<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	  <title>Ask MetaFilter questions tagged with counter-arguement</title>
      <link>http://ask.metafilter.com/tags/counter-arguement</link>
      <description>Questions tagged with 'counter-arguement' at Ask MetaFilter.</description>
	  <pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:15:51 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:15:51 -0800</lastBuildDate>

      <language>en-us</language>
	  <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	  <ttl>60</ttl>	  
	<item>
	<title>Peak Oil? nah...</title>
	<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/22822/Peak%2DOil%2Dnah</link>	
	<description>I&apos;m looking for a good refutation of &quot;Peak Oil&quot;. Articles about the certainty/validity of Peak Oil are not hard to come by, but I have yet to find a decent opposing view. I&apos;m open to the possibility that these claims have basis, but I feel as though my reading on the topic is skewed heavily in favor of it.</description>
	<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:ask.metafilter.com,2005:site.22822</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:15:51 -0800</pubDate>
	<category>apocalypse</category>
	<category>counter-arguement</category>
	<category>oil</category>
	<category>peakoil</category>
	<category>refutation</category>
	<dc:creator>phrontist</dc:creator>
	</item>
	
	</channel>
</rss>

