<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Recent report published projecting values of sea-level rise]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by Underdog</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/should-the-ipcc-be-more-extreme/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2007 12:49:49 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/should-the-ipcc-be-more-extreme/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>IPCC Understates the Danger of Warming</strong></p><p>The IPCC is a scientific organization constrained by political realities. &nbsp;It represents a middle ground between the opposing scientific and political views on global warming. &nbsp;And this post interprets the IPCC's work accordingly.</p><p>
But the real danger of global warming isn't the likelihood that sea level will rise by about a foot in the next century. &nbsp;We can adapt to that if we have to. &nbsp;The danger is that a combination of dramatic sea level rise, habitat destruction, and extreme weather events will lead to real catastrophe for our descendants. &nbsp;By focusing on gradual, manageable changes--and by giving the impression that these changes are predictable--the IPCC understates the case for a serious effort to fight global warming. &nbsp;Even if there is only a 1% chance of catastrophic climate change, every possible measure should be taken to prevent it. </p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>IPCC Understates the Danger of Warming</strong></p><p>The IPCC is a scientific organization constrained by political realities. &nbsp;It represents a middle ground between the opposing scientific and political views on global warming. &nbsp;And this post interprets the IPCC's work accordingly.</p><p>
But the real danger of global warming isn't the likelihood that sea level will rise by about a foot in the next century. &nbsp;We can adapt to that if we have to. &nbsp;The danger is that a combination of dramatic sea level rise, habitat destruction, and extreme weather events will lead to real catastrophe for our descendants. &nbsp;By focusing on gradual, manageable changes--and by giving the impression that these changes are predictable--the IPCC understates the case for a serious effort to fight global warming. &nbsp;Even if there is only a 1% chance of catastrophic climate change, every possible measure should be taken to prevent it. </p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by Biodiversivist</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/should-the-ipcc-be-more-extreme/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:17:51 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/should-the-ipcc-be-more-extreme/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Yes, I read that article today<p>I can see how presenting the worst case scenarios could cause people to stick their heads in &nbsp;the sand. Wish I had an answer. 

<p>In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. <a href="http://www.poisondarts.net" rel="nofollow">Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world</a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Yes, I read that article today<p>I can see how presenting the worst case scenarios could cause people to stick their heads in &nbsp;the sand. Wish I had an answer. 

<p>In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. <a href="http://www.poisondarts.net" rel="nofollow">Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world</a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #3 by hank</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/should-the-ipcc-be-more-extreme/</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:42:12 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/should-the-ipcc-be-more-extreme/3</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>The more I read about the PETM<p>... the worse the current excursion looks.<p>
<a href="http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005AM/finalprogram/abstract_94450.htm" rel="nofollow">http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005AM/finalprogram/abstract_94 ...<p>
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:DazTn287PvsJ:ic.ucsc.edu/~jzachos/eart120/readings/Schmitz_Puljate_07.pdf+Schmitz+Pujalte&amp;hl=en&amp;ct=clnk&amp;cd=6&amp;gl=us" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:DazTn287PvsJ:ic.ucsc ...</a></p></a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>The more I read about the PETM<p>... the worse the current excursion looks.<p>
<a href="http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005AM/finalprogram/abstract_94450.htm" rel="nofollow">http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005AM/finalprogram/abstract_94 ...<p>
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:DazTn287PvsJ:ic.ucsc.edu/~jzachos/eart120/readings/Schmitz_Puljate_07.pdf+Schmitz+Pujalte&amp;hl=en&amp;ct=clnk&amp;cd=6&amp;gl=us" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:DazTn287PvsJ:ic.ucsc ...</a></p></a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>