Listen Now: TNT Radio Hosts Principia Scientific’s ‘Dragon Slayers’
Principia Scientific International (PSI) now offers an exciting new weekly radio broadcasting service with our Australian friends, TNT Radio! Listen in real time with John O’Sullivan, Joe Olson and Joe Postma and special guests discussing topical issues from the world of science, medicine and technology. Links below.
Our first ‘Sky Dragon Slaying’ broadcast was January 23, 2022 when O’Sullivan, Olson and Postma had a terrific 90-minute discussion about the ‘Slayers’ and our 11-year mission exposing the fake science of the cornerstone of man-made global warming – the so-called greenhouse gas theory.
LISTEN TO THE FIRST SHOW HERE https://tntradio.live/shows/sky-dragon-slaying/
Our second show, January 31, 2022 was an in-depth interview with our friend and fellow ‘Slayer’ Geraint Hughes (author of the climate science book, ‘Black Dragon‘) who has performed several real world experiments which prove that there is no such mechanism in the air for carbon dioxide to trap heat or delay cooling, and thus it is impossible for CO2 to be the control knob of our planet’s climate.
LISTEN TO THE SECOND SHOW HERE:
PART ONE: https://tntradio.live/shows/sky-dragon-slaying/
PART TWO: https://tntradio.live/shows/sky-dragon-slaying/
FOR ALL LIVESTREAM SHOWS ON TNT RADIO VISIT:
https://tntradio.live/?proradio-popup=1
Future ‘Sky Dragon Slaying’ shows will cover the heated debate about the medical fraud behind the covid pandemic and ‘vaccines’, another show will be a no-holds-barred examination of the 9/11 disaster that precipitated the Gulf Wars.
Our invited guests are experts in their field and will be given ample opportunity to present their case, often in conflict with the skewed mainstream narratives that too many people accept unquestioningly.
Live broadcasts can be heard each Saturday from 11pm to 1am UTC. Follow the link below:
https://tntradio.live/shows/sky-dragon-slaying/
We hope you will join us soon!
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Andy
| #
Nice one John 🙂
Reply
John O'Sullivan
| #
cheers, Andy, Your important contribution at PSI enables this kind of project to run more efficiently.
Reply
James McGinn
| #
Our 11-year mission exposing the fake science of the cornerstone of man-made global warming – the so-called greenhouse gas theory
Global warming and CO2
https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes/Global-warming-and-CO2-e1doep6
James McGinn / Genius
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi John O’Sullivan and PSI Readers,
October 3, 2016 you posted an essay titled: A New Scientific Law and The Greenhouse Effect (https://principia-scientific.com/new-scientific-law-greenhouse-effect/) And then, November 6, 2016, you posted another essay titled: Solar Radiation Sufficient! No Greenhouse Effect of Certain Atmospheric Gases! (https://principia-scientific.com/?s=solar+Radiation+Sufficient)
I had been discouraged by the fact that these early essays and the many other essays generated so few comments. Which caused me to conclude that few PSI Readers were actually reading them. However, you (John) encouraged me by telling me that I was playing an important role at PSI. And I believed you. However (again), it now seems that you have not grasped the significance of these two essays.
I ask: Why??? I ask this because I have an answer. You seem to have had little experience as an EXPERIMENTAL SCIENTIST. Joe Olson, an engineer (I believe), likely has done engineering type experiments but I doubt if he has ever started a research project simply because it had never been done before and therefore there was only new information to be gained.
After high school I went to college with the goal to become a chemistry teacher; for I respected my chemistry and physics teacher’s knowledge. I went to graduate school because I knew I have not yet learned the practical applications of chemistry to become a good chemistry teacher. And after six years of graduate school and three years as research associate (post-doc) I found a job teaching high school physical science and elementary mathematics. Why? The SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH I had been doing had no obvious PRACTICAL APPLICATION and it did not motivate me. And during those nine years I had not really learned much about a practical knowledge of PHYSICAL SCIENCE.
So as a teacher, as I look back, I now know I made many mistakes. For, until near the end of my 20+ years of teaching chemistry, I had never read the book where and when PHYSICAL SCIENCE began; DIALOGUES CONCERNING TWO NEW SCIENCES (1638) by Galileo Galilei. This because for two centuries Galileo’s Italian language had not been available to people, like myself, who could only read the English language.
Joe Postma is an astronomer, a SCIENTIST. However, he is not an EXPERIMENTAL ASTRONOMER like Tycho Brahe, a contemporary of Galileo, was. Brahe designed LARGE astronomical instruments which allowed him to make precise, naked-eye, quantitative measurements of the. positions of these stars during many, many nights when the sky was clear However, I question if either of you (John, Joe O and Joe P) have pondered the fact that Tycho had no idea who was going to ANALYZE his DATA. Joe P attempts to analyze the Astronomical observations and measurements which others have made as we now know that Johannes Kepler did with Brahe’s data and discovered the first three mathematical (quantitative) SCIENTIFIC LAWS.
If anyone wants to LEARN, even a little bit, about PHYSICAL SCIENCES, one best start at their beginnings!!!
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Joseph Olson
| #
I was in daily contact with Dr Nasif Nahle as he recreated the Robert Woods 1909 greenhouse radiation experiment and his 30 day back radiation measurements. I have read thousands of research papers, attended hundreds of technical seminars. Engineering is APPLIED science with civil and criminal penalties for failure. Do not denigrate Engineers.
Reply
James McGinn
| #
Joe Olson:
Engineering is APPLIED science with civil and criminal penalties for failure. Do not denigrate Engineers.
James McGinn:
I don’t think anybody is trying to denigrate anybody. I agree that engineering is applied science. Moreover, I would agree that you yourself are especially proficient in this regard–you may very well be the most proficient in the world as regards this subject matter. But when it comes to science you are just an engineer and this is apparent with respect to what you consider and what you will not and would never consider.
Engineers have a limited field of view. Engineers try to fit their thinking within the box of all that has been “proven” true. When this fails they/you become defensive.
Scientist have a bigger box. Scientist consider all that has not been proven false.
This is the reason engineers can never make discoveries. The box they build is so strong and so well engineered that they/you can never escape it.
Deep Dishonesty About Water Has Rendered Meteorology Feckless
James McGinn / Genius
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Joseph,
I have only one question. Why is it you seem to ignore my two essays?
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
James McGinn
| #
JO
Engineering is APPLIED science with civil and criminal penalties for failure. Do not denigrate Engineers.
JMcG
Invariably engineers make poor scientists because they carry this delusion that science in the past achieved some kind of ideal and now all we need to do is run the numbers and arrive at the right answer.
The Achille’s heel of engineers when they get involved in science can be paraphrased:
The biggest obstacle to progress in science isn’t what we don’t know. It’s what we think we know that isn’t quite so.
Did you hear the one about the guy that goes to buy a suit?
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=16319
James McGinn / Genius
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi James,
Thank you! Thank you! For bringing us PSI Readers to this article and these comments which are more than a month old. We certainly are buds despite our difference involving the critically important SCIENCE of WATER. We will have tp wait to see if Joseph Olson, an engineer, well respond to your comments. Or if he will respond to my recent comment about Mathematics and Technology and Science.
Have a good day buddy, Jerry
Reply
James McGinn
| #
There is no heat engine in the sky. Sorry Willis
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/YLbJBmE-0bY/m/Gi0VgYAeAwAJ
James McGinn / Genius
Reply
T. C. Clark
| #
James the Genius should take a few minutes to explain the Double Slit Experiment…a Nobel awaits your proof explanation.
Reply
James McGinn
| #
TCC:
explain the Double Slit Experiment…
JMcG:
Not in my wheelhouse. If I ever win the Nobel prize it will, most likely, be in regard to my discovery that H2O molecules are solvents for their own polarity:
Solving Tornadoes
James McGinn / Genius
Reply
T. C. Clark
| #
James the Genius: “Scientist consider all that has not been proven false” The Double Slit and Entanglement …Quantum physics is so interesting that it is hard to believe any scientist would just ignore the subject….I guess all scientists…like all engineers…are not all alike, eh?
Reply
James McGinn
| #
Well, if you insist. I have had some thoughts. The evidence does suggest that to me that photons may not be discreet entities but packets or conglomerates of smaller entities. This is as far as I’ve gotten on this subject–not my wheelhouse. You might consider a guy on YouTube named DraftScience. He is the person to whom from wlhich I obtained this understanding.
Hope this helps.
James McGinn / Genius
Reply
T. C. Clark
| #
Well, just search U-toob and you get many hits for double slit experiment…I prefer the Fermilab ones….quantum erasure one in particular. A magician seemingly pulls playing cards out of thin air…but we know his tricks….in the case of the double slit, we don’t know yet…just speculations.
Reply