<?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: Hypocritic Oaf</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/08/hypocritic-oaf.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/08/hypocritic-oaf.html</link>
	<description>Challenging Climate Orthodoxy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:47:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: talisker</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/08/hypocritic-oaf.html#comment-537</link>
		<dc:creator>talisker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2008 09:50:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=194#comment-537</guid>
		<description>As usual, Julie Burchill shows a faultless sense of political judgement, not to mention an admirable respect for the facts and an in-depth understanding of the scientific issuee. If only people would treat her spirited defence of Stalin and Stalinism with as much respect! Stalin understood very well that politics - and specifically the merciless imperatives of class struggle - must take precedence over any bourgeois notion of scientific objectivity.

Of course, climate &#039;sceptics&#039; such as Lord Nigel Lawson and Christopher Monkton (3rd Viscount Monkton of Benchely) come from unimpeachably proletarian backgrounds, and this is reflected in the soundness of their views.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As usual, Julie Burchill shows a faultless sense of political judgement, not to mention an admirable respect for the facts and an in-depth understanding of the scientific issuee. If only people would treat her spirited defence of Stalin and Stalinism with as much respect! Stalin understood very well that politics &#8211; and specifically the merciless imperatives of class struggle &#8211; must take precedence over any bourgeois notion of scientific objectivity.</p>
<p>Of course, climate &#8216;sceptics&#8217; such as Lord Nigel Lawson and Christopher Monkton (3rd Viscount Monkton of Benchely) come from unimpeachably proletarian backgrounds, and this is reflected in the soundness of their views.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kriek Jooste</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/08/hypocritic-oaf.html#comment-536</link>
		<dc:creator>Kriek Jooste</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:22:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=194#comment-536</guid>
		<description>Local oil only matters if you consider that local resources are more abundant and local extraction is more efficient than trading something else you have lots of with a foreign country where resources and extraction are so abundant and cheap that transport costs are paid for hundred times over.

Britain relies heavily on gas from Russia, and imports electricity from France.  There&#039;s more than enough coal in Britain, but it&#039;s strategically better and more efficient to buy it for cheaper from elsewhere than deplete the local resource.

Switching to local supply only makes sense when it becomes more efficient than foreign supply.  Sometimes if foreign supply is limited by a cartel, the threat of switching to local supply can also be a bargaining tool.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Local oil only matters if you consider that local resources are more abundant and local extraction is more efficient than trading something else you have lots of with a foreign country where resources and extraction are so abundant and cheap that transport costs are paid for hundred times over.</p>
<p>Britain relies heavily on gas from Russia, and imports electricity from France.  There&#8217;s more than enough coal in Britain, but it&#8217;s strategically better and more efficient to buy it for cheaper from elsewhere than deplete the local resource.</p>
<p>Switching to local supply only makes sense when it becomes more efficient than foreign supply.  Sometimes if foreign supply is limited by a cartel, the threat of switching to local supply can also be a bargaining tool.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jabailo</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/08/hypocritic-oaf.html#comment-535</link>
		<dc:creator>jabailo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 21:50:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=194#comment-535</guid>
		<description>Case in point: the offshore oil debate in America.

I keep asking the question: what is so bad about offshore oil?  Isn&#039;t it more &quot;local&quot; than oil brought halfway around the globe?   Wouldn&#039;t you want this by virtue of your own philosophy?

Silence.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Case in point: the offshore oil debate in America.</p>
<p>I keep asking the question: what is so bad about offshore oil?  Isn&#8217;t it more &#8220;local&#8221; than oil brought halfway around the globe?   Wouldn&#8217;t you want this by virtue of your own philosophy?</p>
<p>Silence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

