www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1720024.ece
Sitemap From The Sunday Times April 29, 2007 Climate change hits Mars Mars is being hit by rapid climate change and it is happening so fast that the red planet could lose its southern ice cap, writes Jonathan Leake. Scientists from Nasa say that Mars has warmed by about 05C since the 1970s. This is similar to the warming experienced on Earth over approximately the same period. Since there is no known life on Mars it suggests rapid changes in planetary climates could be natural phenomena. The mechanism at work on Mars appears, however, to be different from that on Earth. One of the researchers, Lori Fenton, believes variations in radiation and temperature across the surface of the Red Planet are generating strong winds. In a paper published in the journal Nature, she suggests that such winds can stir up giant dust storms, trapping heat and raising the planet's temperature. Fenton's team unearthed heat maps of the Martian surface from Nasa's Viking mission in the 1970s and compared them with maps gathered more than two decades later by Mars Global Surveyor. They found there had been widespread changes, with some areas becoming darker. When a surface darkens it absorbs more heat, eventually radiating that heat back to warm the thin Martian atmosphere: lighter surfaces have the opposite effect. The temperature differences between the two are thought to be stirring up more winds, and dust, creating a cycle that is warming the planet.
Have your say Never having believed half the rubbish about a largely human cause for global warming (and being of the opinion that this is a dangerous assertion at best) this theory is a welcome one. The fact that it is largely dismissed as going against popular theory highlights the lack of open scientific thinking amongst 'experts'. Gavin Harrington, London, England I believe that global warming is FAKER than michael jackson's nose. Steven , Darwine, the data shows that CO2 follows the warming of the earth, and not before, therefore CO2 can't be the "global warming trigger", I suggest that the variations in the sun/sunspots/cosmic radiation have a greater effect on the climate changes. frank M, perth, australia If CO2 is responsible for global warming why were temperatures 200 million years ago so much higher than today?. Surely our planet has gone through many warm and cold periods before humans even existed. We hear many things about our climate such as Global Dimming , Global Warming with so many theories banded about ,which are we to believe?. Lets have less of the Doomsday talk and more positive attitude from these so called Experts. DWilliams, Arbroath, Scotland Al Gore is right in that the debate is over. It should be obvious by now that solar fluctuations are causing "Global Warming". You start with scientific method then finish with science by concensus? The fact that you can't produce scientists who disagree at the moment means global warming theory is true? I don't think there is one scientist who will tell you the earth isn't heating up. Stephen Spencer, Co Springs, For those who still believe that rising CO2 causes rising temperatures, please look at the post-2000 analyses of the Vostok ice core data. Also instructive is the 500-million year geologic reconstruction. Both completely refute the notion that the greenhouse effect is a major contributor to climate CHANGE, and, specifically, that atmospheric CO2 has a significant role in global temperature change. To believe the IPCC's view, you must be willing to believe: 1 Atmospheric CO2 can change temperatures hundreds of years in the past (see Vostok ice core analyses, post 2000). The IPCC is a political organization and a lot of government science jobs now depend upon governments who have invested in the fiction produced by the IPCC. Bob Webster, Andover, New Jersey, USA with regards : "Or perhaps, if you read their reports, they have both considered that and have an explanation: the sulphur based aerosols produced in the industrial expansion of WW2 and its aftermath. These aerosols reflected sunlight back and efeffect (in the Northern hemisphere, not globally) was to lower temperatures. " so between 1945 and 1978 global warming was reduced or even reveresed by aerosols - is it just me or isnt the obvious thing to do to bring them back and reverse the spectre of global catastrophe for good ? perhaps the stuff could be added to jet fuel - then the more we fly the cooler it gets - problem solved ! Clive Brown, Cambridge, UK "an equal number of scientists can be produced who do not subscribe to that theory (and yes, it is a theory). You are free to practice any religion you like, but don't try to push junk science off as fact." In science, facts are based on empirical evidence - oberservations. For instance, it is an observed fact that CO2 concentrations are 30% higher than in 1750. It is an observed fact that tempertaures are measureably and significantly higher than then. A theory (as opposed to a conjecture or hypothesis, which you appear to think are synonyms for theory) is a generally accepted explanation of the observed facts. In this case, the well understood greenhouse gas physics is an excellent explanation, well accepted by the scientists who study this field, for the observed facts of global warming. If there are "equal numbers" of scientists who disagree with this, can they declare themselves? James PhD (Physics), Hampshire, UK "Hey Dan, one volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire history of mankind. As for deforestation logic says the more CO2 the better off our forests would be. Alan D, Avondale, PA / USA" Check out the US Geological Survey (presumably not in the pocket of the EU). They estimate that man made CO2 contrinbutes 150 times that of volcanoes. They state the various factors that they estimate affect global temperatures, including solar and CO2 contributions from various sources. If you don't believe them, produce the counter evidence, but not with this type of soundbite science! If your reason for not believing them is because they have a vested interest to get funding, the best way to get funding for science is to emphasise UNCERTAINTY. Rene Descartes, UK, To Steve Cramer and others: A quote from the website of The Royal Society, the oldest, and arguably, the most respected SCIENTIFIC body on this planet. the overwhelming majority of scientists who work on climate change agree on the main points, even if there is still some uncertainty about particular aspects, such as how the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will change in the future. In the journal Science in 2004, Oreskes published the results of a survey of 928 papers on climate change published in peer-reviewed journals between 1993 and 2003. She found that three-quarters of the papers either explicitly or implicitly accepted the view expressed in the IPCC 2001 report that human activities have had a major impact on climate change in the last 50 years, and none rejected it". The intolerable bigotry displayed in these pages will not. Richard, London, "Damien from Katterbach - check out the CO2 and Temperature records from the 1940s to 1970s. This stunning revelation totally blows their silly greenhouse gas theory out of the windows! Or perhaps, if you read their reports, they have both considered that and have an explanation: the sulphur based aerosols produced in the industrial expansion of WW2 and its aftermath. These aerosols reflected sunlight back and efeffect (in the Northern hemisphere, not globally) was to lower temperatures. Sceptics may feel the IPCC conveniently explains all these little things away, but this is a very complex area of science with many factors involved, all interfering with one another. style anecdote approach that your example typifies is similar to creationists out to prove the earth is only 6000 years old and discredit evolution. Rene Descartes, UK, The report on Mars / Earth mirror tempature rise was first reported here in Oz nearly four weeks ago. I have posted that information on several sites concerned mainly with blaming it all us mere humans, but the new save the earth industry is getting in to top gear and rea...
|
http://csua.com/feed/