Why Is This Happening on Mars?

[lukin]

Interesting, and from National Geographic to boot.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

[scribblet]

It's the sun, see, not all of it is man made, it's natural see... just keep stifling those opposing opinions. -

[Michael Hardner]

You would have to correlate the changes in solar power between Earth and Mars.

Here's the first impression from one scientist:

[As for Abdussamatov’s claim that solar fluctuations are causing Earth’s current global warming, Charles Long, a climate physicist at Pacific Northwest National Laboratories in Washington, says the idea is nonsense.

“That’s nuts,” Long said in a telephone interview. “It doesn’t make physical sense that that’s the case.”

In 2005, Long’s team published a study in the journal Science showing that Earth experienced a period of “solar global dimming” from 1960 to 1990, during which time solar radiation hitting our planet’s surface decreased. Then from the mid-1990’s onward, the trend reversed and Earth experienced a “solar brightening.”

LiveScience

Let's wait for the studies to be published and reviewed, though.

Edited October 2, 2010 by Michael Hardner

[ToadBrother]

Interesting, and from National Geographic to boot.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

Mars has an atmosphere much much thinner than Earth's. Can you explain why the two systems should closely map to each other that we can start asserting that if something applies to one it should apply to the other?

[lukin]

Mars has an atmosphere much much thinner than Earth's. Can you explain why the two systems should closely map to each other that we can start asserting that if something applies to one it should apply to the other?

The question is what is causing the ice caps to melt on Mars? We know it's not carbon, right?

[Michael Hardner]

The question is what is causing the ice caps to melt on Mars? We know it's not carbon, right?

I guess we don't know.

[The_Squid]

What does Mars have to do with Federal Politics?

[ToadBrother]

The question is what is causing the ice caps to melt on Mars? We know it's not carbon, right?

That's a question. The other question is why you think a planet whose atmosphere and geology is considerably different than Earth's can reliably be used for a model of Earth climate.

[Saipan]

Martians use too many SUVs, and that is a problem.

[Michael Hardner]

That's a question. The other question is why you think a planet whose atmosphere and geology is considerably different than Earth's can reliably be used for a model of Earth climate.

The idea would be that Earth and Mars are both affected by fluctuations in radiation from the sun. But this idea has already been dismissed out-of-hand. Another comment I read (sorry, no link) indicated that the Martian warming cycles didn't correspond to the solar variability graphs.

[ToadBrother]

The idea would be that Earth and Mars are both affected by fluctuations in radiation from the sun. But this idea has already been dismissed out-of-hand. Another comment I read (sorry, no link) indicated that the Martian warming cycles didn't correspond to the solar variability graphs.

Oh, I understand where it comes from, but in general when talking about two systems with a high degree of divergence, attempting to map phenomena from one system to another is tricky business. Mars has an incredibly thin atmosphere (something like 0.0059 atmospheres), virtually no magnetic field and considerably more ionizing radiation (a real safety concern if we ever send anyone there). In gross parameters, Mars isn't a lot like Earth. You'd best be looking at a much more denser atmosphere, say Venus, Titan or even the gas giants if you want a better overall analogy, though even these have enough differences to make that problematic (for instance, Titan receives considerably less radiation from both the sun and its primary, and a world like Jupiter is puking out considerably more radiation than it receives).

This is just the sort of over-simplified "gotcha" kind of argument you expect of scientific "skeptics", regardless of the field they're skeptical of. I remember a few years ago some Young Earth Creationist insisting that the Grand Canyon must be young because there are similar looking formations on Mount St. Helens formed by flash floods when the glacier melted. Again, the fallacy was in assuming that because two things have some surface similarities that somehow they were formed and behaved in precisely the same way.

[Michael Hardner]

Oh, I understand where it comes from, but in general when talking about two systems with a high degree of divergence, attempting to map phenomena from one system to another is tricky business. Mars has an incredibly thin atmosphere (something like 0.0059 atmospheres), virtually no magnetic field and considerably more ionizing radiation (a real safety concern if we ever send anyone there). In gross parameters, Mars isn't a lot like Earth. You'd best be looking at a much more denser atmosphere, say Venus, Titan or even the gas giants if you want a better overall analogy, though even these have enough differences to make that problematic (for instance, Titan receives considerably less radiation from both the sun and its primary, and a world like Jupiter is puking out considerably more radiation than it receives).

Sure, but if you saw a cycle with the same periodicity on Mars, then you might find something... however ...

This is just the sort of over-simplified "gotcha" kind of argument you expect of scientific "skeptics", regardless of the field they're skeptical of.

... exactly. People with PHDs who publish continuously for years are not likely to make easy mistakes that the layman understands with the snap of a finger.

I remember a few years ago some Young Earth Creationist insisting that the Grand Canyon must be young because there are similar looking formations on Mount St. Helens formed by flash floods when the glacier melted. Again, the fallacy was in assuming that because two things have some surface similarities that somehow they were formed and behaved in precisely the same way.

Or the assertion that the amount of dust on the moon was proof that the earth was much younger than thought... which turned out to be a simple mistake repeated over and over again, even when adherents knew that it was a mistake.

This is why moderated debate is a great way to learn.