<?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: Why the EPA is Wrong about Recent Warming</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/</link>
	<description>A free-market energy blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 18:38:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: IPCC gate Du Jour – Antarctic Sea Ice Increase Underestimated by 50% &#8211; Dark Politricks</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-9226</link>
		<dc:creator>IPCC gate Du Jour – Antarctic Sea Ice Increase Underestimated by 50% &#8211; Dark Politricks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Apr 2010 23:43:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-9226</guid>
		<description>[...] is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] concentrations” was shown to be wrong. This argument isn’t included in the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] concentrations” was shown to be wrong. This argument isn’t included in the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cor de Laater</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-8457</link>
		<dc:creator>Cor de Laater</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:13:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-8457</guid>
		<description>SBVOR

Thank&#039;s for the comment.
I fear &quot;precession&quot; has a bigger impact on our climat changes than estimated. This is an element on the long term, were humans have no experience.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SBVOR</p>
<p>Thank&#8217;s for the comment.<br />
I fear &#8220;precession&#8221; has a bigger impact on our climat changes than estimated. This is an element on the long term, were humans have no experience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SBVOR</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-8187</link>
		<dc:creator>SBVOR</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:11:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-8187</guid>
		<description>Cor de Laater (03.12.10 at 6:13 am),

&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Orbital_variations&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Precession alone&lt;/a&gt; is powerful enough to drive a 20,000 year cycle wherein the Sahara alternates between a lush, wet land with three giant interconnected lakes and the desert we see today.

Precession, of course, is but one of three orbital eccentricities collectively known as &lt;a href=&quot;http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/Paleoclimatology_Evidence/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Milankovitch cycles&lt;/a&gt;. These cycles are clearly the primary drivers of climate change on the scale of roughly 100,000 years, 40,000 years and 20,000 years.

But, many make the mistake of thinking about these cycles as being binary in nature. These cycles play out on a continuum and the interplay of these cycles is constantly altering our climate.

I hope that helped.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2009/10/climate-change-science-overview.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Click here&lt;/a&gt; for some more basic climate change science.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cor de Laater (03.12.10 at 6:13 am),</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Orbital_variations" rel="nofollow">Precession alone</a> is powerful enough to drive a 20,000 year cycle wherein the Sahara alternates between a lush, wet land with three giant interconnected lakes and the desert we see today.</p>
<p>Precession, of course, is but one of three orbital eccentricities collectively known as <a href="http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/Paleoclimatology_Evidence/" rel="nofollow">Milankovitch cycles</a>. These cycles are clearly the primary drivers of climate change on the scale of roughly 100,000 years, 40,000 years and 20,000 years.</p>
<p>But, many make the mistake of thinking about these cycles as being binary in nature. These cycles play out on a continuum and the interplay of these cycles is constantly altering our climate.</p>
<p>I hope that helped.</p>
<p><a href="http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2009/10/climate-change-science-overview.html" rel="nofollow">Click here</a> for some more basic climate change science.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cor de Laater</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-8132</link>
		<dc:creator>Cor de Laater</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:26:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-8132</guid>
		<description>&quot;presession&quot; must be &quot;precession&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;presession&#8221; must be &#8220;precession&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cor de Laater</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-7361</link>
		<dc:creator>Cor de Laater</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 11:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-7361</guid>
		<description>Concerning the global climate change;

Has anybody ever thought about the &quot;presession&quot; &lt;em&gt;[?? ed note&lt;/em&gt;] of the earth&#039;s axis? It changes very slowly and must have an inpact on the earth&#039;s global temperature in the very long term.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Concerning the global climate change;</p>
<p>Has anybody ever thought about the &#8220;presession&#8221; <em>[?? ed note</em>] of the earth&#8217;s axis? It changes very slowly and must have an inpact on the earth&#8217;s global temperature in the very long term.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Man NOT to blame! &#171; TWAWKI</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-6968</link>
		<dc:creator>Man NOT to blame! &#171; TWAWKI</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:01:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-6968</guid>
		<description>[...] causes warming then most of it is not likely caused by man. See here at World Climate Report and Master Resource. Then when you realise the warming stopped 12 &#8211; 15 years ago and the warming coincided with a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] causes warming then most of it is not likely caused by man. See here at World Climate Report and Master Resource. Then when you realise the warming stopped 12 &#8211; 15 years ago and the warming coincided with a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: IPCC Must Go!. Part 2-Global Temperature Manipulation &#171; Climate Change Sanity</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-5396</link>
		<dc:creator>IPCC Must Go!. Part 2-Global Temperature Manipulation &#171; Climate Change Sanity</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 00:40:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-5396</guid>
		<description>[...] WHY THE EPA IS WRONG ABOUT RECENT WARMING. See here. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] WHY THE EPA IS WRONG ABOUT RECENT WARMING. See here. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Roundup: IPCC Authors Now Admitting Fault &#8211; No Warming Since 1995 &#8211; Sea Levels Not Rising &#171; The IUSB Vision Weblog</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-4740</link>
		<dc:creator>The Roundup: IPCC Authors Now Admitting Fault &#8211; No Warming Since 1995 &#8211; Sea Levels Not Rising &#171; The IUSB Vision Weblog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 05:06:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-4740</guid>
		<description>[...] is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] concentrations” was shown to be wrong. This argument isn’t included in the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] concentrations” was shown to be wrong. This argument isn’t included in the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Another IPCC Error: Antarctic Sea Ice Increase Underestimated by 50% &#171; climategate.tv</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-4538</link>
		<dc:creator>Another IPCC Error: Antarctic Sea Ice Increase Underestimated by 50% &#171; climategate.tv</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 21:31:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-4538</guid>
		<description>[...] is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] concentrations” was shown to be wrong. This argument isn’t included in the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] concentrations” was shown to be wrong. This argument isn’t included in the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cknappenberger</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-4519</link>
		<dc:creator>cknappenberger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:38:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.masterresource.org/?p=7331#comment-4519</guid>
		<description>Re:#28,

Sure enough!  Thanks, David. It is fixed now.

-Chip</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re:#28,</p>
<p>Sure enough!  Thanks, David. It is fixed now.</p>
<p>-Chip</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
