<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: National Geographic Magazine: a treasure trove of relevant information every month</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/09/26/national-geographic-a-treasure-trove-every-month/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/09/26/national-geographic-a-treasure-trove-every-month/</link>
	<description>Human Animals at the Crossroads of Culture, Science, Religion and Media</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:28:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: FH</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/09/26/national-geographic-a-treasure-trove-every-month/#comment-14498</link>
		<dc:creator>FH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:45:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1624#comment-14498</guid>
		<description>Haven't seen the National Geographic for  few years. Is the ratio of men to women in the world still 10 to 1? Have the women acquired any more practical clothing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Haven&#8217;t seen the National Geographic for  few years. Is the ratio of men to women in the world still 10 to 1? Have the women acquired any more practical clothing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Klarmann</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/09/26/national-geographic-a-treasure-trove-every-month/#comment-14497</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Klarmann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:41:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1624#comment-14497</guid>
		<description>I used to read the Geographic. It is an excellent source of cultural and scientific knowledge presented in impeccable form. But I noticed that a majority of the articles covered ground that I'd read about up to a year earlier in Scientific American (in more detail), or about 3 months earlier in Smithsonian (with comparable presentation).

With only so many hours available to read, I stopped subscribing to National Geographic. Anything important that I may have missed would show up on TV in another month or so, anyway.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to read the Geographic. It is an excellent source of cultural and scientific knowledge presented in impeccable form. But I noticed that a majority of the articles covered ground that I&#8217;d read about up to a year earlier in Scientific American (in more detail), or about 3 months earlier in Smithsonian (with comparable presentation).</p>
<p>With only so many hours available to read, I stopped subscribing to National Geographic. Anything important that I may have missed would show up on TV in another month or so, anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
