<?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: How are the media handling climate story? Check TVOntario tonight</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2010/03/10/how-are-the-media-handling-climate-story-check-tvontario-tonight/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2010/03/10/how-are-the-media-handling-climate-story-check-tvontario-tonight/</link>
	<description>Trends, happenings and innovations in the clean technology market</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:28:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marlowe Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2010/03/10/how-are-the-media-handling-climate-story-check-tvontario-tonight/comment-page-1/#comment-9825</link>
		<dc:creator>Marlowe Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:16:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanbreak.ca/?p=2193#comment-9825</guid>
		<description>Excellent job Tyler.  great points by all the panelists for the most part.  Too bad the first episode was such a stinker.  It boggles the mind that Richard Lindzen gets his soapbox and then they put on Hadi as a counterpoint (Hadi&#039;s more of a WG2 kinda guy so it doesn&#039;t make sense IMO).

Lindzen has virtually no credibility left in the climate science community and he&#039;s more of an obstructionist than anything else.  Wonder perhaps if you would ask Steve P how exactly it was decided to chose the guests? Personally I would have gone with Andrew Weaver and Jim Hansen but I suspect that&#039;s not the kind of &#039;balance&#039; that they&#039;re looking for....

p.s. for evidence of Lindzen&#039;s mendacity see here:

http://deepclimate.org/2010/03/02/round-and-round-we-go-with-lindzen-motl-and-jones/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent job Tyler.  great points by all the panelists for the most part.  Too bad the first episode was such a stinker.  It boggles the mind that Richard Lindzen gets his soapbox and then they put on Hadi as a counterpoint (Hadi&#8217;s more of a WG2 kinda guy so it doesn&#8217;t make sense IMO).</p>
<p>Lindzen has virtually no credibility left in the climate science community and he&#8217;s more of an obstructionist than anything else.  Wonder perhaps if you would ask Steve P how exactly it was decided to chose the guests? Personally I would have gone with Andrew Weaver and Jim Hansen but I suspect that&#8217;s not the kind of &#8216;balance&#8217; that they&#8217;re looking for&#8230;.</p>
<p>p.s. for evidence of Lindzen&#8217;s mendacity see here:</p>
<p><a href="http://deepclimate.org/2010/03/02/round-and-round-we-go-with-lindzen-motl-and-jones/" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview('/outbound/comment/deepclimate.org');" rel="nofollow">http://deepclimate.org/2010/03/02/round-and-round-we-go-with-lindzen-motl-and-jones/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathan</title>
		<link>http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2010/03/10/how-are-the-media-handling-climate-story-check-tvontario-tonight/comment-page-1/#comment-9806</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:26:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cleanbreak.ca/?p=2193#comment-9806</guid>
		<description>Sounds good. Hopefully it is online. How&#039;d it go?

Nathan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds good. Hopefully it is online. How&#8217;d it go?</p>
<p>Nathan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

