<?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: Weekend Question 3: Will This Kind of Enviro-Intimidation Grow?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/06/04/weekend-question-3-will-this-kind-of-enviro-intimidation-grow/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/06/04/weekend-question-3-will-this-kind-of-enviro-intimidation-grow/</link>
	<description>The Business End of the Blogosphere</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 03:12:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: TBlumer</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/06/04/weekend-question-3-will-this-kind-of-enviro-intimidation-grow/#comment-15209</link>
		<dc:creator>TBlumer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 14:35:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=2281#comment-15209</guid>
		<description>#1, first bullet stands, regardless of your spin.

Second bullet cuts to the heart of the objection, and the statement you quote doesn't give credibility to global warming. It merely recognizes that there is a scientific debate--So? The global warming advocates' side doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Besides, the NOAA was being polite. It's not good PR to say "these guys are nuts," even when they are.

So I disagree. My points are very relevant, and on point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#1, first bullet stands, regardless of your spin.</p>
<p>Second bullet cuts to the heart of the objection, and the statement you quote doesn&#8217;t give credibility to global warming. It merely recognizes that there is a scientific debate&#8211;So? The global warming advocates&#8217; side doesn&#8217;t stand up to scrutiny. Besides, the NOAA was being polite. It&#8217;s not good PR to say &#8220;these guys are nuts,&#8221; even when they are.</p>
<p>So I disagree. My points are very relevant, and on point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: werthog</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/06/04/weekend-question-3-will-this-kind-of-enviro-intimidation-grow/#comment-15207</link>
		<dc:creator>werthog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:44:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=2281#comment-15207</guid>
		<description>Ummm... This article says that people who claim that stronger hurricanes are caused by global warming are being canned, not that people are claiming that hurricanes cause global warming.

â€œWe recognize there is an ongoing scientific debate and will continue to support research that might identify detectable influences of global warming in hurricane frequency and/or intensity.â€
â€œThe increased activity since 1995 is due to natural fluctuations and cycles of hurricane activity,â€ he said at the time."

This would indicate that they're arguing about the cause of hurricane activity, not global warming. The questions brought up after the article are therefore irrelevant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ummm&#8230; This article says that people who claim that stronger hurricanes are caused by global warming are being canned, not that people are claiming that hurricanes cause global warming.</p>
<p>â€œWe recognize there is an ongoing scientific debate and will continue to support research that might identify detectable influences of global warming in hurricane frequency and/or intensity.â€<br />
â€œThe increased activity since 1995 is due to natural fluctuations and cycles of hurricane activity,â€ he said at the time.&#8221;</p>
<p>This would indicate that they&#8217;re arguing about the cause of hurricane activity, not global warming. The questions brought up after the article are therefore irrelevant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
