<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.fastcompany.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title></title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/member_recent_content/145479</link>
 <description>Member recent activity block for member profile page</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Comment on Node  ant</title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/comment/comment-node-ant-2877</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;During ww2, a book was published- 100 scientists against Einstein...his response, &quot;why 100. If I were wrong, 1 would be enough&quot;. Why is a 9 page article necessary to discredit someone? I read c2c, but I had no knowledge of Mcdonough&#039;s rock star status. I found this article to be an exercise in splitting hairs, contriving facts, and quoting anonymous sources. The author doesn&#039;t provide the name of the ghost writer for c2c. She blames Mcdonough for the reluctance of companies to &quot;go green&quot;- an absurd argument.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fastcompany.com/comment/comment-node-ant-2877&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 00:19:43 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Darren Murtha</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1074800 at http://www.fastcompany.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
