<?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: Moving earth and air</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sedgemore.com/2009/11/moving-earth-and-air/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sedgemore.com/2009/11/moving-earth-and-air/</link>
	<description>physicist, journalist and science writer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 03:14:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: SnoopyTheGoon</title>
		<link>http://sedgemore.com/2009/11/moving-earth-and-air/comment-page-1/#comment-4594</link>
		<dc:creator>SnoopyTheGoon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:03:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sedgemore.com/?p=5820#comment-4594</guid>
		<description>Well, of course I didn&#039;t read the article, my bad. But I used &quot;could&quot; too ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, of course I didn&#8217;t read the article, my bad. But I used &#8220;could&#8221; too ;-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Francis Sedgemore</title>
		<link>http://sedgemore.com/2009/11/moving-earth-and-air/comment-page-1/#comment-4592</link>
		<dc:creator>Francis Sedgemore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:38:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sedgemore.com/?p=5820#comment-4592</guid>
		<description>Based on the paper as a whole, I would say that it&#039;s more than a one factor analysis. However, note that I used the word &lt;i&gt;&quot;could&quot;&lt;/i&gt;. Twice.

The authors make a fairly convincing case, and their analysis builds on other work that links solid earth and atmospheric geophysical phenomena.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Based on the paper as a whole, I would say that it&#8217;s more than a one factor analysis. However, note that I used the word <i>&#8220;could&#8221;</i>. Twice.</p>
<p>The authors make a fairly convincing case, and their analysis builds on other work that links solid earth and atmospheric geophysical phenomena.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SnoopyTheGoon</title>
		<link>http://sedgemore.com/2009/11/moving-earth-and-air/comment-page-1/#comment-4590</link>
		<dc:creator>SnoopyTheGoon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:41:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sedgemore.com/?p=5820#comment-4590</guid>
		<description>Er... one-factor analysis, and could be faulty, I am afraid. What about, for instance, moisture contents of the soil that may, in turn, correlate with tides on one hand and with the landslides on the other? Etc...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Er&#8230; one-factor analysis, and could be faulty, I am afraid. What about, for instance, moisture contents of the soil that may, in turn, correlate with tides on one hand and with the landslides on the other? Etc&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

