<?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: Global Warming</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.greenhq.net/definition-for-global-warming/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.greenhq.net</link>
	<description>We Make It Easy To Be Green</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Dec 2010 17:18:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Carl</title>
		<link>http://www.greenhq.net/definition-for-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-202</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 02:32:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.greenhq.net/?page_id=2#comment-202</guid>
		<description>Those little things fall into the round-off error. If we are to let the third world catch up to us, we would need to cut our emissions by 75% just to maintain the current rate of global warming. This would take some serious action like going full bore with thorium breeder reactors and/or levying a carbon tax which doubles retail rates of fossil fuels.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Those little things fall into the round-off error. If we are to let the third world catch up to us, we would need to cut our emissions by 75% just to maintain the current rate of global warming. This would take some serious action like going full bore with thorium breeder reactors and/or levying a carbon tax which doubles retail rates of fossil fuels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

