It isn't well respected. It's the same journal where Fleischmann and Pons went to ruin their careers.
And you still can't show where your paper has been cited since 1993.
Actually, Pons/Fleischmann's peer-reviewed article in JEAC has never been refuted. A lot of smoke has been thrown up by you and your fellow skeptopaths, but when one traces through the real science, P/F have refuted every criticism.
"And you still can't show where your paper has been cited since 1993."
WHY do you keep dragging this argument up?? It has nothing whatsoever to do with the validity of the science. WHY don't you address the supposed errors/mistakes in the paper itself?? My guess is because you simply can't, and are forced to fall back on specious arguments of this sort.
And that sort of tactic is the absolute rule when any of your fellow skeptopaths show up. Cite any actual experimental evidence, and they run like vampires when they smell garlic.
Your actions make Rossi look like a pillar of veracity.