<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>kcr357's Comments</title>
    <description>kcr357's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com</description>
    <link>http://seekingalpha.com/user/337966/comments</link>
    <item>
      <title>Tim Cook's Improbable Victory In Washington</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1453101/comments?source=feed#comment-19127141</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">19127141</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[2% of something is greater than 39% of nothing...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 14:34:50 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[2% of something is greater than 39% of nothing...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>More Buffett/CNBC: "Bonds (AGG, BND, TLT) are priced artificially," he says, and investors in long-term paper stand to lose a terrific amount of money. It echos weekend comments where he told Omaha concert-goers, "I feel sorry for people that have clung to fixed-dollar investments."</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/999841?source=feed#comment-18498041</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">18498041</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Ah yes.  Faith restored, thank you! ;)]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2013 12:59:54 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Ah yes.  Faith restored, thank you! ;)]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>More Buffett/CNBC: "Bonds (AGG, BND, TLT) are priced artificially," he says, and investors in long-term paper stand to lose a terrific amount of money. It echos weekend comments where he told Omaha concert-goers, "I feel sorry for people that have clung to fixed-dollar investments."</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/999841?source=feed#comment-18493311</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">18493311</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[The guy lost any chance of credibility with me when he preached of needing higher taxes on the rich while fighting a battle with the IRS over a billion or so bucks he owed in income tax.  ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2013 11:07:57 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[The guy lost any chance of credibility with me when he preached of needing higher taxes on the rich while fighting a battle with the IRS over a billion or so bucks he owed in income tax.  ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Whispers Say 'How Much' Not 'If' Ruger Will Beat Estimates</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1379171/comments?source=feed#comment-18336021</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">18336021</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[I gave up trying to figure out why stocks do the opposite of what they should when news comes out.  RGR anywhere near 45 is a buy imo.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 18:52:48 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[I gave up trying to figure out why stocks do the opposite of what they should when news comes out.  RGR anywhere near 45 is a buy imo.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Gun-control legislation that would have required background checks online and at guns shows fails in the Senate by a 54-46 vote, short of the 60 required to pass. Some of the reasons for its falling short include concerns over the unnecessary burdens on law-abiding gun owners, and claims that it violates the Constitution&amp;rsquo;s right to bear arms.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/949591?source=feed#comment-17817481</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17817481</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[I passed meds at a childrens group home for a couple years;  those kids down amphetamines like they are M&amp;M's.  Thorazine, clozaril, anything to get behavior under control.  Reading their files, however, the issue stemmed from abuse/molestation well over half of the time.  If the meds are the cause, expect plenty more crazy kids.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:35:17 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[I passed meds at a childrens group home for a couple years;  those kids down amphetamines like they are M&amp;M's.  Thorazine, clozaril, anything to get behavior under control.  Reading their files, however, the issue stemmed from abuse/molestation well over half of the time.  If the meds are the cause, expect plenty more crazy kids.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Gun-control legislation that would have required background checks online and at guns shows fails in the Senate by a 54-46 vote, short of the 60 required to pass. Some of the reasons for its falling short include concerns over the unnecessary burdens on law-abiding gun owners, and claims that it violates the Constitution&amp;rsquo;s right to bear arms.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/949591?source=feed#comment-17762081</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17762081</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[What we need to do is make breaking the law illegal.  ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 19:10:56 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[What we need to do is make breaking the law illegal.  ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Gun-control legislation that would have required background checks online and at guns shows fails in the Senate by a 54-46 vote, short of the 60 required to pass. Some of the reasons for its falling short include concerns over the unnecessary burdens on law-abiding gun owners, and claims that it violates the Constitution&amp;rsquo;s right to bear arms.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/949591?source=feed#comment-17762031</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17762031</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Then what is reactively creating a gun control bill due to Sandy Hook, which would have had no effect whatsoever on Sandy Hook, to prevent another Sandy Hook?  It's feel good legislation to sate some peoples' desire to &quot;Do something&quot;.  Slightly more intelligent than learning how to juggle if you feel you must &quot;Do something.&quot;   ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 19:09:39 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Then what is reactively creating a gun control bill due to Sandy Hook, which would have had no effect whatsoever on Sandy Hook, to prevent another Sandy Hook?  It's feel good legislation to sate some peoples' desire to &quot;Do something&quot;.  Slightly more intelligent than learning how to juggle if you feel you must &quot;Do something.&quot;   ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Gun-control legislation that would have required background checks online and at guns shows fails in the Senate by a 54-46 vote, short of the 60 required to pass. Some of the reasons for its falling short include concerns over the unnecessary burdens on law-abiding gun owners, and claims that it violates the Constitution&amp;rsquo;s right to bear arms.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/949591?source=feed#comment-17755901</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17755901</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Right?  Too bad the bill didn't pass, so those non law-abiding gun owners would have to obey the law.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 17:06:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Right?  Too bad the bill didn't pass, so those non law-abiding gun owners would have to obey the law.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Gun-control legislation that would have required background checks online and at guns shows fails in the Senate by a 54-46 vote, short of the 60 required to pass. Some of the reasons for its falling short include concerns over the unnecessary burdens on law-abiding gun owners, and claims that it violates the Constitution&amp;rsquo;s right to bear arms.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/949591?source=feed#comment-17755811</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17755811</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Obama and the left are doing more for gun co's than the NRA could dream of.  And making a nice profit for me all the while.  ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 17:05:10 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Obama and the left are doing more for gun co's than the NRA could dream of.  And making a nice profit for me all the while.  ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>CBS (CBS) says it had exploratory talks with cable operators about taking local stations signals off the air and moving them to cable. The dramatic threat is part of a measured response by major broadcasters to the disruption Aereo poses with its streaming model and potential partnership with Dish Network (DISH). Also exploring the nuclear option: Fox, Univision.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/934741?source=feed#comment-17448921</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17448921</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Hey, how are we supposed to learn how law enforcement works without cop shows?  ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:17:24 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Hey, how are we supposed to learn how law enforcement works without cop shows?  ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>"It's fun to be able, for once, to place yourself on the cheerleaders' side of the U.S. markets," writes Richard Russell, advising his readers to buy the DJIA ETF (DIA). "It makes sense to be on the side of the (Fed)." Russell last week: I've never seen anything like this.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/882921?source=feed#comment-16181231</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16181231</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Buy high, sell low.  Gotta have a gameplan...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2013 12:17:06 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Buy high, sell low.  Gotta have a gameplan...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Refiners are hit in reaction to a WSJ story calling attention to the squeeze they face from the rising costs of complying with a federal mandate to use corn ethanol in fuel. An EPA proposal, which could be made final as soon as next month, could force refiners and fuel importers to use more than 14B gallons of ethanol, up from 13.3B in 2012. VLO -4%, MPC -1.7%, TSO -2.5%, HFC -2.7%, WNR -3%, PSX -1.4%.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/880281?source=feed#comment-16137191</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16137191</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Gotta keep global warming in check.  Think of how many people might possibly die in a few decades/centuries from the temp being a couple degrees higher, and you'll be better able to come to terms with causing death from starvation today.  /sarc]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 13:29:37 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Gotta keep global warming in check.  Think of how many people might possibly die in a few decades/centuries from the temp being a couple degrees higher, and you'll be better able to come to terms with causing death from starvation today.  /sarc]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>20 Signs The U.S. Economy Is Heading For Big Trouble In The Months Ahead</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1208831/comments?source=feed#comment-15292461</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">15292461</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Projected surplus, yes.  I'm looking forward to seeing if it materializes.  It will be a good indicator of tax/revenue.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 01:10:39 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Projected surplus, yes.  I'm looking forward to seeing if it materializes.  It will be a good indicator of tax/revenue.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>20 Signs The U.S. Economy Is Heading For Big Trouble In The Months Ahead</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1208831/comments?source=feed#comment-15291471</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">15291471</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[If you aren't holding stocks right now, you're missing out on some good gains.  If/when the economy hits the crapper again, your stocks, Im guessing, won't be one of your big concerns.  There will be bigger issues to handle.  Just my .02.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 00:15:35 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[If you aren't holding stocks right now, you're missing out on some good gains.  If/when the economy hits the crapper again, your stocks, Im guessing, won't be one of your big concerns.  There will be bigger issues to handle.  Just my .02.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Reuters' Jack Shafer rails against the phrase "our crumbling infrastructure" and the press' all-too uncritical acceptance that hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars needs to be spent to repair it. The doom-mongering has been going on for decades, but as the Federal Highway Administration explains, bridges can be "structurally deficient" or "functionally obsolete" and still be perfectly safe.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/833361?source=feed#comment-15170251</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">15170251</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[MN was a design flaw in the bridge itself, not neglect/old age/deterioration.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:30:24 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[MN was a design flaw in the bridge itself, not neglect/old age/deterioration.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>How Congress Could Fix Its Budget Woes, Permanently</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1178631/comments?source=feed#comment-14982321</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">14982321</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Pend-Thank you.  And I've yet to not be able to get where I need to go due to &quot;not having enough roads and bridges.&quot;]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 10:05:28 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Pend-Thank you.  And I've yet to not be able to get where I need to go due to &quot;not having enough roads and bridges.&quot;]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>President Obama will lay out yet another plan for trying to spark some life back into the economy when he gives his State of the Union address on Tuesday. The program includes investments in infrastructure, manufacturing, clean energy and education. But as with countless proposals in the past, any new spending plans are likely to hit strong opposition from Republicans, who would probably prefer to hear about cuts and deficit reduction.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/816861?source=feed#comment-14821431</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">14821431</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Babboo,that last pararaph makes way more sense than I wish it would.  Good post, either way.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:09:19 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Babboo,that last pararaph makes way more sense than I wish it would.  Good post, either way.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Initial Jobless Claims: -5K to 330K vs. 360K consensus, 335K prior (revised). Continuing claims -71K to 3.15M.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/779291?source=feed#comment-14096301</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">14096301</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Are the numbers BS?  Of course<br/>Do I give a sh*t?  No. stopped caring a while ago;  the market will continue to go up as rainbows and unicorns eminate from made up stats.  Whatever.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:05:21 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Are the numbers BS?  Of course<br/>Do I give a sh*t?  No. stopped caring a while ago;  the market will continue to go up as rainbows and unicorns eminate from made up stats.  Whatever.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Fracking, Climate Change And What Gets Lost In The Shuffle</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1035441/comments?source=feed#comment-13601421</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13601421</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[&quot; Perhaps I should add a list of my patent numbers to my bio with a link to the US Patent Office search engine and you can verify them yourself&quot;<br/>He has no interest in anything that goes against his beliefs.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:11:45 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[&quot; Perhaps I should add a list of my patent numbers to my bio with a link to the US Patent Office search engine and you can verify them yourself&quot;<br/>He has no interest in anything that goes against his beliefs.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Ford Corporate Bonds Yield 61% More Than U.S. Treasury</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1105301/comments?source=feed#comment-13568041</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13568041</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Consumer Reports is getting less trustworthy by the year;  look into the Cmax debacle, seemingly caused exclusively by CR.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2013 20:45:53 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Consumer Reports is getting less trustworthy by the year;  look into the Cmax debacle, seemingly caused exclusively by CR.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Fracking, Climate Change And What Gets Lost In The Shuffle</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1035441/comments?source=feed#comment-13441041</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13441041</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Now if they could just link solar expansion and co2 emissions....]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:04:12 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Now if they could just link solar expansion and co2 emissions....]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Fracking, Climate Change And What Gets Lost In The Shuffle</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1035441/comments?source=feed#comment-13305111</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13305111</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[What's that saying about resorting to ad hominem attacks when in an argument?  Anyway, we've spent enough time discussing, I wish you well.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:56:19 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[What's that saying about resorting to ad hominem attacks when in an argument?  Anyway, we've spent enough time discussing, I wish you well.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Fracking, Climate Change And What Gets Lost In The Shuffle</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1035441/comments?source=feed#comment-13289881</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13289881</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[The study in which your link relies on clearly states it used articles/papers NOT PEER REVIEWED in its tabulation of warming/cooling numbers, I am not spending any more time on this.  I provided the author, study, and page number, as well as a direct quote.  You are making yourself look bad denying this.<br/>1.  I initially stated there was a possibility there was room for bias, and/or sampling errors.  <br/>2.  You claimed this wasn't the case, one of the reasons being all the papers used in the study were peer reviewed.  (Peterson 2008)<br/>3.  I post a quote from this study PROVING otherwise(again, author, study name, page number all included);  IT LITERALLY SAYS NON PEER REVIEWED PAPERS WERE USED IN THE TALLY.  <br/>4.  You post meaningless links to misdirect from the fact you made an incorrect assumption/were wrong.<br/>Everyone is wrong from time to time, man up and admit it or bow out gracefully.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:09:08 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[The study in which your link relies on clearly states it used articles/papers NOT PEER REVIEWED in its tabulation of warming/cooling numbers, I am not spending any more time on this.  I provided the author, study, and page number, as well as a direct quote.  You are making yourself look bad denying this.<br/>1.  I initially stated there was a possibility there was room for bias, and/or sampling errors.  <br/>2.  You claimed this wasn't the case, one of the reasons being all the papers used in the study were peer reviewed.  (Peterson 2008)<br/>3.  I post a quote from this study PROVING otherwise(again, author, study name, page number all included);  IT LITERALLY SAYS NON PEER REVIEWED PAPERS WERE USED IN THE TALLY.  <br/>4.  You post meaningless links to misdirect from the fact you made an incorrect assumption/were wrong.<br/>Everyone is wrong from time to time, man up and admit it or bow out gracefully.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Fracking, Climate Change And What Gets Lost In The Shuffle</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1035441/comments?source=feed#comment-13233971</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13233971</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[1 other thing I found in Peterson 2008 that refutes your statement of all papers being peer reviewed-<br/>&quot;However, a few prestigious reports that<br/>may not have been peer-reviewed have been<br/>included in this literature survey as they clearly<br/>represent the science of their day.&quot;<br/>Page 5<br/>Kinda leaves room for some personal bias, no?<br/> ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2013 16:37:38 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[1 other thing I found in Peterson 2008 that refutes your statement of all papers being peer reviewed-<br/>&quot;However, a few prestigious reports that<br/>may not have been peer-reviewed have been<br/>included in this literature survey as they clearly<br/>represent the science of their day.&quot;<br/>Page 5<br/>Kinda leaves room for some personal bias, no?<br/> ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Fracking, Climate Change And What Gets Lost In The Shuffle</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1035441/comments?source=feed#comment-13227191</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13227191</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Here are some papers/studies in support of global cooling that are NOT counted in Peterson 2008, which is the source of the ratio re cooling/warming.  It took about 5 minutes to find, it would have been less, but there are a myriad of sites spamming a search trying to debunk what I was assessing. Snowballing, if you will.<br/><br/>Dr. Holdren and Dr. Ehrlich wrote in the 1971 essay, “Overpopulation and the Potential for Ecocide”:<br/>“The effects of a new ice age on agriculture and the supportability of large human populations scarcely need elaboration here.”<br/><a rel='nofollow' target='_blank' href='http://bit.ly/WeHZIZ'>http://bit.ly/WeHZIZ</a><br/><br/>The Cooling, Lowe Ponte, 1976, “The cooling has already killed thousands of people in poor nations. If it continues and no strong measures are taken to deal with it, the cooling will cause world famine, world chaos, and probably world war, and this could all come about by the year 2000.”<br/><br/>The Weather Conspiracy, Peter Kilroy, Alastair Clark and The Climate Impact Team, Heron Publishing/Ballantine Books (1977). ISBN 0-345-27209-9.<br/><br/>The Weather Machine &amp; The Threat Of Ice, Nigel Calder, BBC Publications, 1974, “Going by past form, the warm periods between ice ages last about 10,000 years and ours has lasted 10,000 years. One might therefore argue that there is a virtual certainty of the next ice age starting some time in the next two thousand years. Then the odds are only about 20 to 1 against it beginning in the next 100 years.”<br/><br/>Climates Of Hunger, Reid Bryson &amp; Thomas Murray, University of Wisconsin Press, 1979<br/><br/>Ice Ages, Imbrie and Imbrie, 1979, Enslow Publishers<br/><br/>Climate: Present, Past &amp; Future, H. H. Lamb, Routledge 1977]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2013 14:03:05 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Here are some papers/studies in support of global cooling that are NOT counted in Peterson 2008, which is the source of the ratio re cooling/warming.  It took about 5 minutes to find, it would have been less, but there are a myriad of sites spamming a search trying to debunk what I was assessing. Snowballing, if you will.<br/><br/>Dr. Holdren and Dr. Ehrlich wrote in the 1971 essay, “Overpopulation and the Potential for Ecocide”:<br/>“The effects of a new ice age on agriculture and the supportability of large human populations scarcely need elaboration here.”<br/><a rel='nofollow' target='_blank' href='http://bit.ly/WeHZIZ'>http://bit.ly/WeHZIZ</a><br/><br/>The Cooling, Lowe Ponte, 1976, “The cooling has already killed thousands of people in poor nations. If it continues and no strong measures are taken to deal with it, the cooling will cause world famine, world chaos, and probably world war, and this could all come about by the year 2000.”<br/><br/>The Weather Conspiracy, Peter Kilroy, Alastair Clark and The Climate Impact Team, Heron Publishing/Ballantine Books (1977). ISBN 0-345-27209-9.<br/><br/>The Weather Machine &amp; The Threat Of Ice, Nigel Calder, BBC Publications, 1974, “Going by past form, the warm periods between ice ages last about 10,000 years and ours has lasted 10,000 years. One might therefore argue that there is a virtual certainty of the next ice age starting some time in the next two thousand years. Then the odds are only about 20 to 1 against it beginning in the next 100 years.”<br/><br/>Climates Of Hunger, Reid Bryson &amp; Thomas Murray, University of Wisconsin Press, 1979<br/><br/>Ice Ages, Imbrie and Imbrie, 1979, Enslow Publishers<br/><br/>Climate: Present, Past &amp; Future, H. H. Lamb, Routledge 1977]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Fracking, Climate Change And What Gets Lost In The Shuffle</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1035441/comments?source=feed#comment-13202501</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13202501</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[I am asking how they determined there were a total of only 68 studies done in a decade and a half;  and what constituted a study being included to their tally.  <br/>Why I asked-  They are claiming 10% of the papers supported cooling, correct?  With that info, you could take a sample of 8 studies done from 1965-78, and correctly state 70% were in support of global cooling;  unless you have the total number of studies done, proportions don't mean much, esp. on a sight dedicated to debunking AGW deniers.  <br/>Before you call me a right wing denier, answer this-do you think you could accurately find the number of studies today regarding something like fracking and its earthquake causation?  What standards do you use?  Studies done only by phd's?  College students?  Groups funded by NG co's included or excluded? funded by environmental groups?]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 22:58:44 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[I am asking how they determined there were a total of only 68 studies done in a decade and a half;  and what constituted a study being included to their tally.  <br/>Why I asked-  They are claiming 10% of the papers supported cooling, correct?  With that info, you could take a sample of 8 studies done from 1965-78, and correctly state 70% were in support of global cooling;  unless you have the total number of studies done, proportions don't mean much, esp. on a sight dedicated to debunking AGW deniers.  <br/>Before you call me a right wing denier, answer this-do you think you could accurately find the number of studies today regarding something like fracking and its earthquake causation?  What standards do you use?  Studies done only by phd's?  College students?  Groups funded by NG co's included or excluded? funded by environmental groups?]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Better Burger Threat To McDonald's</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1089281/comments?source=feed#comment-13194441</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13194441</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Wow, almost as many replies as a thread involving global warming or tesla.  <br/>If I am eating fast food, I am going for the best price, if I want quality, I go to the store and make em myself. No in between for me, wendys, bk, mc, sonic, etc... all grease filled and barely qualified as food, more of an on the run way to fill my stomach. ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 17:17:59 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Wow, almost as many replies as a thread involving global warming or tesla.  <br/>If I am eating fast food, I am going for the best price, if I want quality, I go to the store and make em myself. No in between for me, wendys, bk, mc, sonic, etc... all grease filled and barely qualified as food, more of an on the run way to fill my stomach. ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Fracking, Climate Change And What Gets Lost In The Shuffle</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1035441/comments?source=feed#comment-13190841</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13190841</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[*news]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 15:08:42 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[*news]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Fracking, Climate Change And What Gets Lost In The Shuffle</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1035441/comments?source=feed#comment-13188841</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13188841</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[So there were a total of only 68 scientific studies from 1965-1979 re warming/cooling?  If the answer is no, then the proportion a pro AGW site gives to warming/cooling studies is has no credence whatsoever.  Kind of like a poll taken by Fox dues regarding opinions on welfare.  ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 13:50:57 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[So there were a total of only 68 scientific studies from 1965-1979 re warming/cooling?  If the answer is no, then the proportion a pro AGW site gives to warming/cooling studies is has no credence whatsoever.  Kind of like a poll taken by Fox dues regarding opinions on welfare.  ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Outlook 2013: Americans Are Going Broke</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1087591/comments?source=feed#comment-13156051</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13156051</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[precious metals<br/>or pig meat, ie. bacon.  Who doesn't want some bacon?]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:14:55 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[precious metals<br/>or pig meat, ie. bacon.  Who doesn't want some bacon?]]>
      </description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
