<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Best Climate Book Yet</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rustypritchard.com/2009/12/02/the-best-climate-book-yet/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rustypritchard.com/2009/12/02/the-best-climate-book-yet/</link>
	<description>Creation, ecology and economics, families and communities</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 23:38:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rustypritchard</title>
		<link>http://rustypritchard.com/2009/12/02/the-best-climate-book-yet/#comment-68</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rustypritchard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 17:48:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rustypritchard.com/?p=157#comment-68</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Larry--I should write something about &quot;Climate Gate&quot;. Lord knows I&#039;ve been reading enough about it. It&#039;s not a tempest in a teapot. Climate has been so politicized for so long, and climate scientists so fed up with the politicization, that they start behaving in unscientific ways. But as far as I can tell no conclusion about the robust climate science is threatened by these revelations. But there needs to be much more transparency in the conduct of science, it now appears. What do you think?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Larry&#8211;I should write something about &#8220;Climate Gate&#8221;. Lord knows I&#8217;ve been reading enough about it. It&#8217;s not a tempest in a teapot. Climate has been so politicized for so long, and climate scientists so fed up with the politicization, that they start behaving in unscientific ways. But as far as I can tell no conclusion about the robust climate science is threatened by these revelations. But there needs to be much more transparency in the conduct of science, it now appears. What do you think?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry</title>
		<link>http://rustypritchard.com/2009/12/02/the-best-climate-book-yet/#comment-65</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Larry]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:08:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rustypritchard.com/?p=157#comment-65</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great post, as usual. Just wondering if you&#039;ll be blogging your thots &amp; concerns (spin-free, of course) about the recent revelations from the University of East Anglia? Is it a tempest in a teapot that doesn&#039;t affect anything from a substantive standpoint or is it cause for genuine concern as far as climatological data/conclusions goes?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post, as usual. Just wondering if you&#8217;ll be blogging your thots &amp; concerns (spin-free, of course) about the recent revelations from the University of East Anglia? Is it a tempest in a teapot that doesn&#8217;t affect anything from a substantive standpoint or is it cause for genuine concern as far as climatological data/conclusions goes?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

