
77. Carbon Isotope Dating of Pressure Tube Corrosion. COG WP-35 Poster Presentation at Fuel Channel Meeting, Toronto, (1997).
78. Oxygen-18 Distributions in the Outside Surface Oxides of P3LSFCR pressure Tubes. COG Report COG-97-487, (March 1998).
79. Characterization of a Metal Fragment Found Lodged in a Fuel Bundle Removed from Channel T05 of Bruce ‘B’ Unit 5. OHT Report 6686-052-1998-RA-0001-R00, (September 1998).
80. The Characterization of Thick Oxide Patches on Removed Pressure Tubes: New Results for B3U11. OHT Report 6122-203-1997-TM-0001-R00, (February 1999).
81.The Quantitative Analysis of Carbon and Oxygen in Zirconium Alloys by SIMS
Depth Profiling. COG Report COG-00-057, (May 2000).
82. Testing of Potential Inhibitors for H Ingress due to Aqueous Corrosion of Zr-
2.5Nb. EPRI Technical Progress Report 1000161, (July 2000). (Co-author).
83. Titanium Flow Accelerated Corrosion Inhibitor Addition to CANDU Reactors: Design Concepts and Compatibility with Reactor Operation. COG Report COG-00-083, (July 2000). (Co-author).
84. Chemical Control of Pressure Tube Corrosion and Hydrogen Pickup: Technical Progress 1998 –’99. COG Report COG-00-080, (August 2000).

 

[~enigma~]

Do you get dizzy from all of the spin you are throwing around? I obviously was talking about John Kennedy's and my own similar view that the material should be available to the public not the peer review side of the equation.

Any intelligent person reading this should wonder about someone who makes assumptions like you are concerning whether or not someone else has a life, outside of debating on an Internet forum. Ad Hominem won't win the argument for you.

Listen idiot, JFK was not talking about scientific papers. Now if you want to be an immature brat that just plays stupid word games, go play them yourself because I am not getting involved with a moron...

 

[Gravy]

Steven E. Jones: The Galileo of our times.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

You have no evidence of that at all.

Scientific journals discourage bad scholarship. That is why no "Truth Movement" paper has ever been published. It has nothing to do with politics.

Prove me wrong.

What is your basis for saying the fact that no "Truth Movement" paper has ever been published in a scientific journal has nothing to do with politics?

I think you are the one who is lacking evidence here. You should also read an article as to why some controversial things aren't published initially.

http://amasci.com/supress1.html

Galileo's findings that Copernicus was right when it came to whether the earth was the center of the universe or not weren't allowed to be published for many years. Was it because it was bad scholarship? Or did it have to do with ignorance and essentially politics?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Listen idiot, JFK was not talking about scientific papers. Now if you want to be an immature brat that just plays stupid word games, go play them yourself because I am not getting involved with a moron...

Ok nitwit, JFK was talking about making information available for the people to discern its truth or falsehood. What don't you understand about that?

Don't hide behind the peer review as a way of keeping information out of the hands of the public. Most adults can discern whether something has validity and don't need or want it censured for them. You also fail to recognize that I said to present both sides of the argument to the public so get real.

 

[T.A.M.]

Please refrain from insulting Galileo by comparing him to the pseudoscience that is the 9/11 truth movement.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Don't hide behind the peer review as a way of keeping information out of the hands of the public. Most people can discern whether something has validity and don't need it censured for them. Get real.

most people, except the experts who have not published any 9/11 truth papers right...they are wrong...right?

No wait, let me guess, they are "in on it"?

TAM

 

[R.Mackey]

What is your basis for saying the fact that no "Truth Movement" paper has ever been published in a scientific journal has nothing to do with politics?

Because all "Truth Movement" papers appear as whitepapers on the Internet, and every one that I've read has had more holes in it than a horse-trader's mule -- excepting those where a faction of the "Truth Movement" tries to discredit other factions. That is why they aren't published. The question of politics never even enters the equation.

The "Space Beams are Nonsense" whitepapers and Gregory Urich's mass calculation paper are examples of those that are not nonsense, but they don't contest the NIST report, and as such are not actually "Truth Movement" papers.

I think you are the one who is lacking evidence here. You should also read an article as to why some controversial things aren't published initially.

http://amasci.com/supress1.html

My evidence is the "Journal" for 9/11 Studies. I am not engaging in unfounded speculation. Nice try, though.

I've participated on both sides of the peer review process, even in the same week. Even currently. Individual journals or editors sometimes have unfortunate politics, but there are so many journals out there that if your paper is correct, you can get it published. You claimed otherwise. You pulled that out of thin air.

Galileo's findings that Copernicus was right when it came to whether the earth was the center of the universe or not weren't allowed to be published for many years. Was it because it was bad scholarship? Or did it have to do with ignorance and essentially politics?

If you're attempting to claim that journals today behave similarly to those four centuries past, you've no business challenging me.

 

[Apollo20]

TAM:

"Seek ye first the political kingdom".............

 

[~enigma~]

most people, except the experts who have not published any 9/11 truth papers right...they are wrong...right?

No wait, let me guess, they are "in on it"?

TAM

So the woo are considering peer review censorship? Not like they have any bias right TAM.

 

[T.A.M.]

TAM:

"Seek ye first the political kingdom".............

Look Frank, I have defended you and your scientific work here, and will continue to do so, so long as it has been based on good science. ALL THAT I HAVE SEEN from the truth movement is based on flawed science, or flawed data, or both. I agree with Mackey, if the work is legit, based on proper data and science, it will get published...maybe not everywhere, but somewhere.

I am aware there is a degree of politics everywhere, peer review, publishing in general, within the the scientific community.

So the woo are considering peer review censorship? Not like they have any bias right TAM.

They consider peer review censorship BECAUSE they have not been able to utilize it. If one of them, by some freakish chance, were to ever get an article published in a peer reviewed journal, they would be praising peer review as if it were next to an "ok from God".

TAM

 

[William Rea]

...see below.



Are you saying that independent verification AFTER publication means more than independent verification BEFORE publication?

Tell me what independent verification happens before publication?

 

[William Rea]

I hope you will excuse me William but this should be said. Yes, verification after publication is a much more stringent test of the merits of a work and therefore means a lot more.

Excusing not required, thanks for the intervention.

It's nice to read a post from someone who displays intelligence and actually thinks before they press submit rather than posting erratically in the belief they have a chance to "get one over" on me.

 

[~enigma~]

They consider peer review censorship BECAUSE they have not been able to utilize it. If one of them, by some freakish chance, were to ever get an article published in a peer reviewed journal, they would be praising peer review as if it were next to an "ok from God".

Well I think this would be a good point to post this...

No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity.

 

[William Rea]

Do you get dizzy from all of the spin you are throwing around? I obviously was talking about John Kennedy's and my own similar view that the material should be available to the public not the peer review side of the equation.

Any intelligent person reading this should wonder about someone who makes assumptions like you are concerning whether or not someone else has a life, outside of debating on an Internet forum. Ad Hominem won't win the argument for you.

It's not an Ad Hom, they don't exist in JREFland.

 

[T.A.M.]

Excusing not required, thanks for the intervention.

It's nice to read a post from someone who displays intelligence and actually thinks before they press submit rather than posting erratically in the belief they have a chance to "get one over" on me.

There are lots of us here who are INTELLIGENT, but may not agree with you on certain things...

TAM

 

[Apollo20]

Look TAM, I will not defend you and your work here, and will continue not to support you, so long as your position here is based on your lack of appreciation of the REALPOLITIK of scientific publishing.

 

[~enigma~]

Look TAM, I will not defend you and your work here, and will continue not to support you, so long as your position here is based on your lack of appreciation of the REALPOLITIK of scientific publishing.

Is this irony?

 

[William Rea]

There are lots of us here who are INTELLIGENT, but may not agree with you on certain things...

TAM

"Lots" is an exaggeration in terms of intelligent, I can count them on one hand. I will concede however that "lots" of people disagree with me.

I do try to avoid lumping the JREFers together to use the less intelligent ones as material to carry out Ad Homs against the overall arguments (as per JREFers and the St***ies).

 

[William Rea]

Look TAM, I will not defend you and your work here, and will continue not to support you, so long as your position here is based on your lack of appreciation of the REALPOLITIK of scientific publishing.

It is a scientifically proven fact that 100% of 911 related papers published are devoid of politics.