<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sci Tech Committee Again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/</link>
	<description>by Steve McIntyre</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 14:30:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Escape and evasion &#171; Autonomous Mind</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253573</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Escape and evasion &#171; Autonomous Mind]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Feb 2011 11:57:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253573</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] contacted by a member of the public to find out more.  The story has been posted as a comment on Climate Audit (screenshot below) and mentioned in a comment thread on the Bishop Hill blog (click to [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] contacted by a member of the public to find out more.  The story has been posted as a comment on Climate Audit (screenshot below) and mentioned in a comment thread on the Bishop Hill blog (click to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jbor</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253551</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jbor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Feb 2011 01:48:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253551</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What is it about Toronto based geologists upsetting the ruling establishment? :-)

Cracking the Scratch Lottery Code
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/01/ff_lottery/all/1]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is it about Toronto based geologists upsetting the ruling establishment? <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Cracking the Scratch Lottery Code<br />
<a href="http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/01/ff_lottery/all/1" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/01/ff_lottery/all/1</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: al</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253536</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[al]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:38:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253536</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I sent an email to Stephen Metcalfe MP at 10:38pm on Thursday 27th asking him to explain  which parts of the conclusion proposed by Mr Stringer that he disagreed with and why he voted for the severely cut version instead.

I was very surprised to receive a phone call from him less than an hour later at 11.30pm!

He mentioned lots of people talking about party whips being the reason he voted (and that not being the case) and that the summary had been written by the chairman, although he backed down later on this and said it was written by the committee. He said that Graham Stringer was not willing to modify any of his conclusion and that is why they were forced to come up with an alternative. I tried to ask him about some particulars of Mr Stringer&#039;s conclusions and he would not go into them as he was away from the office. so I arranged to phone him back the next day in office hours.

Unfortunately the next day he sent me an email saying: 
Thank you for taking the call last night. I think in hindsight we are never going to agree on this and so why waste each others time. All I can say, is that I vote in a way I thought best represented the evidence we had taken.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I sent an email to Stephen Metcalfe MP at 10:38pm on Thursday 27th asking him to explain  which parts of the conclusion proposed by Mr Stringer that he disagreed with and why he voted for the severely cut version instead.</p>
<p>I was very surprised to receive a phone call from him less than an hour later at 11.30pm!</p>
<p>He mentioned lots of people talking about party whips being the reason he voted (and that not being the case) and that the summary had been written by the chairman, although he backed down later on this and said it was written by the committee. He said that Graham Stringer was not willing to modify any of his conclusion and that is why they were forced to come up with an alternative. I tried to ask him about some particulars of Mr Stringer&#8217;s conclusions and he would not go into them as he was away from the office. so I arranged to phone him back the next day in office hours.</p>
<p>Unfortunately the next day he sent me an email saying:<br />
Thank you for taking the call last night. I think in hindsight we are never going to agree on this and so why waste each others time. All I can say, is that I vote in a way I thought best represented the evidence we had taken.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexej Buergin</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253535</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alexej Buergin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:30:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253535</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Maybe Steve McI is doing something important at the moment; if not he could have a look at this
http://www.buentgen.com/graphs.html
and find out how this fellow gets his hockey-stick.
It seems interesting to me because it uses other data than usual, and, who knows, it is maybe aviable.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe Steve McI is doing something important at the moment; if not he could have a look at this<br />
<a href="http://www.buentgen.com/graphs.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.buentgen.com/graphs.html</a><br />
and find out how this fellow gets his hockey-stick.<br />
It seems interesting to me because it uses other data than usual, and, who knows, it is maybe aviable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AngusPangus</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253523</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AngusPangus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2011 11:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253523</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[O/T

Eric has posted on O&#039;Donnell at SurrealClimate....]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>O/T</p>
<p>Eric has posted on O&#8217;Donnell at SurrealClimate&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hunter</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253491</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hunter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2011 21:16:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253491</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tom,
Excellent point.
We seem to be stuck in an eddy pool.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom,<br />
Excellent point.<br />
We seem to be stuck in an eddy pool.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sci Tech Committee Again &#171; Bee Auditor</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253399</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sci Tech Committee Again &#171; Bee Auditor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Jan 2011 06:43:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253399</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Source: http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/ [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Source: <a href="http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/" rel="nofollow">http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kim</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253343</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[kim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 10:46:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253343</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just as Steve is let
Graham Stringer be a Bulldog.
Buzz, buzz, bombs away.
===============]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just as Steve is let<br />
Graham Stringer be a Bulldog.<br />
Buzz, buzz, bombs away.<br />
===============</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff Sherrington</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253342</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Geoff Sherrington]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 10:33:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253342</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Kim,
Haiku is a form of Oriental poetry, consisting of 17 moras in three phrases of 5, 7, and 5 moras respectively. This one is short.

The poem &quot;V-2&quot; is your shortest yet. Is it an Oriental haiku_ZIP?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kim,<br />
Haiku is a form of Oriental poetry, consisting of 17 moras in three phrases of 5, 7, and 5 moras respectively. This one is short.</p>
<p>The poem &#8220;V-2&#8243; is your shortest yet. Is it an Oriental haiku_ZIP?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: L Graham Smith</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2011/01/24/sci-tech-committee-again/#comment-253326</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[L Graham Smith]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 05:29:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=12842#comment-253326</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[my God, I think he&#039;s got it!  
now repeat: &quot;The rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain.&quot;
(With apologies to both Rex Harrison and the ghost of GBS).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>my God, I think he&#8217;s got it!<br />
now repeat: &#8220;The rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain.&#8221;<br />
(With apologies to both Rex Harrison and the ghost of GBS).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
