<?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: 68% of Republicans Not At All Concerned About Climate Change</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republicans-not-at-all-concerned-about-climate-change/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republicans-not-at-all-concerned-about-climate-change/</link>
	<description>The Politics of Energy and the Environment</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 10:41:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Welcome to the New GOP &#124; God Discussion</title>
		<link>http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republicans-not-at-all-concerned-about-climate-change/comment-page-2/#comment-7114</link>
		<dc:creator>Welcome to the New GOP &#124; God Discussion</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 06:47:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecopolitology.org/?p=3132#comment-7114</guid>
		<description>[...] of scientists, but it points out some other interesting facts:60% of Republicans are creationists.68% of Republicans are not at all concerned about Climate Change.23% of Republicans believe in natural [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of scientists, but it points out some other interesting facts:60% of Republicans are creationists.68% of Republicans are not at all concerned about Climate Change.23% of Republicans believe in natural [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave MingChang</title>
		<link>http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republicans-not-at-all-concerned-about-climate-change/comment-page-1/#comment-5840</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave MingChang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 18:29:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecopolitology.org/?p=3132#comment-5840</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re 50% correct. The sun does add thermal energy but you also need greenhouse gases for a stable atmosphere. Too little gas and you have no stable temperature like the moon. Too much gas and you have a planet like venus.

Did you even stop to consider how many sources of heat are around you right now? Every single electronic device generates heat. Every car, air conditioner, computer, cell phone, and plane not to mention the power plants that supply the electricity. Name one human invention that reduces temperature more than the total heat it uses to reduce that temperature (A/Cs give off more heat than cold air they produce). Where exactly do you think all this extra heat magically disappears to? What event would you physically have to see to say there is human-contributed global warming? Imagine an event (fictional) and describe to us what that would be; some event that would make you say &quot;yes this particular case does indicate human-contributed global warming&quot;.

Assuming that it&#039;s all the sun&#039;s fault, your proposed solution is to do nothing? The puzzles me because every other instance of nature imposing it&#039;s will upon mankind has been met with technological changes. Rivers flood do we say &quot;oh well that&#039;s nature&quot;? no, we build dams. Hurricanes, tornadoes, and earthquakes destroy lives and property do we say &quot;oh well&quot;? no, we impose building regulations and restrictions. Escape routes and seismic warning for volcanic activity. You just want to do nothing?

Adding exclamation points to every sentence does not turn them into facts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re 50% correct. The sun does add thermal energy but you also need greenhouse gases for a stable atmosphere. Too little gas and you have no stable temperature like the moon. Too much gas and you have a planet like venus.</p>
<p>Did you even stop to consider how many sources of heat are around you right now? Every single electronic device generates heat. Every car, air conditioner, computer, cell phone, and plane not to mention the power plants that supply the electricity. Name one human invention that reduces temperature more than the total heat it uses to reduce that temperature (A/Cs give off more heat than cold air they produce). Where exactly do you think all this extra heat magically disappears to? What event would you physically have to see to say there is human-contributed global warming? Imagine an event (fictional) and describe to us what that would be; some event that would make you say &#8220;yes this particular case does indicate human-contributed global warming&#8221;.</p>
<p>Assuming that it&#8217;s all the sun&#8217;s fault, your proposed solution is to do nothing? The puzzles me because every other instance of nature imposing it&#8217;s will upon mankind has been met with technological changes. Rivers flood do we say &#8220;oh well that&#8217;s nature&#8221;? no, we build dams. Hurricanes, tornadoes, and earthquakes destroy lives and property do we say &#8220;oh well&#8221;? no, we impose building regulations and restrictions. Escape routes and seismic warning for volcanic activity. You just want to do nothing?</p>
<p>Adding exclamation points to every sentence does not turn them into facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ?Who is the Real Terrorist &#171; Talkhaba</title>
		<link>http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republicans-not-at-all-concerned-about-climate-change/comment-page-1/#comment-5269</link>
		<dc:creator>?Who is the Real Terrorist &#171; Talkhaba</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 13:15:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecopolitology.org/?p=3132#comment-5269</guid>
		<description>[...] 68% of Republicans are not at all concerned about Climate Change [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 68% of Republicans are not at all concerned about Climate Change [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TERRORISM, ALWAYS SUSPECT A &#8220;FALSE FLAG&#8221; FIRST &#171; Therearenosunglasses&#8217;s Weblog</title>
		<link>http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republicans-not-at-all-concerned-about-climate-change/comment-page-1/#comment-5256</link>
		<dc:creator>TERRORISM, ALWAYS SUSPECT A &#8220;FALSE FLAG&#8221; FIRST &#171; Therearenosunglasses&#8217;s Weblog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecopolitology.org/?p=3132#comment-5256</guid>
		<description>[...] 68% of Republicans are not at all concerned about Climate Change [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 68% of Republicans are not at all concerned about Climate Change [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GORDON DUFF: TERRORISM, ALWAYS SUSPECT A “FALSE FLAG” FIRST &#8211; Dark Politricks</title>
		<link>http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republicans-not-at-all-concerned-about-climate-change/comment-page-1/#comment-5250</link>
		<dc:creator>GORDON DUFF: TERRORISM, ALWAYS SUSPECT A “FALSE FLAG” FIRST &#8211; Dark Politricks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:21:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecopolitology.org/?p=3132#comment-5250</guid>
		<description>[...] 68% of Republicans are not at all concerned about Climate Changehttp://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republic &#8230; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 68% of Republicans are not at all concerned about Climate Changehttp://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republic &#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lucio Pogozelski</title>
		<link>http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republicans-not-at-all-concerned-about-climate-change/comment-page-1/#comment-4958</link>
		<dc:creator>Lucio Pogozelski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 22:21:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecopolitology.org/?p=3132#comment-4958</guid>
		<description>Love your blog,  it&#039;s all so pretty.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Love your blog,  it&#8217;s all so pretty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy B. Hurst</title>
		<link>http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/15/68-of-republicans-not-at-all-concerned-about-climate-change/comment-page-1/#comment-4306</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy B. Hurst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecopolitology.org/?p=3132#comment-4306</guid>
		<description>likwidshoe:

Satellite temperature readings show no warming? Try running your numbers by NOAA&#039;s that &lt;a href=&quot;http://ecopolitology.org/2010/02/16/january-was-the-fourth-warmest-on-record-period/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;definitely do show warming&lt;/a&gt;.  

And I&#039;m not even sure what/who you are referring to when you write, &quot;AGW religionists lie too boldly.&quot; I&#039;m trying to see how the comment is relevant to the post an I&#039;m having some trouble doing so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>likwidshoe:</p>
<p>Satellite temperature readings show no warming? Try running your numbers by NOAA&#8217;s that <a href="http://ecopolitology.org/2010/02/16/january-was-the-fourth-warmest-on-record-period/" rel="nofollow">definitely do show warming</a>.  </p>
<p>And I&#8217;m not even sure what/who you are referring to when you write, &#8220;AGW religionists lie too boldly.&#8221; I&#8217;m trying to see how the comment is relevant to the post an I&#8217;m having some trouble doing so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

