<?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: Hansen refuses to explain why he does it</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/04/hansen-refuses-to-explain/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/04/hansen-refuses-to-explain/</link>
	<description>Taking the heat out of global warming</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:29:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Climate Conversation Group &#187; A swelling debate &#8212; Chris has questions</title>
		<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/04/hansen-refuses-to-explain/comment-page-1/#comment-23710</link>
		<dc:creator>Climate Conversation Group &#187; A swelling debate &#8212; Chris has questions</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Aug 2010 03:34:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/?p=5228#comment-23710</guid>
		<description>[...] March the Climate Conversation Group sent him a message: &#8220;There is a very obvious question raised by that discussion. We are interested to know why, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] March the Climate Conversation Group sent him a message: &#8220;There is a very obvious question raised by that discussion. We are interested to know why, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/04/hansen-refuses-to-explain/comment-page-1/#comment-22147</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 May 2010 09:36:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/?p=5228#comment-22147</guid>
		<description>Ah, I see what has happened; you&#039;ve clicked on a category. &quot;Ocean acidification&quot; is a category, not a thread. It lists two posts, either of which you&#039;ll find you can comment on. Hope that helps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, I see what has happened; you&#8217;ve clicked on a category. &#8220;Ocean acidification&#8221; is a category, not a thread. It lists two posts, either of which you&#8217;ll find you can comment on. Hope that helps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CEKay</title>
		<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/04/hansen-refuses-to-explain/comment-page-1/#comment-22146</link>
		<dc:creator>CEKay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 May 2010 09:31:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/?p=5228#comment-22146</guid>
		<description>Thread at http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/category/ocean-acidification - no place to add a post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thread at <a href="http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/category/ocean-acidification" rel="nofollow">http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/category/ocean-acidification</a> &#8211; no place to add a post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/04/hansen-refuses-to-explain/comment-page-1/#comment-22136</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 May 2010 06:33:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/?p=5228#comment-22136</guid>
		<description>Sorry, I wasn&#039;t aware of any closed threads. The ones I&#039;ve checked are open; what&#039;s the link?

Your analysis is exactly right. You&#039;ve removed the acidic threat fears, as long as the warming continues. If you throw in the fact that the temperature response to increasing CO2 is logarithmic, so the more it increases, the less the temperature rises, then the vicious circle of outgassing causing further (dangerous) warming is also refuted. Of course, the oceans are cooling at the moment, too …

That warming just isn&#039;t a happening thing right now! Who&#039;d be a warmista?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, I wasn&#8217;t aware of any closed threads. The ones I&#8217;ve checked are open; what&#8217;s the link?</p>
<p>Your analysis is exactly right. You&#8217;ve removed the acidic threat fears, as long as the warming continues. If you throw in the fact that the temperature response to increasing CO2 is logarithmic, so the more it increases, the less the temperature rises, then the vicious circle of outgassing causing further (dangerous) warming is also refuted. Of course, the oceans are cooling at the moment, too …</p>
<p>That warming just isn&#8217;t a happening thing right now! Who&#8217;d be a warmista?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CEKay</title>
		<link>http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/04/hansen-refuses-to-explain/comment-page-1/#comment-22134</link>
		<dc:creator>CEKay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 May 2010 06:01:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/?p=5228#comment-22134</guid>
		<description>Sorry to hark back, but I note you&#039;ve closed the thread on ocean acidification.

The EPA in the US has decided this week that it is interested in storm-water runoff, because this might carry more carbon dioxide into the ocean and make the seawater less alkaline. 

So the EPA would rather see CO2 being left in the atmosphere rather than having it dissolved in the oceans. Well, this is good news, because that is what will happen if the world heats up.

The  EPA  thinks ocean heat content is increasing and, as we all know, a warmer ocean cannot hold as much CO2 as a colder ocean. The catastrophists point to an argument that warming oceans could keep out-gassing CO2 to cause even warmer oceans – in a vicious circle.

But if this happens, then we won&#039;t have to worry about the oceans becoming less alkaline, will we? People with ocean-acid phobia only need to worry about the sceptics – because they say the oceans are not warming and can therefore dissolve more CO2.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry to hark back, but I note you&#8217;ve closed the thread on ocean acidification.</p>
<p>The EPA in the US has decided this week that it is interested in storm-water runoff, because this might carry more carbon dioxide into the ocean and make the seawater less alkaline. </p>
<p>So the EPA would rather see CO2 being left in the atmosphere rather than having it dissolved in the oceans. Well, this is good news, because that is what will happen if the world heats up.</p>
<p>The  EPA  thinks ocean heat content is increasing and, as we all know, a warmer ocean cannot hold as much CO2 as a colder ocean. The catastrophists point to an argument that warming oceans could keep out-gassing CO2 to cause even warmer oceans – in a vicious circle.</p>
<p>But if this happens, then we won&#8217;t have to worry about the oceans becoming less alkaline, will we? People with ocean-acid phobia only need to worry about the sceptics – because they say the oceans are not warming and can therefore dissolve more CO2.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

