<?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: Climate Change: Basic Greenhouse Equations &#8220;Totally Wrong&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2008/03/07/climate-change-basic-greenhouse-equations-totally-wrong/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2008/03/07/climate-change-basic-greenhouse-equations-totally-wrong/</link>
	<description>Conservative group weblog that publishes daily commentary on political events and topics affecting Canada, the United States and the world.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:57:22 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Abattoir</title>
		<link>http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2008/03/07/climate-change-basic-greenhouse-equations-totally-wrong/#comment-179922</link>
		<dc:creator>Abattoir</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:53:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2008/03/07/climate-change-basic-greenhouse-equations-totally-wrong/#comment-179922</guid>
		<description>Oh no. A scientist in Hungary changed his mind. Let's scrap the whole thing now.

Seriously? Global conspiracy theories? History has shown us that game-changing theories eventually will win out on their own merits, whether or not other interests are at stake.

If there is something of real merit to this theory, we will see in time. In the meantime, I'm going to go with the status quo, and continue to support GHG-reduction measures.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh no. A scientist in Hungary changed his mind. Let&#8217;s scrap the whole thing now.</p>
<p>Seriously? Global conspiracy theories? History has shown us that game-changing theories eventually will win out on their own merits, whether or not other interests are at stake.</p>
<p>If there is something of real merit to this theory, we will see in time. In the meantime, I&#8217;m going to go with the status quo, and continue to support GHG-reduction measures.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott from Winnipeg</title>
		<link>http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2008/03/07/climate-change-basic-greenhouse-equations-totally-wrong/#comment-179749</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott from Winnipeg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2008 05:10:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2008/03/07/climate-change-basic-greenhouse-equations-totally-wrong/#comment-179749</guid>
		<description>I'd read the paper cited if I were you... and the opinion of the scientist who authored it.

From the conclusion of the paper:

"Finally, as the present analysis rests on a simple single compartment energy balance model, the question must inevitably arise whether the rather obdurate climate system might be amenable to determination of its key properties through empirical analysis based on such a simple model. In response to that question it might have to be said that it remains to be seen. In this context it is hoped that the present study might stimulate further work along these lines with more complex models."

And of and from Swartz, the author:

"I'm very concerned about the world my grandchildren will live in," said Mr. Schwartz, who is currently studying climate change. "There could be an increase of four to eight degrees in the next century, and that's huge. The last time there was a five-degree Celsius decrease was the last ice age."

"A report on Fox News introduced the study by saying, "Skeptics are increasingly certain the [global warming] scare is vastly overblown," and other news sources said Mr. Schwartz's study debunked the notion that global warming is a force with which humanity needs to contend.

This, he said, was not what he was trying to prove at all. Global warming is a very real reality, he said, and his study spells that out -- though in a different manner than those carried out by other scientists and organizations."

So, can we focus again on addressing the very real issue of AGW ?  

LOL, just kidding. Praise be to God.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d read the paper cited if I were you&#8230; and the opinion of the scientist who authored it.</p>
<p>From the conclusion of the paper:</p>
<p>&#8220;Finally, as the present analysis rests on a simple single compartment energy balance model, the question must inevitably arise whether the rather obdurate climate system might be amenable to determination of its key properties through empirical analysis based on such a simple model. In response to that question it might have to be said that it remains to be seen. In this context it is hoped that the present study might stimulate further work along these lines with more complex models.&#8221;</p>
<p>And of and from Swartz, the author:</p>
<p>&#8220;I&#8217;m very concerned about the world my grandchildren will live in,&#8221; said Mr. Schwartz, who is currently studying climate change. &#8220;There could be an increase of four to eight degrees in the next century, and that&#8217;s huge. The last time there was a five-degree Celsius decrease was the last ice age.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;A report on Fox News introduced the study by saying, &#8220;Skeptics are increasingly certain the [global warming] scare is vastly overblown,&#8221; and other news sources said Mr. Schwartz&#8217;s study debunked the notion that global warming is a force with which humanity needs to contend.</p>
<p>This, he said, was not what he was trying to prove at all. Global warming is a very real reality, he said, and his study spells that out &#8212; though in a different manner than those carried out by other scientists and organizations.&#8221;</p>
<p>So, can we focus again on addressing the very real issue of AGW ?  </p>
<p>LOL, just kidding. Praise be to God.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gerry</title>
		<link>http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2008/03/07/climate-change-basic-greenhouse-equations-totally-wrong/#comment-179739</link>
		<dc:creator>gerry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:06:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2008/03/07/climate-change-basic-greenhouse-equations-totally-wrong/#comment-179739</guid>
		<description>You would not believe the ads on your website given the content.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You would not believe the ads on your website given the content.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
