<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_17_202203</id>
	<title>Maldives Government Holds Undersea Cabinet Meeting</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1255769040000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://hughpickens.com/" rel="nofollow">Hugh Pickens</a> writes <i>"The president of the Maldives and 11 ministers, decked out in scuba gear, held a cabinet meeting 4m underwater to <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south\_asia/8312320.stm">highlight the threat of global warming to the low-lying Indian Ocean nation</a>. While officials said the event itself was light-hearted, the idea is to focus on the plight of the Maldives, where rising sea levels threaten to make the nation uninhabitable by the end of the century. President Mohamed Nasheed and his cabinet spent half an hour on the sea bed, communicating with white boards and hand signals and signed a document calling for global cuts in carbon emissions. The Maldives has already begun to divert a portion of the country's billion-dollar annual tourist revenue to <a href="//news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/12/0129232&amp;tid=1446">buy a new homeland</a> as an insurance policy against climate change that threatens to turn the 300,000 islanders into environmental refugees. Emerging out of the water, a dripping President Nasheed removed his mask to answer questions from reporters and photographers crowded around on the shore. 'We are trying to send a message to the world about what is happening and what would happen to the Maldives if climate change isn't checked,' he said, bobbing around in the water with his team of ministers. 'If the Maldives is not saved, today we do not feel there is much chance for the rest of the world.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hugh Pickens writes " The president of the Maldives and 11 ministers , decked out in scuba gear , held a cabinet meeting 4m underwater to highlight the threat of global warming to the low-lying Indian Ocean nation .
While officials said the event itself was light-hearted , the idea is to focus on the plight of the Maldives , where rising sea levels threaten to make the nation uninhabitable by the end of the century .
President Mohamed Nasheed and his cabinet spent half an hour on the sea bed , communicating with white boards and hand signals and signed a document calling for global cuts in carbon emissions .
The Maldives has already begun to divert a portion of the country 's billion-dollar annual tourist revenue to buy a new homeland as an insurance policy against climate change that threatens to turn the 300,000 islanders into environmental refugees .
Emerging out of the water , a dripping President Nasheed removed his mask to answer questions from reporters and photographers crowded around on the shore .
'We are trying to send a message to the world about what is happening and what would happen to the Maldives if climate change is n't checked, ' he said , bobbing around in the water with his team of ministers .
'If the Maldives is not saved , today we do not feel there is much chance for the rest of the world .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hugh Pickens writes "The president of the Maldives and 11 ministers, decked out in scuba gear, held a cabinet meeting 4m underwater to highlight the threat of global warming to the low-lying Indian Ocean nation.
While officials said the event itself was light-hearted, the idea is to focus on the plight of the Maldives, where rising sea levels threaten to make the nation uninhabitable by the end of the century.
President Mohamed Nasheed and his cabinet spent half an hour on the sea bed, communicating with white boards and hand signals and signed a document calling for global cuts in carbon emissions.
The Maldives has already begun to divert a portion of the country's billion-dollar annual tourist revenue to buy a new homeland as an insurance policy against climate change that threatens to turn the 300,000 islanders into environmental refugees.
Emerging out of the water, a dripping President Nasheed removed his mask to answer questions from reporters and photographers crowded around on the shore.
'We are trying to send a message to the world about what is happening and what would happen to the Maldives if climate change isn't checked,' he said, bobbing around in the water with his team of ministers.
'If the Maldives is not saved, today we do not feel there is much chance for the rest of the world.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785719</id>
	<title>Re:Expect to see more stunts</title>
	<author>chrb</author>
	<datestamp>1255894560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The original, discredited Mann hockey stick</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11646-climate-myths-the-hockey-stick-graph-has-been-proven-wrong.html" title="newscientist.com">Climate Myths: The 'hockey stick' graph has been proven wrong</a> [newscientist.com], quote:</p><p><i>The conclusion that we are making the world warmer certainly does not depend on reconstructions of temperature prior to direct records.</i></p><p><i>Most researchers would agree that while the original hockey stick can - and has - been improved in a number of ways, it was not far off the mark. Most later temperature reconstructions fall within the error bars of the original hockey stick. Some show far more variability leading up to the 20th century than the hockey stick, but none suggest that it has been warmer at any time in the past 1000 years than in the last part of the 20th century.</i></p><p>The "Hockey Stick" was investigated by the 2006 report of the US National Academy of Science, which found:</p><p><i>the key conclusion is the same: it's hotter now than it has been for at least 1000 years.</i></p><p>So, either you are wrong, or the US National Academy of Science is wrong. I wonder which is more likely?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The original , discredited Mann hockey stick Climate Myths : The 'hockey stick ' graph has been proven wrong [ newscientist.com ] , quote : The conclusion that we are making the world warmer certainly does not depend on reconstructions of temperature prior to direct records.Most researchers would agree that while the original hockey stick can - and has - been improved in a number of ways , it was not far off the mark .
Most later temperature reconstructions fall within the error bars of the original hockey stick .
Some show far more variability leading up to the 20th century than the hockey stick , but none suggest that it has been warmer at any time in the past 1000 years than in the last part of the 20th century.The " Hockey Stick " was investigated by the 2006 report of the US National Academy of Science , which found : the key conclusion is the same : it 's hotter now than it has been for at least 1000 years.So , either you are wrong , or the US National Academy of Science is wrong .
I wonder which is more likely ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original, discredited Mann hockey stick Climate Myths: The 'hockey stick' graph has been proven wrong [newscientist.com], quote:The conclusion that we are making the world warmer certainly does not depend on reconstructions of temperature prior to direct records.Most researchers would agree that while the original hockey stick can - and has - been improved in a number of ways, it was not far off the mark.
Most later temperature reconstructions fall within the error bars of the original hockey stick.
Some show far more variability leading up to the 20th century than the hockey stick, but none suggest that it has been warmer at any time in the past 1000 years than in the last part of the 20th century.The "Hockey Stick" was investigated by the 2006 report of the US National Academy of Science, which found:the key conclusion is the same: it's hotter now than it has been for at least 1000 years.So, either you are wrong, or the US National Academy of Science is wrong.
I wonder which is more likely?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784089</id>
	<title>Re:Sea level has NOT been rising</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255879740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Morner can claim that all he wants, but he's not entitled to his own reality.  NASA has satellites that measure this, such as TOPEX/JASON:<br>http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=6638</p><p>There are others that extend this back further.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Morner can claim that all he wants , but he 's not entitled to his own reality .
NASA has satellites that measure this , such as TOPEX/JASON : http : //earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php ? id = 6638There are others that extend this back further .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Morner can claim that all he wants, but he's not entitled to his own reality.
NASA has satellites that measure this, such as TOPEX/JASON:http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=6638There are others that extend this back further.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29786761</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Um, Maldives...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255858980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At a model UN thing one year I convinced almost everyone that Tuvalu (the country I was "representing") had a nuclear armed submarine. The story was the French had given it to them.</p><p>Of course, that didn't stop the bastards voting down a climate change resolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At a model UN thing one year I convinced almost everyone that Tuvalu ( the country I was " representing " ) had a nuclear armed submarine .
The story was the French had given it to them.Of course , that did n't stop the bastards voting down a climate change resolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At a model UN thing one year I convinced almost everyone that Tuvalu (the country I was "representing") had a nuclear armed submarine.
The story was the French had given it to them.Of course, that didn't stop the bastards voting down a climate change resolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785667</id>
	<title>Make it an advantage</title>
	<author>bradbury</author>
	<datestamp>1255894140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There have to be hundreds of ways one can use sinking of a nation into an advantage.  First off move PirateBay there.  Lets see the people don scuba gear to issue an injunction.  Second of all, there has to be a host of laws (banking, stem cells, cloning, etc.) are much more effective when issued underwater than in a limited "normal world".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There have to be hundreds of ways one can use sinking of a nation into an advantage .
First off move PirateBay there .
Lets see the people don scuba gear to issue an injunction .
Second of all , there has to be a host of laws ( banking , stem cells , cloning , etc .
) are much more effective when issued underwater than in a limited " normal world " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There have to be hundreds of ways one can use sinking of a nation into an advantage.
First off move PirateBay there.
Lets see the people don scuba gear to issue an injunction.
Second of all, there has to be a host of laws (banking, stem cells, cloning, etc.
) are much more effective when issued underwater than in a limited "normal world".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784969</id>
	<title>Re:Expect to see more stunts</title>
	<author>FriendlyPrimate</author>
	<datestamp>1255888080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm no climatologist (and I assume you are not either), so I cannot say with authority whether or not global warming exists.  I see lots of evidence on both sides of the issue.  But even the right-wing Thomas Donohue, head of the fricken U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE admits that global warming is real.  And if there were any reliable evidence whatsoever to disprove AGW, then he would be the one person who would be all over it.  But he's not.  He admits it's real (although he fights tooth-and-nail about what we should be doing about it).  Him admitting that AGW is real is about equivalent to Al Gore admitting that it's not.  <br> <br>

And besides, like it or not, peak oil is a real problem.  The U.S. hit peak oil back in the 1970's, and production has been decreasing ever since (despite the fact that far more exploratory wells have been drilled in this country than anywhere else on the planet), making us more and more reliant on foreign sources of oil.  Not many people remember, but Texas used to be the Saudi Arabia of oil production...but not any more.  <br> <br>

We SHOULD be taxing the heck out of the stuff and making alternate energy more competitive simply to become less reliant on foreign oil.  And I'm sorry, but the constant "drill-baby-drill" calls from the conservatives is just plain short-sighted.  There's simply not that much oil out there, and we'll need those reserves of oil 20-50 years in the future when we've completely depleted our oil reserves on land.  And we have lots of coal, but coal has it's own issues (mountain top removal, acid rain, mercury emissions, etc...). <br> <br>

So I have no problem whatsoever with taxing carbon emissions.  Even if AGW is all bunk, it's still the right thing to do from a sustainability perspective.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm no climatologist ( and I assume you are not either ) , so I can not say with authority whether or not global warming exists .
I see lots of evidence on both sides of the issue .
But even the right-wing Thomas Donohue , head of the fricken U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE admits that global warming is real .
And if there were any reliable evidence whatsoever to disprove AGW , then he would be the one person who would be all over it .
But he 's not .
He admits it 's real ( although he fights tooth-and-nail about what we should be doing about it ) .
Him admitting that AGW is real is about equivalent to Al Gore admitting that it 's not .
And besides , like it or not , peak oil is a real problem .
The U.S. hit peak oil back in the 1970 's , and production has been decreasing ever since ( despite the fact that far more exploratory wells have been drilled in this country than anywhere else on the planet ) , making us more and more reliant on foreign sources of oil .
Not many people remember , but Texas used to be the Saudi Arabia of oil production...but not any more .
We SHOULD be taxing the heck out of the stuff and making alternate energy more competitive simply to become less reliant on foreign oil .
And I 'm sorry , but the constant " drill-baby-drill " calls from the conservatives is just plain short-sighted .
There 's simply not that much oil out there , and we 'll need those reserves of oil 20-50 years in the future when we 've completely depleted our oil reserves on land .
And we have lots of coal , but coal has it 's own issues ( mountain top removal , acid rain , mercury emissions , etc... ) .
So I have no problem whatsoever with taxing carbon emissions .
Even if AGW is all bunk , it 's still the right thing to do from a sustainability perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm no climatologist (and I assume you are not either), so I cannot say with authority whether or not global warming exists.
I see lots of evidence on both sides of the issue.
But even the right-wing Thomas Donohue, head of the fricken U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE admits that global warming is real.
And if there were any reliable evidence whatsoever to disprove AGW, then he would be the one person who would be all over it.
But he's not.
He admits it's real (although he fights tooth-and-nail about what we should be doing about it).
Him admitting that AGW is real is about equivalent to Al Gore admitting that it's not.
And besides, like it or not, peak oil is a real problem.
The U.S. hit peak oil back in the 1970's, and production has been decreasing ever since (despite the fact that far more exploratory wells have been drilled in this country than anywhere else on the planet), making us more and more reliant on foreign sources of oil.
Not many people remember, but Texas used to be the Saudi Arabia of oil production...but not any more.
We SHOULD be taxing the heck out of the stuff and making alternate energy more competitive simply to become less reliant on foreign oil.
And I'm sorry, but the constant "drill-baby-drill" calls from the conservatives is just plain short-sighted.
There's simply not that much oil out there, and we'll need those reserves of oil 20-50 years in the future when we've completely depleted our oil reserves on land.
And we have lots of coal, but coal has it's own issues (mountain top removal, acid rain, mercury emissions, etc...).
So I have no problem whatsoever with taxing carbon emissions.
Even if AGW is all bunk, it's still the right thing to do from a sustainability perspective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29797445</id>
	<title>Re:Good idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255980360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. I think that the UN should have it's next meeting in this format....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
I think that the UN should have it 's next meeting in this format... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
I think that the UN should have it's next meeting in this format....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782871</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783091</id>
	<title>Supervillain hideout</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255865880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Am I the only one who thought of a supervillain hideout while reading the title? Maybe if they had some flame throwing, robotic dinosaurs they could battle global warming.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one who thought of a supervillain hideout while reading the title ?
Maybe if they had some flame throwing , robotic dinosaurs they could battle global warming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one who thought of a supervillain hideout while reading the title?
Maybe if they had some flame throwing, robotic dinosaurs they could battle global warming.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29789601</id>
	<title>China is adding 1-2 NEW COAL PLANTS EACH WEEK.</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1255884300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>China has passed the US as the world's greatest Carbon Dioxide emitter.  Unless they already know most people probably wouldn't guess who number 3 is, Indonesia.  Indonesia became number 3 by burning down forests and draining wetlands to plant oil palm plantations.  And what's done with them?  Biofuels are made to feed Europe's appetite and reduce it's own Carbon emissions.  Oh and India have been building a lot of those coal fired plants too.</p><p>What I was shocked about was <a href="http://www.earth-stream.com/Actus/australia/18\_203922.html" title="earth-stream.com">Australia</a> [earth-stream.com] passed the US as the world largest per capita emitter.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>China has passed the US as the world 's greatest Carbon Dioxide emitter .
Unless they already know most people probably would n't guess who number 3 is , Indonesia .
Indonesia became number 3 by burning down forests and draining wetlands to plant oil palm plantations .
And what 's done with them ?
Biofuels are made to feed Europe 's appetite and reduce it 's own Carbon emissions .
Oh and India have been building a lot of those coal fired plants too.What I was shocked about was Australia [ earth-stream.com ] passed the US as the world largest per capita emitter .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China has passed the US as the world's greatest Carbon Dioxide emitter.
Unless they already know most people probably wouldn't guess who number 3 is, Indonesia.
Indonesia became number 3 by burning down forests and draining wetlands to plant oil palm plantations.
And what's done with them?
Biofuels are made to feed Europe's appetite and reduce it's own Carbon emissions.
Oh and India have been building a lot of those coal fired plants too.What I was shocked about was Australia [earth-stream.com] passed the US as the world largest per capita emitter.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787191</id>
	<title>Re:No sympathy here...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255862160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so they get no sympathy from you because they get no sympathy from their king which has made their life miserable. Awesome!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so they get no sympathy from you because they get no sympathy from their king which has made their life miserable .
Awesome !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so they get no sympathy from you because they get no sympathy from their king which has made their life miserable.
Awesome!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787301</id>
	<title>If you cant stop emissions you suck out the CO2</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255862820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PLANT TREES LIKE CRAZY.<br>That is the only realistic solution. Let me put it in a more American way:<br>-----<br>EVERY TREE YOU PLANT SAVES YOUR RIGHT TO POSSESS FIREARMS!<br>-----<br>There. Now go shout it out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PLANT TREES LIKE CRAZY.That is the only realistic solution .
Let me put it in a more American way : -----EVERY TREE YOU PLANT SAVES YOUR RIGHT TO POSSESS FIREARMS ! -----There .
Now go shout it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PLANT TREES LIKE CRAZY.That is the only realistic solution.
Let me put it in a more American way:-----EVERY TREE YOU PLANT SAVES YOUR RIGHT TO POSSESS FIREARMS!-----There.
Now go shout it out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29789641</id>
	<title>Re:Expect to see more stunts</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1255884540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>As evidence mounts that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming isn't the disaster the chicken littles have been preaching for the last 2 decades</i></p><p>What evidence is this?</p><p><i>To date a lot of the proxy data</i> </p><p>To date a lot of the <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11462-climate-change-a-guide-for-the-perplexed.html" title="newscientist.com">myths from deniers</a> [newscientist.com] have been debunked.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As evidence mounts that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is n't the disaster the chicken littles have been preaching for the last 2 decadesWhat evidence is this ? To date a lot of the proxy data To date a lot of the myths from deniers [ newscientist.com ] have been debunked .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As evidence mounts that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming isn't the disaster the chicken littles have been preaching for the last 2 decadesWhat evidence is this?To date a lot of the proxy data To date a lot of the myths from deniers [newscientist.com] have been debunked.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782849</id>
	<title>Re:Cue the puns...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255861320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're real wet blankets for the world's economy...</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're real wet blankets for the world 's economy.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're real wet blankets for the world's economy...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785633</id>
	<title>Re:The west can help by killing Kyoto</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255894020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes!!  And me must have government agencies to monitor, control, and regulate all these new taxes and programs.  Massive bureaucracies to make sure that every scum sucking citizen pays theirs burden to the eco-Gods.  We must have commissions to make sure that minorities and the poor are not adversely effected, i.e. the middle class can have another tax to help out the rest.  Over weight people breath heavily, that's too much CO2 so they will either have to hold their breath or get knifed (no shooting, burning things is bad remember).  And we must do this because we want to save the future and all the money will go "for the children".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes ! !
And me must have government agencies to monitor , control , and regulate all these new taxes and programs .
Massive bureaucracies to make sure that every scum sucking citizen pays theirs burden to the eco-Gods .
We must have commissions to make sure that minorities and the poor are not adversely effected , i.e .
the middle class can have another tax to help out the rest .
Over weight people breath heavily , that 's too much CO2 so they will either have to hold their breath or get knifed ( no shooting , burning things is bad remember ) .
And we must do this because we want to save the future and all the money will go " for the children " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes!!
And me must have government agencies to monitor, control, and regulate all these new taxes and programs.
Massive bureaucracies to make sure that every scum sucking citizen pays theirs burden to the eco-Gods.
We must have commissions to make sure that minorities and the poor are not adversely effected, i.e.
the middle class can have another tax to help out the rest.
Over weight people breath heavily, that's too much CO2 so they will either have to hold their breath or get knifed (no shooting, burning things is bad remember).
And we must do this because we want to save the future and all the money will go "for the children".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783211</id>
	<title>Sea level has NOT been rising</title>
	<author>Eukariote</author>
	<datestamp>1255868940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The following interview Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, a Swedisch expert on sea-level geophysics, explains how the data has been misrepresented to feed the global warming scare <a href="http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf" title="climatechangefacts.info">http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf</a> [climatechangefacts.info]. The reality is that little has happened to the sea level over the past decades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The following interview Dr. Nils-Axel Morner , a Swedisch expert on sea-level geophysics , explains how the data has been misrepresented to feed the global warming scare http : //www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf [ climatechangefacts.info ] .
The reality is that little has happened to the sea level over the past decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The following interview Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, a Swedisch expert on sea-level geophysics, explains how the data has been misrepresented to feed the global warming scare http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf [climatechangefacts.info].
The reality is that little has happened to the sea level over the past decades.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785797</id>
	<title>another example</title>
	<author>(arg!)Styopa</author>
	<datestamp>1255895220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, someone goes down to the waterline at low tide and says "hey! Lookit all the unused land! So they build their house. Then when the tide comes back in, we're all supposed to cry that they're going to get flooded out?</p><p>Stupid.</p><p>Whether humans are here or not, water levels will rise and fall. It will happen to every coastal city, it's just a matter of time. Fortunately humans are possibly the most adaptable creatures on the planet.  Certainly climate change will result in costs and even possibly some deaths, but in the big picture, they're really nothing more than inconveniences.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , someone goes down to the waterline at low tide and says " hey !
Lookit all the unused land !
So they build their house .
Then when the tide comes back in , we 're all supposed to cry that they 're going to get flooded out ? Stupid.Whether humans are here or not , water levels will rise and fall .
It will happen to every coastal city , it 's just a matter of time .
Fortunately humans are possibly the most adaptable creatures on the planet .
Certainly climate change will result in costs and even possibly some deaths , but in the big picture , they 're really nothing more than inconveniences .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, someone goes down to the waterline at low tide and says "hey!
Lookit all the unused land!
So they build their house.
Then when the tide comes back in, we're all supposed to cry that they're going to get flooded out?Stupid.Whether humans are here or not, water levels will rise and fall.
It will happen to every coastal city, it's just a matter of time.
Fortunately humans are possibly the most adaptable creatures on the planet.
Certainly climate change will result in costs and even possibly some deaths, but in the big picture, they're really nothing more than inconveniences.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785493</id>
	<title>Re:Cue the puns...</title>
	<author>PDX</author>
	<datestamp>1255892760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Grow some gills and stop complaining. Environmental pressure is the best thing for development of new systems. Perhaps Aquaculture will save the Maldives from starvation. Just to be sure, make sure that a pressure dome covers the entire island. Civ Centauri reference</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Grow some gills and stop complaining .
Environmental pressure is the best thing for development of new systems .
Perhaps Aquaculture will save the Maldives from starvation .
Just to be sure , make sure that a pressure dome covers the entire island .
Civ Centauri reference</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Grow some gills and stop complaining.
Environmental pressure is the best thing for development of new systems.
Perhaps Aquaculture will save the Maldives from starvation.
Just to be sure, make sure that a pressure dome covers the entire island.
Civ Centauri reference</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29794021</id>
	<title>Re:Sea level has NOT been rising</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255966560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, the sceptics are still waiting on the model that relies on more than statistics and has some ability to rule out other factors. Proof that CO2 is the main driving factor (above all others) of the world temp increasing would do actually. Proof of actual causation - as all i've seen in this thread and the thousands of others are demands that we not ignore the 'mountain of correlated evidence' and more demands that 'bow down to the altar of the educated climate-scientists (who of course have nothing to gain...) and swallow everything they say'.</p><p>Seriously if this was any other field of science, all of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. would be up in arms about the way the scientific method is abused. Let alone the way that sceptics are treated like cynics and pariahs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , the sceptics are still waiting on the model that relies on more than statistics and has some ability to rule out other factors .
Proof that CO2 is the main driving factor ( above all others ) of the world temp increasing would do actually .
Proof of actual causation - as all i 've seen in this thread and the thousands of others are demands that we not ignore the 'mountain of correlated evidence ' and more demands that 'bow down to the altar of the educated climate-scientists ( who of course have nothing to gain... ) and swallow everything they say'.Seriously if this was any other field of science , all of / .
would be up in arms about the way the scientific method is abused .
Let alone the way that sceptics are treated like cynics and pariahs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, the sceptics are still waiting on the model that relies on more than statistics and has some ability to rule out other factors.
Proof that CO2 is the main driving factor (above all others) of the world temp increasing would do actually.
Proof of actual causation - as all i've seen in this thread and the thousands of others are demands that we not ignore the 'mountain of correlated evidence' and more demands that 'bow down to the altar of the educated climate-scientists (who of course have nothing to gain...) and swallow everything they say'.Seriously if this was any other field of science, all of /.
would be up in arms about the way the scientific method is abused.
Let alone the way that sceptics are treated like cynics and pariahs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787025</id>
	<title>Re:Sea level has NOT been rising</title>
	<author>pnot</author>
	<datestamp>1255861140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're selling Dr M&#246;rner short! He's an expert in <b>dowsing</b> as well as an expert on geophysics, and he applies the <a href="http://www.randi.org/hotline/1998/0012.html" title="randi.org">same rigorous levels of scientific proof</a> [randi.org] to demonstrating his dowsing skills as he does to arguing against sea-level rise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're selling Dr M   rner short !
He 's an expert in dowsing as well as an expert on geophysics , and he applies the same rigorous levels of scientific proof [ randi.org ] to demonstrating his dowsing skills as he does to arguing against sea-level rise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're selling Dr Mörner short!
He's an expert in dowsing as well as an expert on geophysics, and he applies the same rigorous levels of scientific proof [randi.org] to demonstrating his dowsing skills as he does to arguing against sea-level rise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787631</id>
	<title>What about the Antarcticans?</title>
	<author>dirkdodgers</author>
	<datestamp>1255865460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If we are successful in our current pursuit of manmade global warming, by the end of the century, much of Antarctica could be habitable and productive. This seems a worthwhile tradeoff for slightly higher temperatures in the tropics and loss of some costal regions.</p><p>With more arable land and increased crop yields around the globe, the earth will be an Eocene paradise.</p><p>Life is short. If we have the ability to radically alter the climate of the earth for the better within our lifetimes, I say we go for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If we are successful in our current pursuit of manmade global warming , by the end of the century , much of Antarctica could be habitable and productive .
This seems a worthwhile tradeoff for slightly higher temperatures in the tropics and loss of some costal regions.With more arable land and increased crop yields around the globe , the earth will be an Eocene paradise.Life is short .
If we have the ability to radically alter the climate of the earth for the better within our lifetimes , I say we go for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we are successful in our current pursuit of manmade global warming, by the end of the century, much of Antarctica could be habitable and productive.
This seems a worthwhile tradeoff for slightly higher temperatures in the tropics and loss of some costal regions.With more arable land and increased crop yields around the globe, the earth will be an Eocene paradise.Life is short.
If we have the ability to radically alter the climate of the earth for the better within our lifetimes, I say we go for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787103</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Um, Maldives...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255861620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not just send Al Gore over there?</p><p>I mean, every time he shows up for a Global Warming(tm) summit it ends up snowing. So, maybe something similar can happen here. He flies in with his huge entourage, on multiple planes; they can all drive around the island on their SUVs; and then leave again once a huge cold front moves in, freezing the water water at its current level.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not just send Al Gore over there ? I mean , every time he shows up for a Global Warming ( tm ) summit it ends up snowing .
So , maybe something similar can happen here .
He flies in with his huge entourage , on multiple planes ; they can all drive around the island on their SUVs ; and then leave again once a huge cold front moves in , freezing the water water at its current level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not just send Al Gore over there?I mean, every time he shows up for a Global Warming(tm) summit it ends up snowing.
So, maybe something similar can happen here.
He flies in with his huge entourage, on multiple planes; they can all drive around the island on their SUVs; and then leave again once a huge cold front moves in, freezing the water water at its current level.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784871</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>Burnhard</author>
	<datestamp>1255886940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Under what mathematical law does the fact that two graphs don't look the same mean that they are not related? This is really sad: Experts spend years analyzing the data, come to an extremely complicated conclusion based on mountains of evidence, and then someone who has not the slightest fucking clue about science or mathematics walks in and says "But those graphs look different!" and decides those experts are all wrong. And worse, other people who share this guy's lack of clue believe his argument because it's the only one simple enough for them to understand.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

You mean the kind of experts who do extremely complicated things <a href="http://rankexploits.com/musings/2009/tricking-yourself-into-cherry-picking/" title="rankexploits.com">like this</a> [rankexploits.com], <a href="http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7411" title="climateaudit.org">or this</a> [climateaudit.org], <a href="http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7168" title="climateaudit.org">or maybe even this?</a> [climateaudit.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Under what mathematical law does the fact that two graphs do n't look the same mean that they are not related ?
This is really sad : Experts spend years analyzing the data , come to an extremely complicated conclusion based on mountains of evidence , and then someone who has not the slightest fucking clue about science or mathematics walks in and says " But those graphs look different !
" and decides those experts are all wrong .
And worse , other people who share this guy 's lack of clue believe his argument because it 's the only one simple enough for them to understand .
You mean the kind of experts who do extremely complicated things like this [ rankexploits.com ] , or this [ climateaudit.org ] , or maybe even this ?
[ climateaudit.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Under what mathematical law does the fact that two graphs don't look the same mean that they are not related?
This is really sad: Experts spend years analyzing the data, come to an extremely complicated conclusion based on mountains of evidence, and then someone who has not the slightest fucking clue about science or mathematics walks in and says "But those graphs look different!
" and decides those experts are all wrong.
And worse, other people who share this guy's lack of clue believe his argument because it's the only one simple enough for them to understand.
You mean the kind of experts who do extremely complicated things like this [rankexploits.com], or this [climateaudit.org], or maybe even this?
[climateaudit.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783131</id>
	<title>Perspective on Maldives</title>
	<author>Skapare</author>
	<datestamp>1255867380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To get a perspective on the Maldives, start <a href="http://wikimapia.org/#lat=4.1752512&amp;lon=73.5091433&amp;z=2&amp;l=0&amp;m=s" title="wikimapia.org">here</a> [wikimapia.org] and then click to zoom in 14 times.  I suggest opening the link in a new tab or window (Slashdot code won't let me make the link tag do that for you).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To get a perspective on the Maldives , start here [ wikimapia.org ] and then click to zoom in 14 times .
I suggest opening the link in a new tab or window ( Slashdot code wo n't let me make the link tag do that for you ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To get a perspective on the Maldives, start here [wikimapia.org] and then click to zoom in 14 times.
I suggest opening the link in a new tab or window (Slashdot code won't let me make the link tag do that for you).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789</id>
	<title>CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>Morgaine</author>
	<datestamp>1255860000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No amount of CO2 cutbacks is going to stop climate change and the sea levels rising, even if CO2 emissions dropped to zero tomorrow.  The relevant time constants are from hundreds to thousands of years.</p><p>This pretty much highlights how it's all primarily a media circus and political game.  The science is lost entirely in the noise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No amount of CO2 cutbacks is going to stop climate change and the sea levels rising , even if CO2 emissions dropped to zero tomorrow .
The relevant time constants are from hundreds to thousands of years.This pretty much highlights how it 's all primarily a media circus and political game .
The science is lost entirely in the noise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No amount of CO2 cutbacks is going to stop climate change and the sea levels rising, even if CO2 emissions dropped to zero tomorrow.
The relevant time constants are from hundreds to thousands of years.This pretty much highlights how it's all primarily a media circus and political game.
The science is lost entirely in the noise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782765</id>
	<title>My secret confession: I smell my farts.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255859640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's true- I'll waft them up to my face, or fart on something then smell that. I've noticed a difference between smelling farts off my fingers and farting into a towel and smelling that. I prefer the towel. Sometimes, right before I take a shower, I'll wipe my ass with a towel or my underwear to smell my butt-perfume. I frequently pull the covers over my own head when I fart between the sheets. Oh, and I love the smell and frequency of my hangover farts. I love leaving my room for a few minutes and coming back to smell my still-lingering farts hanging in the air. To me its kind of like climing out of the swimming pool, getting in the hot tub for a few minutes, then going back into the pool. If I want to fart without making a lot of noise I'll reach into my pants and hold my buttcheeks apart with my fingers so the gas can leave my asshole unobstructed. it actually makes a very audible "pssssssssssssss" sound. Like if someone was in earshot but they couldn't see me, they would probably be wondering if i was farting with my fingers in my ass.</p><p>Sometimes if I'm in public I'll find "discreet" ways to indulge my fart-sniffing penchance. For example I'll try to pass gas as quietly as possible, then discreetly fan my thighs open and closed so the gas is wafted up to my face.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's true- I 'll waft them up to my face , or fart on something then smell that .
I 've noticed a difference between smelling farts off my fingers and farting into a towel and smelling that .
I prefer the towel .
Sometimes , right before I take a shower , I 'll wipe my ass with a towel or my underwear to smell my butt-perfume .
I frequently pull the covers over my own head when I fart between the sheets .
Oh , and I love the smell and frequency of my hangover farts .
I love leaving my room for a few minutes and coming back to smell my still-lingering farts hanging in the air .
To me its kind of like climing out of the swimming pool , getting in the hot tub for a few minutes , then going back into the pool .
If I want to fart without making a lot of noise I 'll reach into my pants and hold my buttcheeks apart with my fingers so the gas can leave my asshole unobstructed .
it actually makes a very audible " pssssssssssssss " sound .
Like if someone was in earshot but they could n't see me , they would probably be wondering if i was farting with my fingers in my ass.Sometimes if I 'm in public I 'll find " discreet " ways to indulge my fart-sniffing penchance .
For example I 'll try to pass gas as quietly as possible , then discreetly fan my thighs open and closed so the gas is wafted up to my face .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's true- I'll waft them up to my face, or fart on something then smell that.
I've noticed a difference between smelling farts off my fingers and farting into a towel and smelling that.
I prefer the towel.
Sometimes, right before I take a shower, I'll wipe my ass with a towel or my underwear to smell my butt-perfume.
I frequently pull the covers over my own head when I fart between the sheets.
Oh, and I love the smell and frequency of my hangover farts.
I love leaving my room for a few minutes and coming back to smell my still-lingering farts hanging in the air.
To me its kind of like climing out of the swimming pool, getting in the hot tub for a few minutes, then going back into the pool.
If I want to fart without making a lot of noise I'll reach into my pants and hold my buttcheeks apart with my fingers so the gas can leave my asshole unobstructed.
it actually makes a very audible "pssssssssssssss" sound.
Like if someone was in earshot but they couldn't see me, they would probably be wondering if i was farting with my fingers in my ass.Sometimes if I'm in public I'll find "discreet" ways to indulge my fart-sniffing penchance.
For example I'll try to pass gas as quietly as possible, then discreetly fan my thighs open and closed so the gas is wafted up to my face.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29795915</id>
	<title>Re:The west can help by killing Kyoto</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255974480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All great points. But, capping carbon emissions is</p><p>1. Illegal. Under our signed commitments to the WTO we cannot put tariffs on goods this way. Sure, we would get away with it for a while like we have with gambling (http://www.google.com/search?q=us+loses+wto+gambling). But, even if we got away with it, how can be possibly expect countries like Iran to live up to their international obligations when we aren't living up to ours'?</p><p>2. Counterproductive. Like you said, the third world is way worse in terms of polluting. If we cap and trade, and they don't, manufacturing will shift to the third world. Let me repeat, it will switch from clean modern production to third world production. Gas, oil, etc that would have been burnt under current EPA standards will instead be burnt in China instead. No catalytic converters. No scrubbers. Very little regulation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All great points .
But , capping carbon emissions is1 .
Illegal. Under our signed commitments to the WTO we can not put tariffs on goods this way .
Sure , we would get away with it for a while like we have with gambling ( http : //www.google.com/search ? q = us + loses + wto + gambling ) .
But , even if we got away with it , how can be possibly expect countries like Iran to live up to their international obligations when we are n't living up to ours ' ? 2 .
Counterproductive. Like you said , the third world is way worse in terms of polluting .
If we cap and trade , and they do n't , manufacturing will shift to the third world .
Let me repeat , it will switch from clean modern production to third world production .
Gas , oil , etc that would have been burnt under current EPA standards will instead be burnt in China instead .
No catalytic converters .
No scrubbers .
Very little regulation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All great points.
But, capping carbon emissions is1.
Illegal. Under our signed commitments to the WTO we cannot put tariffs on goods this way.
Sure, we would get away with it for a while like we have with gambling (http://www.google.com/search?q=us+loses+wto+gambling).
But, even if we got away with it, how can be possibly expect countries like Iran to live up to their international obligations when we aren't living up to ours'?2.
Counterproductive. Like you said, the third world is way worse in terms of polluting.
If we cap and trade, and they don't, manufacturing will shift to the third world.
Let me repeat, it will switch from clean modern production to third world production.
Gas, oil, etc that would have been burnt under current EPA standards will instead be burnt in China instead.
No catalytic converters.
No scrubbers.
Very little regulation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29786919</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Um, Maldives...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255860300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>For my part, I support any legislation aimed at CO2 reduction; hopefully after hearing about the Maldives more people will do the same.</i> </p><p>This is why "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".  You offer your unswerving support for <b>"any"</b> legislation <b>"aimed"</b> at your bugaboo.  The powers that be know of your support and will exploit it to ends completely unlike your stated aims.  Read the fucking bills (or at least commentary from those that have), demand a higher standard, don't join the "do something... anything" crowd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For my part , I support any legislation aimed at CO2 reduction ; hopefully after hearing about the Maldives more people will do the same .
This is why " the road to hell is paved with good intentions " .
You offer your unswerving support for " any " legislation " aimed " at your bugaboo .
The powers that be know of your support and will exploit it to ends completely unlike your stated aims .
Read the fucking bills ( or at least commentary from those that have ) , demand a higher standard , do n't join the " do something... anything " crowd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For my part, I support any legislation aimed at CO2 reduction; hopefully after hearing about the Maldives more people will do the same.
This is why "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".
You offer your unswerving support for "any" legislation "aimed" at your bugaboo.
The powers that be know of your support and will exploit it to ends completely unlike your stated aims.
Read the fucking bills (or at least commentary from those that have), demand a higher standard, don't join the "do something... anything" crowd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783715</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>cbope</author>
	<datestamp>1255875960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's more sad, is the state of mathematics and science education in the US today. It's no wonder Joe Sixpack comes to this kind of conclusion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's more sad , is the state of mathematics and science education in the US today .
It 's no wonder Joe Sixpack comes to this kind of conclusion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's more sad, is the state of mathematics and science education in the US today.
It's no wonder Joe Sixpack comes to this kind of conclusion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782823</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1255860780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course its a political game. People of the Maldives are going to ask for land and money.</p><p>And I don't blame them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course its a political game .
People of the Maldives are going to ask for land and money.And I do n't blame them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course its a political game.
People of the Maldives are going to ask for land and money.And I don't blame them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769</id>
	<title>Yeah, Um, Maldives...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255859640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>No one's listening, OK. Perhaps you might considering enriching uranium instead. Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that. You words might have more urgency if they were backed by NUCLEAR FORCE. That's all I'm saying...</htmltext>
<tokenext>No one 's listening , OK. Perhaps you might considering enriching uranium instead .
Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that .
You words might have more urgency if they were backed by NUCLEAR FORCE .
That 's all I 'm saying.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one's listening, OK. Perhaps you might considering enriching uranium instead.
Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that.
You words might have more urgency if they were backed by NUCLEAR FORCE.
That's all I'm saying...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782755</id>
	<title>Say it with me :</title>
	<author>OeLeWaPpErKe</author>
	<datestamp>1255859280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Hope and Change"</p><p>Hope being what comes before the election<br>Change being what happens after</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Hope and Change " Hope being what comes before the electionChange being what happens after</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Hope and Change"Hope being what comes before the electionChange being what happens after</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782987</id>
	<title>Don't worry</title>
	<author>turing\_m</author>
	<datestamp>1255863600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Darling it's better, down where it's wetter, take it from me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Darling it 's better , down where it 's wetter , take it from me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Darling it's better, down where it's wetter, take it from me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783117</id>
	<title>No sympathy here...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255866780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have no sympathy for a country that forces its people to convert to islam and subjects almost 1/3 of the population to a form of serfdom. In addition if you are not a muslim and a native then you are either executed, imprisoned or expelled. Finally the country is extremely racist when it comes to non-muslims. I've had the unfortunate pleasure of being sent to the main island a few times for work. While the country is very pretty the people are not with the exception of the lowly peasants.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no sympathy for a country that forces its people to convert to islam and subjects almost 1/3 of the population to a form of serfdom .
In addition if you are not a muslim and a native then you are either executed , imprisoned or expelled .
Finally the country is extremely racist when it comes to non-muslims .
I 've had the unfortunate pleasure of being sent to the main island a few times for work .
While the country is very pretty the people are not with the exception of the lowly peasants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no sympathy for a country that forces its people to convert to islam and subjects almost 1/3 of the population to a form of serfdom.
In addition if you are not a muslim and a native then you are either executed, imprisoned or expelled.
Finally the country is extremely racist when it comes to non-muslims.
I've had the unfortunate pleasure of being sent to the main island a few times for work.
While the country is very pretty the people are not with the exception of the lowly peasants.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29790401</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Um, Maldives...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255890300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a fucking LOSING battle.  Lose != Loose</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a fucking LOSING battle .
Lose ! = Loose</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a fucking LOSING battle.
Lose != Loose</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784289</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>V!NCENT</author>
	<datestamp>1255861380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I totally agree. I loved it when I watched a Dutch talkshow about a year ago where some 'experts' were talking about global warming and one guy said: "Look guys, I have two graphs here. In the first graph you can see the global warming measured per year. In the second paragraph you can see the carbondioxide emissions meassured per year. Now let's fold these two together, shall we?" And they totally did <b>not</b> match. Man that guy made my fucking day!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I totally agree .
I loved it when I watched a Dutch talkshow about a year ago where some 'experts ' were talking about global warming and one guy said : " Look guys , I have two graphs here .
In the first graph you can see the global warming measured per year .
In the second paragraph you can see the carbondioxide emissions meassured per year .
Now let 's fold these two together , shall we ?
" And they totally did not match .
Man that guy made my fucking day !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I totally agree.
I loved it when I watched a Dutch talkshow about a year ago where some 'experts' were talking about global warming and one guy said: "Look guys, I have two graphs here.
In the first graph you can see the global warming measured per year.
In the second paragraph you can see the carbondioxide emissions meassured per year.
Now let's fold these two together, shall we?
" And they totally did not match.
Man that guy made my fucking day!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783461</id>
	<title>As an avid Scuba Diver...</title>
	<author>AbbyNormal</author>
	<datestamp>1255872780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I welcome our new warming climate overlords (and cheaper scuba gear prices).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I welcome our new warming climate overlords ( and cheaper scuba gear prices ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I welcome our new warming climate overlords (and cheaper scuba gear prices).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784243</id>
	<title>Well done!</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1255880940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was a nice public stunt. I don't think any news show on the planet is willing to miss on that one.<br>And of course I can't imagining anyone seeing a beautiful tropic island go forever.</p><p>I only hope that as many people as possible will from now on always have to think about them just destroying a beautiful place that they at least wanted to see once, when doing something that raises sea levels.</p><p>Unfortunately, with the biggest polluters being companies, that can afford making 13 senators openly defend gang rape and forbidding employees to sue for it (Haliburton), can start whole wars for their own profit (Exxon, also Haliburton, etc), sell drugs that are worse than crack and crystal meth to people and children "for everyday use" to make them addicted (Eli Lily) and create genetically modified crops that make the whole world junkies on their needles, sell biochemical warfare agents as sweeteners or kill whole towns by putting toxines in the water (all Monsanto), I don't see anything becoming better until there is a revolution with heads being chopped off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was a nice public stunt .
I do n't think any news show on the planet is willing to miss on that one.And of course I ca n't imagining anyone seeing a beautiful tropic island go forever.I only hope that as many people as possible will from now on always have to think about them just destroying a beautiful place that they at least wanted to see once , when doing something that raises sea levels.Unfortunately , with the biggest polluters being companies , that can afford making 13 senators openly defend gang rape and forbidding employees to sue for it ( Haliburton ) , can start whole wars for their own profit ( Exxon , also Haliburton , etc ) , sell drugs that are worse than crack and crystal meth to people and children " for everyday use " to make them addicted ( Eli Lily ) and create genetically modified crops that make the whole world junkies on their needles , sell biochemical warfare agents as sweeteners or kill whole towns by putting toxines in the water ( all Monsanto ) , I do n't see anything becoming better until there is a revolution with heads being chopped off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was a nice public stunt.
I don't think any news show on the planet is willing to miss on that one.And of course I can't imagining anyone seeing a beautiful tropic island go forever.I only hope that as many people as possible will from now on always have to think about them just destroying a beautiful place that they at least wanted to see once, when doing something that raises sea levels.Unfortunately, with the biggest polluters being companies, that can afford making 13 senators openly defend gang rape and forbidding employees to sue for it (Haliburton), can start whole wars for their own profit (Exxon, also Haliburton, etc), sell drugs that are worse than crack and crystal meth to people and children "for everyday use" to make them addicted (Eli Lily) and create genetically modified crops that make the whole world junkies on their needles, sell biochemical warfare agents as sweeteners or kill whole towns by putting toxines in the water (all Monsanto), I don't see anything becoming better until there is a revolution with heads being chopped off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784805</id>
	<title>unnecessary</title>
	<author>anonieuweling</author>
	<datestamp>1255886460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unnecessary propaganda. <br>
How long have these islands be over the sea?<br>
Did they ever take a real look at that?<br>
Was that 500 years? 1500? 5000 years?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unnecessary propaganda .
How long have these islands be over the sea ?
Did they ever take a real look at that ?
Was that 500 years ?
1500 ? 5000 years ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unnecessary propaganda.
How long have these islands be over the sea?
Did they ever take a real look at that?
Was that 500 years?
1500? 5000 years?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747</id>
	<title>Expect to see more stunts</title>
	<author>cluge</author>
	<datestamp>1255876380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As evidence mounts that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming isn't the disaster the chicken littles have been preaching for the last 2 decades, the more dramatic, outlandish, and shrill the commentary will become.  Expect to see more of these stunts from both countries and entities expecting to receive a big pay day from the industrialized nations, while the evidence points to a theory that needs serious revising and models that aren't very accurate at the most basic of predictions.</p><p>To date a lot of the <a href="http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7320" title="climateaudit.org">proxy data</a> [climateaudit.org] used to bolster the claim that the observed warming trend was "unprecedented" turns out to be extremely poorly put together.  The recent Briffa revelations are so bad and Briffa so resistant to releasing his data (which is contrary to scientific methodology) that one has to wonder if there was deliberate fraud.  In climate research this has happened before.  The original, discredited Mann hockey stick was another example where a researcher refused to release both data and methodology, and when forced to told the world that data was lost (until it was found by accident on his <a href="http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=167" title="climateaudit.org">FTP server</a> [climateaudit.org]).  Both examples are indications that peer review in some fields is nothing more than a cliquish acceptance of a forgone conclusion. </p><p>Perhaps this stunt will bring attention to the matter that current understanding of AGW is poor at best and that current climate models are woafully inadequate (and perhaps a tad overly dramatic).  More research is needed and more importantly the people conducting that research need to strictly adhere to scientific method if we are to have a clear view of the mechanisms that shape our climate and what the human population effect on it. </p><p> Final Thought : Having researchers act like a group of 14 year old girls that decide who is "in" and who is "out" isn't science - it's dogma.  It does little to advance the course of science - but it makes great reading.  Better drama than day time TV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As evidence mounts that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is n't the disaster the chicken littles have been preaching for the last 2 decades , the more dramatic , outlandish , and shrill the commentary will become .
Expect to see more of these stunts from both countries and entities expecting to receive a big pay day from the industrialized nations , while the evidence points to a theory that needs serious revising and models that are n't very accurate at the most basic of predictions.To date a lot of the proxy data [ climateaudit.org ] used to bolster the claim that the observed warming trend was " unprecedented " turns out to be extremely poorly put together .
The recent Briffa revelations are so bad and Briffa so resistant to releasing his data ( which is contrary to scientific methodology ) that one has to wonder if there was deliberate fraud .
In climate research this has happened before .
The original , discredited Mann hockey stick was another example where a researcher refused to release both data and methodology , and when forced to told the world that data was lost ( until it was found by accident on his FTP server [ climateaudit.org ] ) .
Both examples are indications that peer review in some fields is nothing more than a cliquish acceptance of a forgone conclusion .
Perhaps this stunt will bring attention to the matter that current understanding of AGW is poor at best and that current climate models are woafully inadequate ( and perhaps a tad overly dramatic ) .
More research is needed and more importantly the people conducting that research need to strictly adhere to scientific method if we are to have a clear view of the mechanisms that shape our climate and what the human population effect on it .
Final Thought : Having researchers act like a group of 14 year old girls that decide who is " in " and who is " out " is n't science - it 's dogma .
It does little to advance the course of science - but it makes great reading .
Better drama than day time TV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As evidence mounts that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming isn't the disaster the chicken littles have been preaching for the last 2 decades, the more dramatic, outlandish, and shrill the commentary will become.
Expect to see more of these stunts from both countries and entities expecting to receive a big pay day from the industrialized nations, while the evidence points to a theory that needs serious revising and models that aren't very accurate at the most basic of predictions.To date a lot of the proxy data [climateaudit.org] used to bolster the claim that the observed warming trend was "unprecedented" turns out to be extremely poorly put together.
The recent Briffa revelations are so bad and Briffa so resistant to releasing his data (which is contrary to scientific methodology) that one has to wonder if there was deliberate fraud.
In climate research this has happened before.
The original, discredited Mann hockey stick was another example where a researcher refused to release both data and methodology, and when forced to told the world that data was lost (until it was found by accident on his FTP server [climateaudit.org]).
Both examples are indications that peer review in some fields is nothing more than a cliquish acceptance of a forgone conclusion.
Perhaps this stunt will bring attention to the matter that current understanding of AGW is poor at best and that current climate models are woafully inadequate (and perhaps a tad overly dramatic).
More research is needed and more importantly the people conducting that research need to strictly adhere to scientific method if we are to have a clear view of the mechanisms that shape our climate and what the human population effect on it.
Final Thought : Having researchers act like a group of 14 year old girls that decide who is "in" and who is "out" isn't science - it's dogma.
It does little to advance the course of science - but it makes great reading.
Better drama than day time TV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782981</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255863540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I assume you have taken into account that there are delays in the events of systems that effect the climate? Otherwise you might have a made a silly assumption about how the data should look. Do you really think you can just take two graphs and overlay them and think you have automatically made a logical and scientific conclusion? Don't be so daft.</p><p>It seems clear that you have some disdain towards people who take the issue of global warming seriously, and that this means more to you than being objective about the issue. No wonder you are making silly mistakes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I assume you have taken into account that there are delays in the events of systems that effect the climate ?
Otherwise you might have a made a silly assumption about how the data should look .
Do you really think you can just take two graphs and overlay them and think you have automatically made a logical and scientific conclusion ?
Do n't be so daft.It seems clear that you have some disdain towards people who take the issue of global warming seriously , and that this means more to you than being objective about the issue .
No wonder you are making silly mistakes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I assume you have taken into account that there are delays in the events of systems that effect the climate?
Otherwise you might have a made a silly assumption about how the data should look.
Do you really think you can just take two graphs and overlay them and think you have automatically made a logical and scientific conclusion?
Don't be so daft.It seems clear that you have some disdain towards people who take the issue of global warming seriously, and that this means more to you than being objective about the issue.
No wonder you are making silly mistakes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783559</id>
	<title>How long can you tread water?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255874040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They see what is coming, so there will be no excuse for not finding other places to live.</p><p>The Earth has always changed. It will continue to change.  If you can't survive those changes, you deserve to die.</p><p>How long can you tread water? Either get really good at it or relocate.</p><p>This goes for people living on fault lines, below volcanoes, and near rivers that flood too. If you are dumb enough to live in those locations, you deserve the hardships.  You have two feet - start walking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They see what is coming , so there will be no excuse for not finding other places to live.The Earth has always changed .
It will continue to change .
If you ca n't survive those changes , you deserve to die.How long can you tread water ?
Either get really good at it or relocate.This goes for people living on fault lines , below volcanoes , and near rivers that flood too .
If you are dumb enough to live in those locations , you deserve the hardships .
You have two feet - start walking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They see what is coming, so there will be no excuse for not finding other places to live.The Earth has always changed.
It will continue to change.
If you can't survive those changes, you deserve to die.How long can you tread water?
Either get really good at it or relocate.This goes for people living on fault lines, below volcanoes, and near rivers that flood too.
If you are dumb enough to live in those locations, you deserve the hardships.
You have two feet - start walking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753</id>
	<title>Cue the puns...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255859280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apparently they were under a lot of pressure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently they were under a lot of pressure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently they were under a lot of pressure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29791173</id>
	<title>Re:No sympathy here...</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1255943340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've had the unfortunate pleasure of being sent to the main island a few times for work.</p></div><p>Wow, so you had a near-work experience? Did you see a bright white light and meet Jesus? But at least it was a pleasure, however unfortunate, and one's got to count one's blessings.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had the unfortunate pleasure of being sent to the main island a few times for work.Wow , so you had a near-work experience ?
Did you see a bright white light and meet Jesus ?
But at least it was a pleasure , however unfortunate , and one 's got to count one 's blessings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had the unfortunate pleasure of being sent to the main island a few times for work.Wow, so you had a near-work experience?
Did you see a bright white light and meet Jesus?
But at least it was a pleasure, however unfortunate, and one's got to count one's blessings.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782903</id>
	<title>Re:Cue the puns...</title>
	<author>adamchou</author>
	<datestamp>1255862160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well at least the US won't be the only country with mortgages under water</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well at least the US wo n't be the only country with mortgages under water</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well at least the US won't be the only country with mortgages under water</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784289</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Um, Maldives...</title>
	<author>Interoperable</author>
	<datestamp>1255881240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm listening, many of the readers on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. are listening, many people around the world are listening. It was clever stunt that got a lot of international attention and it's a good step in the right direction. We can only hope that's it's not a loosing battle. For my part, I support any legislation aimed at CO2 reduction; hopefully after hearing about the Maldives more people will do the same.</p><p>People need to be less cynical, even at the expense of a "funny" mod.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm listening , many of the readers on / .
are listening , many people around the world are listening .
It was clever stunt that got a lot of international attention and it 's a good step in the right direction .
We can only hope that 's it 's not a loosing battle .
For my part , I support any legislation aimed at CO2 reduction ; hopefully after hearing about the Maldives more people will do the same.People need to be less cynical , even at the expense of a " funny " mod .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm listening, many of the readers on /.
are listening, many people around the world are listening.
It was clever stunt that got a lot of international attention and it's a good step in the right direction.
We can only hope that's it's not a loosing battle.
For my part, I support any legislation aimed at CO2 reduction; hopefully after hearing about the Maldives more people will do the same.People need to be less cynical, even at the expense of a "funny" mod.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784911</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Um, Maldives...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255887420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let us stop and think for a second about one big bright and hot yet overlooked fact. The sun is hot, extremely hot. When it goes behind a cloud, the area underneath the cloud cools, also, when the planet is not receiving light (aka night time) the surface is cooler. When one superimposes a graph of surface temperatures to a graph of solar output one sees that the surface temperature of our planet is linked to how much heat gets to the surface. whoa, crazy huh. Its like understanding how when you turn off the heat in your house, it cools down, no matter  how much insulation is in the attic. or better yet, at night, your house gets cooler, when the sun isn't shining on it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let us stop and think for a second about one big bright and hot yet overlooked fact .
The sun is hot , extremely hot .
When it goes behind a cloud , the area underneath the cloud cools , also , when the planet is not receiving light ( aka night time ) the surface is cooler .
When one superimposes a graph of surface temperatures to a graph of solar output one sees that the surface temperature of our planet is linked to how much heat gets to the surface .
whoa , crazy huh .
Its like understanding how when you turn off the heat in your house , it cools down , no matter how much insulation is in the attic .
or better yet , at night , your house gets cooler , when the sun is n't shining on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let us stop and think for a second about one big bright and hot yet overlooked fact.
The sun is hot, extremely hot.
When it goes behind a cloud, the area underneath the cloud cools, also, when the planet is not receiving light (aka night time) the surface is cooler.
When one superimposes a graph of surface temperatures to a graph of solar output one sees that the surface temperature of our planet is linked to how much heat gets to the surface.
whoa, crazy huh.
Its like understanding how when you turn off the heat in your house, it cools down, no matter  how much insulation is in the attic.
or better yet, at night, your house gets cooler, when the sun isn't shining on it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29794573</id>
	<title>Re:The west can help by killing Kyoto</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255968960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thats all very nice, but it could be solved in one much simpler move - the western countries that signed up to these deals should stop off-loading their manufacturing to countries that aren't interested in reducing their carbon output.</p><p>Blame China all you want - but it's our shit their making. The CO2 might be coming from plants in their borders - but ethically it belongs to the country that requested the goods and will in the end consume them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats all very nice , but it could be solved in one much simpler move - the western countries that signed up to these deals should stop off-loading their manufacturing to countries that are n't interested in reducing their carbon output.Blame China all you want - but it 's our shit their making .
The CO2 might be coming from plants in their borders - but ethically it belongs to the country that requested the goods and will in the end consume them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats all very nice, but it could be solved in one much simpler move - the western countries that signed up to these deals should stop off-loading their manufacturing to countries that aren't interested in reducing their carbon output.Blame China all you want - but it's our shit their making.
The CO2 might be coming from plants in their borders - but ethically it belongs to the country that requested the goods and will in the end consume them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783187</id>
	<title>Clearly this is "Allah's" will...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255868640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...or, wait, when it's something bad it's always because of the western societies, right?</p><p>Right - Good; god wanted it, Bad; due conspiracy. I keep mixing it up.</p><p>Sometimes man gets the fate he deserves, but he always gets the fate he reaches for with his hands. I feel more sorry for the animal life in the region than the humans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...or , wait , when it 's something bad it 's always because of the western societies , right ? Right - Good ; god wanted it , Bad ; due conspiracy .
I keep mixing it up.Sometimes man gets the fate he deserves , but he always gets the fate he reaches for with his hands .
I feel more sorry for the animal life in the region than the humans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...or, wait, when it's something bad it's always because of the western societies, right?Right - Good; god wanted it, Bad; due conspiracy.
I keep mixing it up.Sometimes man gets the fate he deserves, but he always gets the fate he reaches for with his hands.
I feel more sorry for the animal life in the region than the humans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784411</id>
	<title>Maldives have seen a sea-level fall</title>
	<author>zerosomething</author>
	<datestamp>1255882440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/ccsa/2004/00000013/00000002/art00004" title="ingentaconnect.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/ccsa/2004/00000013/00000002/art00004</a> [ingentaconnect.com]
<p>"In a common greenhouse global-warming scenario, the Maldives have been condemned to become flooded in 50 years or, at the most, 100 years. However, our study of past and present sea-level changes shows no sign of any sea-level rise. On the contrary, the Maldives have seen a sea-level fall in the past 30 years. This sea-level fall is likely to be the effect of an increased evaporation and intensified northeast monsoon over the central Indian Ocean. We are confident that the people of the Maldives are not condemned to become flooded in the near future."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/ccsa/2004/00000013/00000002/art00004 [ ingentaconnect.com ] " In a common greenhouse global-warming scenario , the Maldives have been condemned to become flooded in 50 years or , at the most , 100 years .
However , our study of past and present sea-level changes shows no sign of any sea-level rise .
On the contrary , the Maldives have seen a sea-level fall in the past 30 years .
This sea-level fall is likely to be the effect of an increased evaporation and intensified northeast monsoon over the central Indian Ocean .
We are confident that the people of the Maldives are not condemned to become flooded in the near future .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/ccsa/2004/00000013/00000002/art00004 [ingentaconnect.com]
"In a common greenhouse global-warming scenario, the Maldives have been condemned to become flooded in 50 years or, at the most, 100 years.
However, our study of past and present sea-level changes shows no sign of any sea-level rise.
On the contrary, the Maldives have seen a sea-level fall in the past 30 years.
This sea-level fall is likely to be the effect of an increased evaporation and intensified northeast monsoon over the central Indian Ocean.
We are confident that the people of the Maldives are not condemned to become flooded in the near future.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784571</id>
	<title>Threat global warming low-lying Indian Ocean natio</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255884060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is NOT the first time a nation was threatened with encroaching sea water. The Netherlands, Holland specifically dealt with this centuries ago, with out all the fuss and bother of asking other nations for help.<br>Start building dikes, NOW!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is NOT the first time a nation was threatened with encroaching sea water .
The Netherlands , Holland specifically dealt with this centuries ago , with out all the fuss and bother of asking other nations for help.Start building dikes , NOW !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is NOT the first time a nation was threatened with encroaching sea water.
The Netherlands, Holland specifically dealt with this centuries ago, with out all the fuss and bother of asking other nations for help.Start building dikes, NOW!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29788363</id>
	<title>Re:Sea level has NOT been rising</title>
	<author>Ferretman</author>
	<datestamp>1255872840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You first, model wise.
<br>
<br>
I want a model, Warmites.  I want a scientifically valid atmospheric dynamics model that shows that increasing the amount of CO2 has any affect whatsoever on global climate and yet still explains our observational data.  Note that any *valid* model should be able to recreate past results, which to date none of them have been able to do.
<br>
<br>
Go ahead.  I'll wait.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You first , model wise .
I want a model , Warmites .
I want a scientifically valid atmospheric dynamics model that shows that increasing the amount of CO2 has any affect whatsoever on global climate and yet still explains our observational data .
Note that any * valid * model should be able to recreate past results , which to date none of them have been able to do .
Go ahead .
I 'll wait .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You first, model wise.
I want a model, Warmites.
I want a scientifically valid atmospheric dynamics model that shows that increasing the amount of CO2 has any affect whatsoever on global climate and yet still explains our observational data.
Note that any *valid* model should be able to recreate past results, which to date none of them have been able to do.
Go ahead.
I'll wait.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785511</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>Temporal</author>
	<datestamp>1255867860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Under what mathematical law does the fact that two graphs don't look the same mean that they are not related?  This is really sad:  Experts spend years analyzing the data, come to an extremely complicated conclusion based on mountains of evidence, and then someone who has not the slightest fucking clue about science or mathematics walks in and says "But those graphs look different!" and decides those experts are all wrong.  And worse, other people who share this guy's lack of clue believe his argument because it's the only one simple enough for them to understand.</p><p>Roughly speaking, more CO2 in the atmosphere causes the temperature to rise faster, and yearly CO2 emissions are adding to what is already there.  So the CO2 emissions graph is something like the second derivative of the temperature graph.  That means that if we keep emitting CO2 at a constant rate (flat graph) then temperatures will rise faster and faster over time (quadratic curve).  Yeah, the graphs don't look the same, but they are related.  (And in reality it's much more complicated than this.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Under what mathematical law does the fact that two graphs do n't look the same mean that they are not related ?
This is really sad : Experts spend years analyzing the data , come to an extremely complicated conclusion based on mountains of evidence , and then someone who has not the slightest fucking clue about science or mathematics walks in and says " But those graphs look different !
" and decides those experts are all wrong .
And worse , other people who share this guy 's lack of clue believe his argument because it 's the only one simple enough for them to understand.Roughly speaking , more CO2 in the atmosphere causes the temperature to rise faster , and yearly CO2 emissions are adding to what is already there .
So the CO2 emissions graph is something like the second derivative of the temperature graph .
That means that if we keep emitting CO2 at a constant rate ( flat graph ) then temperatures will rise faster and faster over time ( quadratic curve ) .
Yeah , the graphs do n't look the same , but they are related .
( And in reality it 's much more complicated than this .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Under what mathematical law does the fact that two graphs don't look the same mean that they are not related?
This is really sad:  Experts spend years analyzing the data, come to an extremely complicated conclusion based on mountains of evidence, and then someone who has not the slightest fucking clue about science or mathematics walks in and says "But those graphs look different!
" and decides those experts are all wrong.
And worse, other people who share this guy's lack of clue believe his argument because it's the only one simple enough for them to understand.Roughly speaking, more CO2 in the atmosphere causes the temperature to rise faster, and yearly CO2 emissions are adding to what is already there.
So the CO2 emissions graph is something like the second derivative of the temperature graph.
That means that if we keep emitting CO2 at a constant rate (flat graph) then temperatures will rise faster and faster over time (quadratic curve).
Yeah, the graphs don't look the same, but they are related.
(And in reality it's much more complicated than this.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787207</id>
	<title>Do I have to have a subject thingy?</title>
	<author>BozoForPresident</author>
	<datestamp>1255862280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Call me old fashioned but if that had been a real cabinet meeting held underwater due to climate change induced by other countries, the prez wouldn't be signing a document calling for global cuts in carbon emissions, he'd be giving an order to assassinate the biggest polluters.

btw Those billions of dollars for setting up shop in someone else's backyard kind of reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons in which Homer spent the entire city budget on waste removal, Sprindfield ended up drowning in it's own and everyone else's filth and then had to relocate to get away from the mess.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Call me old fashioned but if that had been a real cabinet meeting held underwater due to climate change induced by other countries , the prez would n't be signing a document calling for global cuts in carbon emissions , he 'd be giving an order to assassinate the biggest polluters .
btw Those billions of dollars for setting up shop in someone else 's backyard kind of reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons in which Homer spent the entire city budget on waste removal , Sprindfield ended up drowning in it 's own and everyone else 's filth and then had to relocate to get away from the mess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Call me old fashioned but if that had been a real cabinet meeting held underwater due to climate change induced by other countries, the prez wouldn't be signing a document calling for global cuts in carbon emissions, he'd be giving an order to assassinate the biggest polluters.
btw Those billions of dollars for setting up shop in someone else's backyard kind of reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons in which Homer spent the entire city budget on waste removal, Sprindfield ended up drowning in it's own and everyone else's filth and then had to relocate to get away from the mess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785109</id>
	<title>Re:Expect to see more stunts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255889340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm, you completely misrepresent the Mann controversy. Allow Wikipedia to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey\_stick\_graph" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">enlighten</a> [wikipedia.org] you.</p><p>Summary: all research done since Mann's work shows the same overall trend- a hockey stick! Mann also was blamed for having poor methodology, but the paper itself pointed out the data was far from conclusive. Sure it wasn't a foolproof paper, but there was nothing incredible wrong or falsified about it. As for Mann holding out his data, that's just false. Back it up with a non-agenda'd site please.</p><p>I appreciate skepticism. However, until climate skeptics can back up an argument with more than: </p><p><div class="quote"><p>climate models are woafully[sic] inadequate</p></div><p> and get <i>published</i> research in the journals I will have to remain a skeptic of their skepticism. I understand the need to question research, and we should always do so, but how are those who blindly deny any different than those who blindly accept? It's all about the middle ground my friends.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm , you completely misrepresent the Mann controversy .
Allow Wikipedia to enlighten [ wikipedia.org ] you.Summary : all research done since Mann 's work shows the same overall trend- a hockey stick !
Mann also was blamed for having poor methodology , but the paper itself pointed out the data was far from conclusive .
Sure it was n't a foolproof paper , but there was nothing incredible wrong or falsified about it .
As for Mann holding out his data , that 's just false .
Back it up with a non-agenda 'd site please.I appreciate skepticism .
However , until climate skeptics can back up an argument with more than : climate models are woafully [ sic ] inadequate and get published research in the journals I will have to remain a skeptic of their skepticism .
I understand the need to question research , and we should always do so , but how are those who blindly deny any different than those who blindly accept ?
It 's all about the middle ground my friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm, you completely misrepresent the Mann controversy.
Allow Wikipedia to enlighten [wikipedia.org] you.Summary: all research done since Mann's work shows the same overall trend- a hockey stick!
Mann also was blamed for having poor methodology, but the paper itself pointed out the data was far from conclusive.
Sure it wasn't a foolproof paper, but there was nothing incredible wrong or falsified about it.
As for Mann holding out his data, that's just false.
Back it up with a non-agenda'd site please.I appreciate skepticism.
However, until climate skeptics can back up an argument with more than: climate models are woafully[sic] inadequate and get published research in the journals I will have to remain a skeptic of their skepticism.
I understand the need to question research, and we should always do so, but how are those who blindly deny any different than those who blindly accept?
It's all about the middle ground my friends.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29798303</id>
	<title>BTW, you need to re-read what I said</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1255983480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cap-trade WILL NOT WORK. In fact, IT WILL BACKFIRE ON CARBON. We are BOTH in agreement on that. OTH, applying a tax based on CO2 emissions (and hopefully pollution as well) IS TOTALLY LEGAL.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cap-trade WILL NOT WORK .
In fact , IT WILL BACKFIRE ON CARBON .
We are BOTH in agreement on that .
OTH , applying a tax based on CO2 emissions ( and hopefully pollution as well ) IS TOTALLY LEGAL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cap-trade WILL NOT WORK.
In fact, IT WILL BACKFIRE ON CARBON.
We are BOTH in agreement on that.
OTH, applying a tax based on CO2 emissions (and hopefully pollution as well) IS TOTALLY LEGAL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29795915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782871</id>
	<title>Good idea</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1255861620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think other countries should try it, but without the aqualungs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think other countries should try it , but without the aqualungs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think other countries should try it, but without the aqualungs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783327</id>
	<title>Can we do it in Aus. Perhaps cut down swearing?</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1255870680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an idea. Let's do the same in Australia. The way our politicians carry on booing, jeering, calling each other names and such is disgraceful. (Actually I'm resisting the urge to suggest a 1 hour meeting under water WITHOUT the scuba gear). I guess it's similar the world over. No wonder we're in the economic, social and environmental crapper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an idea .
Let 's do the same in Australia .
The way our politicians carry on booing , jeering , calling each other names and such is disgraceful .
( Actually I 'm resisting the urge to suggest a 1 hour meeting under water WITHOUT the scuba gear ) .
I guess it 's similar the world over .
No wonder we 're in the economic , social and environmental crapper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an idea.
Let's do the same in Australia.
The way our politicians carry on booing, jeering, calling each other names and such is disgraceful.
(Actually I'm resisting the urge to suggest a 1 hour meeting under water WITHOUT the scuba gear).
I guess it's similar the world over.
No wonder we're in the economic, social and environmental crapper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785511</id>
	<title>Re:Sea level has NOT been rising</title>
	<author>Xyrus</author>
	<datestamp>1255892940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A rather discredited expert. Anyone want to take his course on dowsing?</p><p>The site (ClimateChangeFacts) reads like any other number of "skeptic" sites. Lots of speculation backed by bogus claims and zero peer reviewed research to back up their claims.</p><p>I want a model, skeptics. I want a scientifically valid atmospheric dynamics model that shows that increasing the amount of CO2 does not impact global climate and yet still explains our observational data. Go ahead. I'll wait.</p><p>~X~</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A rather discredited expert .
Anyone want to take his course on dowsing ? The site ( ClimateChangeFacts ) reads like any other number of " skeptic " sites .
Lots of speculation backed by bogus claims and zero peer reviewed research to back up their claims.I want a model , skeptics .
I want a scientifically valid atmospheric dynamics model that shows that increasing the amount of CO2 does not impact global climate and yet still explains our observational data .
Go ahead .
I 'll wait. ~ X ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A rather discredited expert.
Anyone want to take his course on dowsing?The site (ClimateChangeFacts) reads like any other number of "skeptic" sites.
Lots of speculation backed by bogus claims and zero peer reviewed research to back up their claims.I want a model, skeptics.
I want a scientifically valid atmospheric dynamics model that shows that increasing the amount of CO2 does not impact global climate and yet still explains our observational data.
Go ahead.
I'll wait.~X~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782839</id>
	<title>Re:Cue the puns...</title>
	<author>M8e</author>
	<datestamp>1255861140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Was the cylinders filled with hot air?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was the cylinders filled with hot air ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was the cylinders filled with hot air?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783061</id>
	<title>The last desperate cries of the climate alarmists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255865220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are seeing more and more articles in the major media doubting that man made carbon dioxide is causing global warming.  Last week it was the BBC, yesterday it was Canada's Globe and Mail.</p><p>There are many sources of information about why global warming 'science' is bogus.  A good one is www.wattsupwiththat.com .  The site has links to all kinds of other sites; pro, con and lukewarm.  A few hours (days/weeks) of reading should adequately demonstrate that all the assertions of the global warming alarmists have been refuted.  Neither the physics or the available evidence support the theory of catastrophic global warming caused by man made carbon dioxide.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are seeing more and more articles in the major media doubting that man made carbon dioxide is causing global warming .
Last week it was the BBC , yesterday it was Canada 's Globe and Mail.There are many sources of information about why global warming 'science ' is bogus .
A good one is www.wattsupwiththat.com .
The site has links to all kinds of other sites ; pro , con and lukewarm .
A few hours ( days/weeks ) of reading should adequately demonstrate that all the assertions of the global warming alarmists have been refuted .
Neither the physics or the available evidence support the theory of catastrophic global warming caused by man made carbon dioxide .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are seeing more and more articles in the major media doubting that man made carbon dioxide is causing global warming.
Last week it was the BBC, yesterday it was Canada's Globe and Mail.There are many sources of information about why global warming 'science' is bogus.
A good one is www.wattsupwiththat.com .
The site has links to all kinds of other sites; pro, con and lukewarm.
A few hours (days/weeks) of reading should adequately demonstrate that all the assertions of the global warming alarmists have been refuted.
Neither the physics or the available evidence support the theory of catastrophic global warming caused by man made carbon dioxide.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783275</id>
	<title>Photo Gallery</title>
	<author>gaanagaa</author>
	<datestamp>1255869960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Photo Gallery
<a href="http://surl.me/2c67" title="surl.me" rel="nofollow">http://surl.me/2c67</a> [surl.me]
 (Flickr)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Photo Gallery http : //surl.me/2c67 [ surl.me ] ( Flickr )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Photo Gallery
http://surl.me/2c67 [surl.me]
 (Flickr)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784007</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>amilo100</author>
	<datestamp>1255878960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>This is really sad: Experts spend years analyzing the data, come to an extremely complicated conclusion based on mountains of evidence, and then someone who has not the slightest fucking clue about science or mathematics walks in and says "</i> <br> <br>

The problem is that mathematical rigor is absent from most environmental studies. This is kinda surprising. For a good overview see this site: <a href="http://www.climateaudit.org/" title="climateaudit.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.climateaudit.org/</a> [climateaudit.org]. <br> <br>

Quite a few highly regarded studies uses statistically dubious methods.<br> <br>

While I think that AGW is true, a lot more research needs to be done in a proper fashion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is really sad : Experts spend years analyzing the data , come to an extremely complicated conclusion based on mountains of evidence , and then someone who has not the slightest fucking clue about science or mathematics walks in and says " The problem is that mathematical rigor is absent from most environmental studies .
This is kinda surprising .
For a good overview see this site : http : //www.climateaudit.org/ [ climateaudit.org ] .
Quite a few highly regarded studies uses statistically dubious methods .
While I think that AGW is true , a lot more research needs to be done in a proper fashion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is really sad: Experts spend years analyzing the data, come to an extremely complicated conclusion based on mountains of evidence, and then someone who has not the slightest fucking clue about science or mathematics walks in and says "  

The problem is that mathematical rigor is absent from most environmental studies.
This is kinda surprising.
For a good overview see this site: http://www.climateaudit.org/ [climateaudit.org].
Quite a few highly regarded studies uses statistically dubious methods.
While I think that AGW is true, a lot more research needs to be done in a proper fashion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785637</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>chrb</author>
	<datestamp>1255894020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The CO2 level and temperature aren't supposed to match up perfectly. Climate Change Myths: <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11659-climate-myths-ice-cores-show-co2-increases-lag-behind-temperature-rises-disproving-the-link-to-global-warming.html" title="newscientist.com">Ice cores show CO2 increases lag behind temperature rises, disproving the link to global warming</a> [newscientist.com] and <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11640-climate-myths-ice-cores-show-co2-rising-as-temperatures-fell.html" title="newscientist.com">Ice cores show CO2 rising as temperatures fell</a> [newscientist.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The CO2 level and temperature are n't supposed to match up perfectly .
Climate Change Myths : Ice cores show CO2 increases lag behind temperature rises , disproving the link to global warming [ newscientist.com ] and Ice cores show CO2 rising as temperatures fell [ newscientist.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The CO2 level and temperature aren't supposed to match up perfectly.
Climate Change Myths: Ice cores show CO2 increases lag behind temperature rises, disproving the link to global warming [newscientist.com] and Ice cores show CO2 rising as temperatures fell [newscientist.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783141</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255867560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have two graphs here. In the first graph you can see the global warming measured per year. In the second paragraph you can see the carbondioxide emissions meassured per year.</p></div><p>Those two graphs <i>shouldn't</i> match.  Measured global warming (if you mean rate of change of temperature) should be proportional to the amount of excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.  This is the <i>integral</i> of carbon dioxide emissions.</p><p>If you don't have even a basic understanding of the science, please don't try to contribute to the debate - all you're doing is parroting the arguments of whichever lobby group got to you first.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have two graphs here .
In the first graph you can see the global warming measured per year .
In the second paragraph you can see the carbondioxide emissions meassured per year.Those two graphs should n't match .
Measured global warming ( if you mean rate of change of temperature ) should be proportional to the amount of excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere .
This is the integral of carbon dioxide emissions.If you do n't have even a basic understanding of the science , please do n't try to contribute to the debate - all you 're doing is parroting the arguments of whichever lobby group got to you first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have two graphs here.
In the first graph you can see the global warming measured per year.
In the second paragraph you can see the carbondioxide emissions meassured per year.Those two graphs shouldn't match.
Measured global warming (if you mean rate of change of temperature) should be proportional to the amount of excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
This is the integral of carbon dioxide emissions.If you don't have even a basic understanding of the science, please don't try to contribute to the debate - all you're doing is parroting the arguments of whichever lobby group got to you first.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784753</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, Um, Maldives...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255885860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm listening</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm listening</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm listening</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667</id>
	<title>The west can help by killing Kyoto</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255875300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right now, everybody is after the west (including the west) to address Climage change and help little nations deal with this. Mostly by putting cap/trad on OUR energy to address this. But will it work?<br>
it would work if all else remains static. Sadly, that is not the case. China is adding 1-2 NEW COAL PLANTS EACH WEEK. These are<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.5GW size plants. Worse, the coal is inferior coal. It is very low grade coal with heavy pollutants. Then add in the new cars and oil based transportation that is happening in China.
<br>
 Even with the growth in hydro and wind and Solar and Nukes that China is planning, if they continue this course, they will exceed ALL OF AMERICA's emission by 2015. By 2018, they will exceed ALL OF America's AND Western EU. By 2020 (11 very short years), they will account for slightly more than 1/2 of all of the CO2 that man has emitted through history. IOW, all of the cuts that we do, will be worthless.
<br> But it still get worse. In particular, once we push Cap/trade, other nations will have a strong incentive to grab our manufacturing. And who will be pushing "cheap" coal plants? GE coal and other companies. Many companies will work to take advantage of the difference in prices (labor and energy).
 <br>
 So, with knowing the above, how do drop the emissions and solve the climate change issues?
 Here is my idea.
<ol>
<li>All western countries need to cap their single point emissions right away. IOW, no increase in emissions from Coal, Cement, etc. Obviously, emissions from transportation (which is diffuse emissions and difficult to control). Ideally, other nations would join, but that is not likely. But the west CAN and should cap it.</li>
<li>Put a sliding tax on ALL GOODS at point of retail sale. It must be based on CO2 emissions FROM THE COUNTRY of main assembly AND the main material AND the transportation of item. Base the CO2 emissions from satellite. The tax needs to be applied as a percentage based on the above items.
 For example, assume something is assembled in Canada, from Canadian oil. Canada has one of the lower emissions in terms of size as well as high efficiency in terms of GDP. In addition, the transportation costs are extremely low, assuming rail. As such, they may have to pay only 5\% of whatever the tax is.
 <br>
 OTH, China has moderate amount of emissions based on size, HOWEVER, is one of the lowest efficiency in emissions/GDP. In addition, it has extremely high transportation costs (rail in China, then boat to here, and then rail around). As such, they would have 90-100\% of the tax.
 <br>
 American goods made here have a moderate emissions per land and moderate efficient emissions. OTH, our transportation emissions are minor. As such, we might see 30-40\% of the tax.</li>
</ol><p>
 Several points on this:</p><ul>
<li>This must be applied to ALL GOODS. If we apply it only to imported goods, then it will be illegal per WTO. Likewise, if we apply it only to local goods, it would simply be the same as the Dem's Cap/Trade; Worthless.</li>
<li>It really needs to be a sliding scale to reward those nations that clean up their act.</li>
<li>the base tax MUST start low to not kill economies and then INCREASE over time. If a business knows that the tax will increase, it gives them time to adjust their plans. If we hit it fast with high taxes, it will destroy economies.</li></ul><p>
 Ideally, this same approach is used for a number of pollutants. For example, Mercury is one that is screaming to be controlled. China is the largest polluter of it and it will continue to increase with the coal. Likewise, the same is true of their SO* emissions. By applying a slowly increasing tax on nations based on their emissions, we can encourage ALL NATIONS to change.
 <br>
 One last point. Many nations will scream that they should be exempt because they are Developing nations. If that is done, it will simply encourage them to have lower costs goods by cheating. In addition, nearly all of the smaller developing nations HAVE low emissions. They would be at the low end of the tax.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right now , everybody is after the west ( including the west ) to address Climage change and help little nations deal with this .
Mostly by putting cap/trad on OUR energy to address this .
But will it work ?
it would work if all else remains static .
Sadly , that is not the case .
China is adding 1-2 NEW COAL PLANTS EACH WEEK .
These are .5GW size plants .
Worse , the coal is inferior coal .
It is very low grade coal with heavy pollutants .
Then add in the new cars and oil based transportation that is happening in China .
Even with the growth in hydro and wind and Solar and Nukes that China is planning , if they continue this course , they will exceed ALL OF AMERICA 's emission by 2015 .
By 2018 , they will exceed ALL OF America 's AND Western EU .
By 2020 ( 11 very short years ) , they will account for slightly more than 1/2 of all of the CO2 that man has emitted through history .
IOW , all of the cuts that we do , will be worthless .
But it still get worse .
In particular , once we push Cap/trade , other nations will have a strong incentive to grab our manufacturing .
And who will be pushing " cheap " coal plants ?
GE coal and other companies .
Many companies will work to take advantage of the difference in prices ( labor and energy ) .
So , with knowing the above , how do drop the emissions and solve the climate change issues ?
Here is my idea .
All western countries need to cap their single point emissions right away .
IOW , no increase in emissions from Coal , Cement , etc .
Obviously , emissions from transportation ( which is diffuse emissions and difficult to control ) .
Ideally , other nations would join , but that is not likely .
But the west CAN and should cap it .
Put a sliding tax on ALL GOODS at point of retail sale .
It must be based on CO2 emissions FROM THE COUNTRY of main assembly AND the main material AND the transportation of item .
Base the CO2 emissions from satellite .
The tax needs to be applied as a percentage based on the above items .
For example , assume something is assembled in Canada , from Canadian oil .
Canada has one of the lower emissions in terms of size as well as high efficiency in terms of GDP .
In addition , the transportation costs are extremely low , assuming rail .
As such , they may have to pay only 5 \ % of whatever the tax is .
OTH , China has moderate amount of emissions based on size , HOWEVER , is one of the lowest efficiency in emissions/GDP .
In addition , it has extremely high transportation costs ( rail in China , then boat to here , and then rail around ) .
As such , they would have 90-100 \ % of the tax .
American goods made here have a moderate emissions per land and moderate efficient emissions .
OTH , our transportation emissions are minor .
As such , we might see 30-40 \ % of the tax .
Several points on this : This must be applied to ALL GOODS .
If we apply it only to imported goods , then it will be illegal per WTO .
Likewise , if we apply it only to local goods , it would simply be the same as the Dem 's Cap/Trade ; Worthless .
It really needs to be a sliding scale to reward those nations that clean up their act .
the base tax MUST start low to not kill economies and then INCREASE over time .
If a business knows that the tax will increase , it gives them time to adjust their plans .
If we hit it fast with high taxes , it will destroy economies .
Ideally , this same approach is used for a number of pollutants .
For example , Mercury is one that is screaming to be controlled .
China is the largest polluter of it and it will continue to increase with the coal .
Likewise , the same is true of their SO * emissions .
By applying a slowly increasing tax on nations based on their emissions , we can encourage ALL NATIONS to change .
One last point .
Many nations will scream that they should be exempt because they are Developing nations .
If that is done , it will simply encourage them to have lower costs goods by cheating .
In addition , nearly all of the smaller developing nations HAVE low emissions .
They would be at the low end of the tax .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right now, everybody is after the west (including the west) to address Climage change and help little nations deal with this.
Mostly by putting cap/trad on OUR energy to address this.
But will it work?
it would work if all else remains static.
Sadly, that is not the case.
China is adding 1-2 NEW COAL PLANTS EACH WEEK.
These are .5GW size plants.
Worse, the coal is inferior coal.
It is very low grade coal with heavy pollutants.
Then add in the new cars and oil based transportation that is happening in China.
Even with the growth in hydro and wind and Solar and Nukes that China is planning, if they continue this course, they will exceed ALL OF AMERICA's emission by 2015.
By 2018, they will exceed ALL OF America's AND Western EU.
By 2020 (11 very short years), they will account for slightly more than 1/2 of all of the CO2 that man has emitted through history.
IOW, all of the cuts that we do, will be worthless.
But it still get worse.
In particular, once we push Cap/trade, other nations will have a strong incentive to grab our manufacturing.
And who will be pushing "cheap" coal plants?
GE coal and other companies.
Many companies will work to take advantage of the difference in prices (labor and energy).
So, with knowing the above, how do drop the emissions and solve the climate change issues?
Here is my idea.
All western countries need to cap their single point emissions right away.
IOW, no increase in emissions from Coal, Cement, etc.
Obviously, emissions from transportation (which is diffuse emissions and difficult to control).
Ideally, other nations would join, but that is not likely.
But the west CAN and should cap it.
Put a sliding tax on ALL GOODS at point of retail sale.
It must be based on CO2 emissions FROM THE COUNTRY of main assembly AND the main material AND the transportation of item.
Base the CO2 emissions from satellite.
The tax needs to be applied as a percentage based on the above items.
For example, assume something is assembled in Canada, from Canadian oil.
Canada has one of the lower emissions in terms of size as well as high efficiency in terms of GDP.
In addition, the transportation costs are extremely low, assuming rail.
As such, they may have to pay only 5\% of whatever the tax is.
OTH, China has moderate amount of emissions based on size, HOWEVER, is one of the lowest efficiency in emissions/GDP.
In addition, it has extremely high transportation costs (rail in China, then boat to here, and then rail around).
As such, they would have 90-100\% of the tax.
American goods made here have a moderate emissions per land and moderate efficient emissions.
OTH, our transportation emissions are minor.
As such, we might see 30-40\% of the tax.
Several points on this:
This must be applied to ALL GOODS.
If we apply it only to imported goods, then it will be illegal per WTO.
Likewise, if we apply it only to local goods, it would simply be the same as the Dem's Cap/Trade; Worthless.
It really needs to be a sliding scale to reward those nations that clean up their act.
the base tax MUST start low to not kill economies and then INCREASE over time.
If a business knows that the tax will increase, it gives them time to adjust their plans.
If we hit it fast with high taxes, it will destroy economies.
Ideally, this same approach is used for a number of pollutants.
For example, Mercury is one that is screaming to be controlled.
China is the largest polluter of it and it will continue to increase with the coal.
Likewise, the same is true of their SO* emissions.
By applying a slowly increasing tax on nations based on their emissions, we can encourage ALL NATIONS to change.
One last point.
Many nations will scream that they should be exempt because they are Developing nations.
If that is done, it will simply encourage them to have lower costs goods by cheating.
In addition, nearly all of the smaller developing nations HAVE low emissions.
They would be at the low end of the tax.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785219</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 cutbacks cannot stop climate change</title>
	<author>DarkOx</author>
	<datestamp>1255890180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Roughly speaking, more CO2 in the atmosphere causes the temperature to rise faster, and yearly CO2 emissions are adding to what is already there. So the CO2 emissions graph is something like the second derivative of the temperature graph.</p></div><p>Well the first derivative would be the rate of acceleration so, based on your sentence that is the one I would expect to correspond with CO2 levels, not the second which would be the rate temperature change is accelerat(ing), those are very different.</p><p>Also I have never seen such a graph and still can't after some googleing.  I suspect you can't produce one with, unless you use data from one of the MANY discredited reports where data points that were never measured were added as padding or where the recording devices have been found to be to near man made radiators to produce meaningful data.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Roughly speaking , more CO2 in the atmosphere causes the temperature to rise faster , and yearly CO2 emissions are adding to what is already there .
So the CO2 emissions graph is something like the second derivative of the temperature graph.Well the first derivative would be the rate of acceleration so , based on your sentence that is the one I would expect to correspond with CO2 levels , not the second which would be the rate temperature change is accelerat ( ing ) , those are very different.Also I have never seen such a graph and still ca n't after some googleing .
I suspect you ca n't produce one with , unless you use data from one of the MANY discredited reports where data points that were never measured were added as padding or where the recording devices have been found to be to near man made radiators to produce meaningful data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Roughly speaking, more CO2 in the atmosphere causes the temperature to rise faster, and yearly CO2 emissions are adding to what is already there.
So the CO2 emissions graph is something like the second derivative of the temperature graph.Well the first derivative would be the rate of acceleration so, based on your sentence that is the one I would expect to correspond with CO2 levels, not the second which would be the rate temperature change is accelerat(ing), those are very different.Also I have never seen such a graph and still can't after some googleing.
I suspect you can't produce one with, unless you use data from one of the MANY discredited reports where data points that were never measured were added as padding or where the recording devices have been found to be to near man made radiators to produce meaningful data.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785621</id>
	<title>Re:Expect to see more stunts</title>
	<author>Xyrus</author>
	<datestamp>1255893840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Catastrophic? Oh, you're talking about the media over-hype.</p><p>I'm not aware of any respectable scientist that's claiming climate change will be catastrophic. I've read about how changes could negatively affect some areas while positively affect some others. But I'm not aware of anyone (other than the media) claiming some sort of world calamity in the face of climate change.</p><p>BTW, climate audit shouldn't really be used as a source. Nor should you use Real Climate. You should get the research papers directly if you can and draw your own conclusions. But like any field of science, there will those who are doing real science and there will be those who are out to pump themselves up (remember cold fusion). It's sad, but you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water. Researchers the world over agree we are impacting the climate.</p><p>You also jump to claiming the climate models are poor. How do you know? What criteria are you using to determine this? Just because there are a couple of self-serving bastards in the scientific community doesn't mean the bulk of the research isn't scientifically sound. Are the models perfect? Hardly, and they never will be. But saying the models are poor or inadequate needs to be backed up by some serious counter-arguments and data.</p><p>~X~</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Catastrophic ?
Oh , you 're talking about the media over-hype.I 'm not aware of any respectable scientist that 's claiming climate change will be catastrophic .
I 've read about how changes could negatively affect some areas while positively affect some others .
But I 'm not aware of anyone ( other than the media ) claiming some sort of world calamity in the face of climate change.BTW , climate audit should n't really be used as a source .
Nor should you use Real Climate .
You should get the research papers directly if you can and draw your own conclusions .
But like any field of science , there will those who are doing real science and there will be those who are out to pump themselves up ( remember cold fusion ) .
It 's sad , but you should n't throw the baby out with the bath water .
Researchers the world over agree we are impacting the climate.You also jump to claiming the climate models are poor .
How do you know ?
What criteria are you using to determine this ?
Just because there are a couple of self-serving bastards in the scientific community does n't mean the bulk of the research is n't scientifically sound .
Are the models perfect ?
Hardly , and they never will be .
But saying the models are poor or inadequate needs to be backed up by some serious counter-arguments and data. ~ X ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Catastrophic?
Oh, you're talking about the media over-hype.I'm not aware of any respectable scientist that's claiming climate change will be catastrophic.
I've read about how changes could negatively affect some areas while positively affect some others.
But I'm not aware of anyone (other than the media) claiming some sort of world calamity in the face of climate change.BTW, climate audit shouldn't really be used as a source.
Nor should you use Real Climate.
You should get the research papers directly if you can and draw your own conclusions.
But like any field of science, there will those who are doing real science and there will be those who are out to pump themselves up (remember cold fusion).
It's sad, but you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water.
Researchers the world over agree we are impacting the climate.You also jump to claiming the climate models are poor.
How do you know?
What criteria are you using to determine this?
Just because there are a couple of self-serving bastards in the scientific community doesn't mean the bulk of the research isn't scientifically sound.
Are the models perfect?
Hardly, and they never will be.
But saying the models are poor or inadequate needs to be backed up by some serious counter-arguments and data.~X~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782781</id>
	<title>underwater cabinet? Sounds familiar...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255859820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Davey Jones' Locker?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Davey Jones ' Locker ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Davey Jones' Locker?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782771</id>
	<title>cash cow</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1255859640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>yeah right they are going to buy a new homeland. that money shall land in the pockets of politicians and the islanders will shake their fists at westerners and make bombs, because brave president whatever his name was, tried to show us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>yeah right they are going to buy a new homeland .
that money shall land in the pockets of politicians and the islanders will shake their fists at westerners and make bombs , because brave president whatever his name was , tried to show us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yeah right they are going to buy a new homeland.
that money shall land in the pockets of politicians and the islanders will shake their fists at westerners and make bombs, because brave president whatever his name was, tried to show us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29791173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783117
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782987
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782823
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29789601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784753
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783141
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29798303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29795915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29794573
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783211
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29790401
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785493
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784969
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783715
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783117
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29789641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784871
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29794021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783211
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29786761
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782903
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29797445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29788363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783211
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785633
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783211
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29786919
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784289
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_17_202203_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782781
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783747
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785109
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784969
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785621
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29789641
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783211
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787025
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785511
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29788363
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29794021
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784089
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782987
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782839
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782849
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783091
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784243
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782769
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784289
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29786919
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787103
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29790401
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29786761
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782871
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29797445
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782823
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782851
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783151
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783715
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785219
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784007
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29784871
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783141
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785637
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29782981
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783117
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29791173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29787191
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29785633
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29795915
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29798303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29794573
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29789601
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783327
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_17_202203.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_17_202203.29783131
</commentlist>
</conversation>
