The Truth About Energy, Global Warming, and Climate Change
A new book, The Truth About Energy, Global Warming, and Climate Change: Exposing Climate Lies in an Age of Disinformation, exposes the truth behind the climate change hoax, showing how it’s a political movement aimed at eliminating capitalism by spreading alarmist drivel.
That means to “save the Earth” from global warming, the world must reduce carbon dioxide emissions by switching from hydrocarbon fuels to renewable energies.
The Truth About Energy, Global Warming, and Climate Change reveals a science-based understanding of Earth’s climate and temperature that Green New Deal proponents are trying to hide.
In this book, you will see scientifically documented evidence for many facts that the radical left denies.
Want to know the truth about how energy, temperature, and climate work? Dr. Corsi provides the answers.
Check out The Truth About Energy, Global Warming, and Climate Change—but prepare to be shocked.
Jerome R. Corsi has conducted a tour-de-force examination of peer-reviewed climate science that exposes the neo-Marxists behind today’s anti-capitalist global warming hoax.
Mr. Corsi is scheduled as a speaking guest on TNT Radio this Sunday, Aug. 7, 2022, which will be available here.
Trackback from your site.
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers,
I read: “Dr. Jerome Corsi received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in political science in 1972.” (Jerome R. Corsi | Official Publisher Page – Simon & Schuster (https://www.simonandschuster.com › authors › Jerome-…))
While the academic major “political science” has “science” in its title, it certainly is not a NATURAL PHYSICAL SCIENCE major as physics, chemistry, meteorology, climatology are.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
lloyd
| #
You miss the point. Corsi examined the effects and POLITICAL reasons behind people like Fauci. You seem to assume only a person you deem a real Scientist can have an educated opinion. You need to realize there are many of us with the ability to make logical arguments. You are turning into a one-trick pony, demanding only those people you deem as SCIENTISTS are worthy of posting an opinion. Lookup the word ARISTOCRACY. I guess that is what you want.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Lloyd and PSI Readers.
Lloyd, when you wrote “Corsi examined the effects and POLITICAL reasons behind people like Fauci” you seem to miss that this website’s title, Principlia Scientific International, is a take off on the title of NEWTON’s book THE PRINCIPIA and the historical fact that physical scientists from many nations have contributed significantly to the present knowledge which remains uncertain. That is if you understand that honest physical scientists recognize and admit that they maybe haven’t accurately observed everything that needs to be observed because IT MATTERS.
And maybe many political scientists, as you seem to be, have not read what Newton, as translated by Andrew Motte, wrote on the last page of his book. “But hitherto I have not been able to discover the cause of there properties of gravity from phenomena, and I frame no hypotheses; for whatever is not deduced from the phenomena is to be called hypothesis; and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, whether of occult qualities or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy. In this philosophy particular propositions are inferred from the phenomena, and afterwards rendered general by induction. Thus it was that the impenetrability, the mobility, and the implusive force of bodies, and the laws of motion and of gravitation, were discovered. And to us it is enough that gravity does really exist, and act according to the laws which we have explained, and abundantly serves to account for all the motions of the celestial bodies, and of our sea.”
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
And yet, since inertial mass equals gravitational mass and does not decrease with distance, gravity can never cause motion in another mass.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Herb,
Are you really questioning that which Newton wrote???
Have a good day, Jerry
Eric the Red
| #
What a load of word salad you just spewed, all of which entirely missed the point to which you supposedly responded.
And what’s with the incessant “have a good day, jerry”?
You must enjoy seeing your own name in print, which points to some kind of psychological problem.
Start learning to think and analyze first, before you mouth off. A little reflection goes a long way, JERRY.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Lloyd,
What I want is that PSI Readers are aware what Galileo RISKED his life to begin. A SCIENCE totally based upon reproducible OBSERVATIONS; not upon opinions.
Reply
Joseph Olson
| #
Science is quantitative, predictable and repeatable, anything less is SUPERSTITION. Using the scientific method does not constitute science. Dr Jordan Grant explains for you slow learners.
https://bitchute.com/video/Je9sUNu1xoPw/
Reply
Barry
| #
Jerry I think that’s the point that climate science has nothing to do with natural science it can only be solved through political science. As most of us know the agw theory is not based on any scientific fact or provable experiment.
Reply
Russ D
| #
Climate Change is a LIE………PERIOD!!!
The AGW Smoking Gun
By Gary Thompson
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2010/02/the_agw_smoking_gun.html
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Herb,
Haven’t been able to reply to your comment the usual way’ so am trying this. I wanted to ask you: Are you questioning what Newton wrote on the last page of his book?
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
herb Rosr
| #
Hi Jerry,
I’m questioning Newton’s conversion of Kepler’s law, that the energy (v^2) of an orbiting object time the distance to the energy source, gives the mass of the source instead of the energy of the source. How can mass produce both motion (gravity) and resistance to motion (inertia)?
Herb
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Herb,
In the preface to Galileo’s ‘Two New Sciences’ (1638): Louis Elzevir, the publisher of the book wrote (as translated to English by Crew and de Salvio, 1914): “Intuitive knowledge keeps pace with accurate definition.”
You ask: “How can mass produce both motion (gravity) and resistance to motion (inertia)?” How many bodies are in this system which you question?
I believe it requires two bodies; one to expert a gravitational pull on the other, and the second to resist this pull because of it inertia. However, the one which resists the gravitation pull of the other body must at the same time must exert a gravitation pull on the other whose inertia resists its gravitational pull.
The two body system which you propose might be considered the earth and the moon. However, I sure you recognize that we should not forget the sun (a third body. I have I have read that Newton wrote that this 3-body analysis could not predict a future position of the moon relative to the earth and sun because of the quite variable, even it small, influence the Jupiter’s gravitational force upon the moon. For the 4-body mathematical analysis was quantitatively impossible. Yes, I trust Newton the mathematician for I certainly do not understand calculus which Newton ‘invented’ even though I can some times use it as a tool if I define my system properly. This was when I was much younger. But as I get older I have developed the skill of observing things that do not require rigid mathematical analysis as one refers to the natural phenomena which is overlooked or even forgotten after once having been seen.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Jerry,
The gravity of the sun does not pull on the moon. If it did, since the gravitational attraction between the sunned moon would be 60% greater than the attraction between the Earth and the moon, it would pull the moon out of its orbit around the Earth.
The masses of the moon and Earth combine to form a unit and it is from the barycenter (center of gravity of the two components) that this unit orbits the sun.
Herb
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Herb,
You just wrote: “The sun’s gravity does not pollen either the moon or the Earth but on the unit formed from their combining.”
Previously you had written: “The masses of the moon and Earth combine to form a unit and it is from the barycenter (center of gravity of the two components) that this unit orbits the sun.” And I agreed with you.
However, the observed fact is that there is NO MASS (body) at the BARYCENTER. Hence, the gravity of the sun cannot pull upon the BARYCENTER.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Jerry,
Actually the barycenter for the moon and Earth is in the Earth.
You are beginning to see the absurdity of gravity being produced by mass (especially since all the masses are derived using Newton’s formula and are wrong.)
Objects do not radiate a gravitational field. There is a different force of gravity between the sun sand every object in the solar system. There is a tremendous force between Jupiter and the sun (the product of there masses) and yet Mercury is able to pass through this force with being effected. This means that the force is not coming from the sun, but since the moons of Jupiter are also able to pass through this force without being effected, it is not coming from Jupiter either.This is why people believe that 100% and 0% of the force comes from each object.
Gravity has nothing to do with mass and is a function of the energy associated with the mass and objects equalize with that energy field (Kepler’s Law) regardless of their mass..
Herb
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Herb,
You wrote: “The masses of the moon and Earth combine to form a unit and it is from the barycenter (center of gravity of the two components) that this unit orbits the sun.” This is what I understand too. But this does not preclude the observed fact that the moon is also orbiting the earth because the earth gravity prevents the moon from flying off away from its orbit (not a straight line motion) about the earth.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Jerry,
I said the sun’s gravity is not pulling on the moon. Because of its massive size the attraction between the sun and the moon would be greater than the attraction between the Earth and the moon. When the moon was between the Earth and the sun it would be pulled on harder moving it further from the Earth causing its orbit to expand. When the Earth was between the moon and the sun there would be less pulling on the moon than on the Earth causing the orbit to further expand.
The sun’s gravity does not pollen either the moon or the Earth but on the unit formed from their combining.
Herb
Reply