<?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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What&#8217;s the evidence?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/01/whats-the-evidence/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/01/whats-the-evidence/</link>
	<description>Taking the heat out of global warming</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 06:08:07 +1200</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/01/whats-the-evidence/comment-page-1/#comment-21084</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:42:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/?p=3061#comment-21084</guid>
		<description>Nice summary.

You might have seen &lt;a href=&quot;http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/28/new-paper-in-nature-on-co2-amplification-its-less-than-we-thought/ rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;WattsUpWithThat&lt;/a&gt; commenting about a paper in Nature. It suggests that increased temperature raises the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide at a rate at least 50% and perhaps as little as 10% of what was previously accepted.

Results like these, casting very strong doubt on the science of global warming, seem to be accelerating in the last month.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice summary.</p>
<p>You might have seen <a href="http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/28/new-paper-in-nature-on-co2-amplification-its-less-than-we-thought/ rel="nofollow">WattsUpWithThat</a> commenting about a paper in Nature. It suggests that increased temperature raises the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide at a rate at least 50% and perhaps as little as 10% of what was previously accepted.</p>
<p>Results like these, casting very strong doubt on the science of global warming, seem to be accelerating in the last month.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Brill</title>
		<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/01/whats-the-evidence/comment-page-1/#comment-21034</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Brill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:27:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/?p=3061#comment-21034</guid>
		<description>The key issue is whether the (alleged) warming trend is caused by humans. Essentially, this defines the question as -  &quot;is CO2 from burning fossil fuels the dominant driver of recent warming?&quot; 

The first riposte is that &quot;recent warming&quot; is confined to a narrow 20-year period in 1979-98, and that the majority of years in the last century were cooler than the preceding year.

As regards the warming that did occur, there are many scientific hypotheses. These include normal fluctuations, solar winds, reduced cloud cover, fossil fuels, periodical oscillations, ocean currents, natural cycles,etc. It is almost impossible to prove a negative, and the onus of proof must lie on the party alleging any particular cause.

The public sector scientists advocating for fossil fuels offer no proofs.Their argument is that any warming must be sheeted home to CO2 because they can&#039;t prove it is anything else, and CO2 is the default solution. This is a non-case. It can&#039;t fly unless there are good reasons why CO2 has to be the default answer - and no such reasons are offered.

If it is not proven that CO2 is the culprit, then the future temperature projections (which are based on CO2) and the contended &#039;tipping points, and the feared catastrophes , can all be safely ignored.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The key issue is whether the (alleged) warming trend is caused by humans. Essentially, this defines the question as &#8211;  &#8220;is CO2 from burning fossil fuels the dominant driver of recent warming?&#8221; </p>
<p>The first riposte is that &#8220;recent warming&#8221; is confined to a narrow 20-year period in 1979-98, and that the majority of years in the last century were cooler than the preceding year.</p>
<p>As regards the warming that did occur, there are many scientific hypotheses. These include normal fluctuations, solar winds, reduced cloud cover, fossil fuels, periodical oscillations, ocean currents, natural cycles,etc. It is almost impossible to prove a negative, and the onus of proof must lie on the party alleging any particular cause.</p>
<p>The public sector scientists advocating for fossil fuels offer no proofs.Their argument is that any warming must be sheeted home to CO2 because they can&#8217;t prove it is anything else, and CO2 is the default solution. This is a non-case. It can&#8217;t fly unless there are good reasons why CO2 has to be the default answer &#8211; and no such reasons are offered.</p>
<p>If it is not proven that CO2 is the culprit, then the future temperature projections (which are based on CO2) and the contended &#8216;tipping points, and the feared catastrophes , can all be safely ignored.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geof</title>
		<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/01/whats-the-evidence/comment-page-1/#comment-20970</link>
		<dc:creator>Geof</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:11:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/?p=3061#comment-20970</guid>
		<description>Great Blog!

There might be global warming or cooling but the important issue is whether we, as a human race, can do anything about it.

There are a host of porkies and not very much truth barraging us everyday so its difficult to know what to believe.

I think I have simplified the issue in an entertaining way on my blog which includes discussion on the CO2 issue and climategate.

http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

Please feel welcome to visit and leave a comment.

Cheers

Roger</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great Blog!</p>
<p>There might be global warming or cooling but the important issue is whether we, as a human race, can do anything about it.</p>
<p>There are a host of porkies and not very much truth barraging us everyday so its difficult to know what to believe.</p>
<p>I think I have simplified the issue in an entertaining way on my blog which includes discussion on the CO2 issue and climategate.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com</a></p>
<p>Please feel welcome to visit and leave a comment.</p>
<p>Cheers</p>
<p>Roger</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
