<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More cracks in the &#8220;warming is humans&#8217; fault&#8221; consensus</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bookwormroom.com/2007/09/14/more-cracks-in-the-warming-is-humans-fault-consensus/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2007/09/14/more-cracks-in-the-warming-is-humans-fault-consensus/</link>
	<description>She escaped from the belly of the liberal beast</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:03:02 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Earl</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2007/09/14/more-cracks-in-the-warming-is-humans-fault-consensus/#comment-14769</link>
		<dc:creator>Earl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Sep 2007 20:43:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://proto2.webloggin.com/?p=1820#comment-14769</guid>
		<description>I'd be a lot more impressed with Avery and Singer if these stories provided some sort of link to  the "controversial study" they did.

And that "study" had better have comprehensive references to the "work of more than 500 scientists" that they say undermines the Chicken Little global warming scenarios.

Enough of the rhetoric -- let's have the actual data so we can read it, along with the conclusions drawn, and make some kind of independent judgment about which side sounds most rational.

I admit to being a skeptic - based on an early "love affair" with Paul Ehrlich - but I hate being stuck with a "fatih position" on this kind of thing.  I want to see the goods!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d be a lot more impressed with Avery and Singer if these stories provided some sort of link to  the &#8220;controversial study&#8221; they did.</p>
<p>And that &#8220;study&#8221; had better have comprehensive references to the &#8220;work of more than 500 scientists&#8221; that they say undermines the Chicken Little global warming scenarios.</p>
<p>Enough of the rhetoric &#8212; let&#8217;s have the actual data so we can read it, along with the conclusions drawn, and make some kind of independent judgment about which side sounds most rational.</p>
<p>I admit to being a skeptic - based on an early &#8220;love affair&#8221; with Paul Ehrlich - but I hate being stuck with a &#8220;fatih position&#8221; on this kind of thing.  I want to see the goods!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marguerite</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2007/09/14/more-cracks-in-the-warming-is-humans-fault-consensus/#comment-14770</link>
		<dc:creator>Marguerite</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 20:07:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://proto2.webloggin.com/?p=1820#comment-14770</guid>
		<description>Drilling in Alaska and off our own shores is such an obvious fix to the reliance on oil from dictatorships.  When common sense trumps the political correct (and deadly) nonesense of the left we will not be in the position of funding our own destruction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Drilling in Alaska and off our own shores is such an obvious fix to the reliance on oil from dictatorships.  When common sense trumps the political correct (and deadly) nonesense of the left we will not be in the position of funding our own destruction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
