<?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: Bizarre: Belief in climate change may be legally recognised as a Philosophical Belief</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.robertsaunders.org.uk/wordpress/2009/06/16/bizarre-belief-in-climate-change-may-be-legally-recognised-as-a-philosophical-belief/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.robertsaunders.org.uk/wordpress/2009/06/16/bizarre-belief-in-climate-change-may-be-legally-recognised-as-a-philosophical-belief/</link>
	<description>...biology and atheism in an overly religious world...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:26:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: barriejohn</title>
		<link>http://www.robertsaunders.org.uk/wordpress/2009/06/16/bizarre-belief-in-climate-change-may-be-legally-recognised-as-a-philosophical-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-585</link>
		<dc:creator>barriejohn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:25:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.robertsaunders.org.uk/wordpress/?p=795#comment-585</guid>
		<description>I don`t buy into the &quot;Global Warming&quot; arguments myself (though I`m always in favour of measures to reduce consumption and pollution), but I must say that this does seem to be stupid! You can argue for and against the theory, but despite the fact that some of its supporters do seem somewhat evangelical, I do assume that if the evidence showed that the theory was not correct they would have the good sense to admit to that, just as I try to keep an open mind on the subject. This, by the way, seems to be the big danger to me: that if the evidence so far presented is at some future date found to be inaccurate, especially when it is pushed with such missionary fervour, the general public are just going to say &quot;To hell with it&quot; and throw the baby out with the bathwater!! </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don`t buy into the &quot;Global Warming&quot; arguments myself (though I`m always in favour of measures to reduce consumption and pollution), but I must say that this does seem to be stupid! You can argue for and against the theory, but despite the fact that some of its supporters do seem somewhat evangelical, I do assume that if the evidence showed that the theory was not correct they would have the good sense to admit to that, just as I try to keep an open mind on the subject. This, by the way, seems to be the big danger to me: that if the evidence so far presented is at some future date found to be inaccurate, especially when it is pushed with such missionary fervour, the general public are just going to say &quot;To hell with it&quot; and throw the baby out with the bathwater!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
