<?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: The Great Global-Warming-Denial-Echo-Chamber Echo-Chamber Irony</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/02/the-great-global-warming-denial-echo-chamber-echo-chamber-irony.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/02/the-great-global-warming-denial-echo-chamber-echo-chamber-irony.html</link>
	<description>Challenging Climate Orthodoxy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:46:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stevo</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/02/the-great-global-warming-denial-echo-chamber-echo-chamber-irony.html#comment-1188</link>
		<dc:creator>Stevo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:32:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=291#comment-1188</guid>
		<description>I think Grandia misunderstands the normal usage of the term.

Talking into the echo chamber is preaching to the choir - passionately arguing your case to people who are already convinced. They simply reflect back your own opinions, and you get the misleading impression that your arguments are convincing and valid, because nobody disagrees with them, and you hear everybody repeating them.

That&#039;s the accusation being made by Johnson. He&#039;s obviously never hung around a sceptic site if he thinks we never get argued with.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Grandia misunderstands the normal usage of the term.</p>
<p>Talking into the echo chamber is preaching to the choir &#8211; passionately arguing your case to people who are already convinced. They simply reflect back your own opinions, and you get the misleading impression that your arguments are convincing and valid, because nobody disagrees with them, and you hear everybody repeating them.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s the accusation being made by Johnson. He&#8217;s obviously never hung around a sceptic site if he thinks we never get argued with.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: StuartR</title>
		<link>http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/02/the-great-global-warming-denial-echo-chamber-echo-chamber-irony.html#comment-1187</link>
		<dc:creator>StuartR</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:52:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=291#comment-1187</guid>
		<description>My first bit of Latin that really sunk in was “argumentum ad hominem”, this was learned by seeing it at work. I now know it means “avoiding the issue and attacking the man” if used by a ‘denier’, or “saving time and ‘moving on’” if used by a believer.

I know this isn’t science but I’ve never met a live person who talks with anything remotely like the zeal you see implied by even the most ‘neutral’ Telegraph headline regurgitating a climate handout.

On the other hand, if push comes to shove, you will find that the equivalent of the ‘hammer  hitting the thumb’ blurting  of annoyance on this subject, lies latent and dormant in most productive humans.

This ‘expose’ by Roberts that people who don’t agree with him actually talk to each other, is really nothing more than the most lame of this accusatory phenomenon, as illustrated in this article.

By twittering in this way to each other about it, they just illuminate the fact that their true aim is nothing more than to keep submerged this subject which will accept no scrutiny.

 Shows how desperate these morons are. – Yes I know, Ad Hominem :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My first bit of Latin that really sunk in was “argumentum ad hominem”, this was learned by seeing it at work. I now know it means “avoiding the issue and attacking the man” if used by a ‘denier’, or “saving time and ‘moving on’” if used by a believer.</p>
<p>I know this isn’t science but I’ve never met a live person who talks with anything remotely like the zeal you see implied by even the most ‘neutral’ Telegraph headline regurgitating a climate handout.</p>
<p>On the other hand, if push comes to shove, you will find that the equivalent of the ‘hammer  hitting the thumb’ blurting  of annoyance on this subject, lies latent and dormant in most productive humans.</p>
<p>This ‘expose’ by Roberts that people who don’t agree with him actually talk to each other, is really nothing more than the most lame of this accusatory phenomenon, as illustrated in this article.</p>
<p>By twittering in this way to each other about it, they just illuminate the fact that their true aim is nothing more than to keep submerged this subject which will accept no scrutiny.</p>
<p> Shows how desperate these morons are. – Yes I know, Ad Hominem <img src='http://www.climate-resistance.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

