<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: EPA Climate Action Upheld by a federal appeals court	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/06/26/epa-climate-action-upheld-by-scotus/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/06/26/epa-climate-action-upheld-by-scotus/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2012 03:17:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.6</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Michael Kelsey		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/06/26/epa-climate-action-upheld-by-scotus/#comment-493540</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kelsey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2012 03:17:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=12522#comment-493540</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Science Magazine had a nice piece on the decision (http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/06/climate-science-gets-a-hug-in-us.html) with an excellent sound-bite from the appeals court&#039;s decision:

&quot;EPA is not required to re-prove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question.&quot;

As described in the Science news piece, the court came down quite firmly on the side of both the ACG science itself, and on EPA&#039;s use of it in formulating its regulations.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Science Magazine had a nice piece on the decision (<a href="http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/06/climate-science-gets-a-hug-in-us.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/06/climate-science-gets-a-hug-in-us.html</a>) with an excellent sound-bite from the appeals court&#8217;s decision:</p>
<p>&#8220;EPA is not required to re-prove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question.&#8221;</p>
<p>As described in the Science news piece, the court came down quite firmly on the side of both the ACG science itself, and on EPA&#8217;s use of it in formulating its regulations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
