<?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: Conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mind.ofdan.ca/?feed=rss2&#038;p=1361" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mind.ofdan.ca/?p=1361</link>
	<description>It&#039;s turtles all the way down</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 09:05:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Episode 1: show notes — Irregular Climate</title>
		<link>http://mind.ofdan.ca/?p=1361#comment-72949</link>
		<dc:creator>Episode 1: show notes — Irregular Climate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 May 2010 22:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scruffydan.com/blog/?p=1361#comment-72949</guid>
		<description>[...] with the accepted orthodoxy, despite the fact that there is no data to support such claims and plenty of data tosupport the exact opposite, they purposely and dishonestly misrepresent the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] with the accepted orthodoxy, despite the fact that there is no data to support such claims and plenty of data tosupport the exact opposite, they purposely and dishonestly misrepresent the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ScruffyDan</title>
		<link>http://mind.ofdan.ca/?p=1361#comment-70297</link>
		<dc:creator>ScruffyDan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scruffydan.com/blog/?p=1361#comment-70297</guid>
		<description>The most thorough literature review on the subject is definitely the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ipcc.ch/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;IPCC AR4&lt;/a&gt;. The &lt;a href=&quot;http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch09.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;chapter&lt;/a&gt; on understanding and attributing climate change is perhaps the most relevant. If your friend doesn&#039;t trust the IPCC, then point him to the cited reference section, so he can verify the claims made by the IPCC himself.

I might also recommend &lt;a href=&quot;?p=2095&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;my post&lt;/a&gt; on why I accept the consensus, and the many links I have included in my &lt;a href=&quot;?page_id=1116&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;comment policy&lt;/a&gt;, for a more layperson view of the science.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The most thorough literature review on the subject is definitely the <a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/" rel="nofollow">IPCC AR4</a>. The <a href="http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch09.pdf" rel="nofollow">chapter</a> on understanding and attributing climate change is perhaps the most relevant. If your friend doesn&#8217;t trust the IPCC, then point him to the cited reference section, so he can verify the claims made by the IPCC himself.</p>
<p>I might also recommend <a href="?p=2095" rel="nofollow">my post</a> on why I accept the consensus, and the many links I have included in my <a href="?page_id=1116" rel="nofollow">comment policy</a>, for a more layperson view of the science.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Valerie</title>
		<link>http://mind.ofdan.ca/?p=1361#comment-70296</link>
		<dc:creator>Valerie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:18:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scruffydan.com/blog/?p=1361#comment-70296</guid>
		<description>Hi Dan. I believe what you are saying, and want to present evidence of this to a friend of mine who things global enviromnental change is stage for money and power grabbing democrats. Do you happen to know of a couple of recent, well-researched and peer-reviewed articles which point out the evidence of global climate change? I would greatly appreciate any help you could provide on the subject. Oh, yes, and Hopfully ones coming from a neutral political source; science-based would be good.
Thanks, Val</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Dan. I believe what you are saying, and want to present evidence of this to a friend of mine who things global enviromnental change is stage for money and power grabbing democrats. Do you happen to know of a couple of recent, well-researched and peer-reviewed articles which point out the evidence of global climate change? I would greatly appreciate any help you could provide on the subject. Oh, yes, and Hopfully ones coming from a neutral political source; science-based would be good.<br />
Thanks, Val</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ScruffyDan</title>
		<link>http://mind.ofdan.ca/?p=1361#comment-69067</link>
		<dc:creator>ScruffyDan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jun 2008 03:43:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scruffydan.com/blog/?p=1361#comment-69067</guid>
		<description>No it isn&#039;t.  Even though I don&#039;t agree with many conservative values or polices, I know full well that there are some very intelligent conservatives.

As for conservative think tanks, they serve a valuable purpose. Their analysis and proposal of policy from a conservative point of view is incredibly valuable (mainly to conservatives of course).  Where they have gone astray (and where much of the conservative movement also gone astray) is in finding facts that support a particular ideology or policy, instead of gathering as many facts as possible and generating the best policy (from a conservative view point) based on those facts.  Or in other words make the policy fit the facts, don&#039;t make the facts fit the policy.  And as this study shows many conservatives have fit the facts into their policies, instead of the other way around.  If conservatives were to revers this trend they would go along way into shedding their anti-science stereotype, and we would all be better off. Even progressives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No it isn&#8217;t.  Even though I don&#8217;t agree with many conservative values or polices, I know full well that there are some very intelligent conservatives.</p>
<p>As for conservative think tanks, they serve a valuable purpose. Their analysis and proposal of policy from a conservative point of view is incredibly valuable (mainly to conservatives of course).  Where they have gone astray (and where much of the conservative movement also gone astray) is in finding facts that support a particular ideology or policy, instead of gathering as many facts as possible and generating the best policy (from a conservative view point) based on those facts.  Or in other words make the policy fit the facts, don&#8217;t make the facts fit the policy.  And as this study shows many conservatives have fit the facts into their policies, instead of the other way around.  If conservatives were to revers this trend they would go along way into shedding their anti-science stereotype, and we would all be better off. Even progressives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BCseawalker</title>
		<link>http://mind.ofdan.ca/?p=1361#comment-69066</link>
		<dc:creator>BCseawalker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jun 2008 02:01:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scruffydan.com/blog/?p=1361#comment-69066</guid>
		<description>&#039;Conservative think tank&#039;. Isn&#039;t that an oxymoron?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;Conservative think tank&#8217;. Isn&#8217;t that an oxymoron?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
