<?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 Is it a communications failure?]]></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 sunflower</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2007 06:56:44 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>A priceless moral question.</strong></p><p>I will not wait until 2009, nor use a lack of leadership as an excuse. &nbsp;Nor do I blame journalists, scientists, obstructionists, corporate structure, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, hubris, lust, gluttony. </p><p>
I blame avoidance on a failure of American ethics. &nbsp;Other indicators of immorality -- preemptive war, torture, plans to vitrify Iran, lost civil rights, injustice, corruption,...</p><p>
We can not solve global warming issues in the vacuum of morality. </p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>A priceless moral question.</strong></p><p>I will not wait until 2009, nor use a lack of leadership as an excuse. &nbsp;Nor do I blame journalists, scientists, obstructionists, corporate structure, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, hubris, lust, gluttony. </p><p>
I blame avoidance on a failure of American ethics. &nbsp;Other indicators of immorality -- preemptive war, torture, plans to vitrify Iran, lost civil rights, injustice, corruption,...</p><p>
We can not solve global warming issues in the vacuum of morality. </p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by caniscandida</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:05:44 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Beware the Ides of March!</strong></p><p>A classic day for assassinating tyrants ...</p><p>
I do not understand the premiss of the argument that "our descendants will be much richer than we are," so therefore let us do nothing and leave the problem to them. &nbsp;How in the world can we make that prediction about our descendants? &nbsp;(Well, yours, not mine, since I do not have any.)</p><p>
And even if they are wealthier, is it not assumed that there will persist an unjust distribution of wealth, with a huge gap between the wealthy and the poor, such as exists today? &nbsp;In that case, how will the motivations of the wealthy be any more enlightened then, than those of their ancestors are today?

<p>Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Beware the Ides of March!</strong></p><p>A classic day for assassinating tyrants ...</p><p>
I do not understand the premiss of the argument that "our descendants will be much richer than we are," so therefore let us do nothing and leave the problem to them. &nbsp;How in the world can we make that prediction about our descendants? &nbsp;(Well, yours, not mine, since I do not have any.)</p><p>
And even if they are wealthier, is it not assumed that there will persist an unjust distribution of wealth, with a huge gap between the wealthy and the poor, such as exists today? &nbsp;In that case, how will the motivations of the wealthy be any more enlightened then, than those of their ancestors are today?

<p>Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #3 by Andrew Dessler</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 03:24:21 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/3</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>I agree ...</strong></p><p>... that the "wealth of future generations" argument has some practical and moral issues. &nbsp;To begin with, it assumes some reasonable rate of economic growth. &nbsp;However, economic growth relies on the stability of the climate, so can you have it with climate change? &nbsp;Also there's the obvious moral issue of passing problems on to future generations. &nbsp;Overall, I am not in favor of that argument.</p><p>
Regards<br>
</br></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>I agree ...</strong></p><p>... that the "wealth of future generations" argument has some practical and moral issues. &nbsp;To begin with, it assumes some reasonable rate of economic growth. &nbsp;However, economic growth relies on the stability of the climate, so can you have it with climate change? &nbsp;Also there's the obvious moral issue of passing problems on to future generations. &nbsp;Overall, I am not in favor of that argument.</p><p>
Regards<br>
</br></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #4 by Chris Haywood</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:53:18 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/4</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Climate change con</strong></p><p>IMO climate change is a big international con, perpertrated namely by the scientists who formulated the idea, and the IPCC.<br>
to look at it plainly and in simple terms, the world climate is a constantly fluctuating entity, like a lifeform. The climate can differ widely over thousand of years, even hundreds. The IPCC is covering itself by shouting wildly at anyone who disagrees, labelling them heretics as if this Global Warming/Climate Change fiasco were some new religion. I dont discount that the Earth is warming up, but didnt we go through this problem before? in the 1970s? were we not talking of polar ice caps melting, sea level rises, a frazzled earth?</p><p>
we have nothing to worry about, the temperate will probably have gone down in 5 years!</p><p>
NOTE: in medieval times the earth was 5 degrees hotter than it is now, woe betide us, remember how all those poor english serfs were killed in the great flood of 1354???? no, neither do i</p><p>
chris</br></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Climate change con</strong></p><p>IMO climate change is a big international con, perpertrated namely by the scientists who formulated the idea, and the IPCC.<br>
to look at it plainly and in simple terms, the world climate is a constantly fluctuating entity, like a lifeform. The climate can differ widely over thousand of years, even hundreds. The IPCC is covering itself by shouting wildly at anyone who disagrees, labelling them heretics as if this Global Warming/Climate Change fiasco were some new religion. I dont discount that the Earth is warming up, but didnt we go through this problem before? in the 1970s? were we not talking of polar ice caps melting, sea level rises, a frazzled earth?</p><p>
we have nothing to worry about, the temperate will probably have gone down in 5 years!</p><p>
NOTE: in medieval times the earth was 5 degrees hotter than it is now, woe betide us, remember how all those poor english serfs were killed in the great flood of 1354???? no, neither do i</p><p>
chris</br></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #5 by Andrew Dessler</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:29:18 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/why-is-climate-change-not-taken-seriously-in-the-us/5</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>A few thoughts<p>Chris-<p>


The temperature of the medieval warm period (MWP) was NOT 5 deg warmer than today. &nbsp;That's preposterous. &nbsp;A recent National Academy report concluded that we simply cannot say whether the MWP was warmer or not than the present. The IPCC concluded that it was likely that the present-day temperature is warmer than the MWP. &nbsp;Obviously, there's some disagreement about whether today is warmer than the MWP or not. &nbsp;But no one confidently argues that the MWP was significantly warmer than today. &nbsp;I'd be really interested to know where you heard that.<p>
The argument that because the temperature has varied in the past, today's warming must be natural is based on faulty logic and no science. &nbsp;I've written about why the scientific community thinks that humans are to blame for the recent warming <a href="http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/14/175433/87" rel="nofollow">here. &nbsp;Check it out.<p>


Regards.</p></a></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>A few thoughts<p>Chris-<p>


The temperature of the medieval warm period (MWP) was NOT 5 deg warmer than today. &nbsp;That's preposterous. &nbsp;A recent National Academy report concluded that we simply cannot say whether the MWP was warmer or not than the present. The IPCC concluded that it was likely that the present-day temperature is warmer than the MWP. &nbsp;Obviously, there's some disagreement about whether today is warmer than the MWP or not. &nbsp;But no one confidently argues that the MWP was significantly warmer than today. &nbsp;I'd be really interested to know where you heard that.<p>
The argument that because the temperature has varied in the past, today's warming must be natural is based on faulty logic and no science. &nbsp;I've written about why the scientific community thinks that humans are to blame for the recent warming <a href="http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/14/175433/87" rel="nofollow">here. &nbsp;Check it out.<p>


Regards.</p></a></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>