Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says

[Herman Munster]

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

Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human- induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory.

Earth is currently experiencing rapid warming, which the vast majority of climate scientists says is due to humans pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. (Get an overview: "Global Warming Fast Facts".)

Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures.

In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row.

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said.

[Cerridwen]

1. I'm gonna snark first and read second ;-)

Did he get his 10 grand from Exxon yet?

Now - off to read.

[SoFlaJet]

7. Damn you beat me to the punch

we're quick around here...my post was gonna be Cha-Ching ring up another 10 grand

[Cerridwen]

8. LOL

That's why I snarked first. If I read first I wouldn't be the first snark.

:rofl:

[Buzz Clik]

11. Lame. Totally lame.

There's some horrible science and non-science being funded and produced with political and economic agendas. And there's good science being produced and funded that has no agenda at all.

The key is not where the money comes from but the quality of the science.

Can either of you dispute the science involved?


EDIT: Further down in the thread, there are some science-based clouds of doubt cast over this study. They are far more relevant than suspicions about funding.

[Phredicles]

2. Can't Terrestrial warming have human AND solar causes?

We have to deal with it no matter why it's happening, and it clearly is happening. And no one's ever made a persuasive case that it isn't bad to have all this gunk in our air and water.

[Buzz Clik]

12. Absolutely. They are linked.

Increases in carbon dioxide during a natural cooling cycle would result in less cooling due to the greenhouse effect. Increased carbon dioxide during a relatively flat period in the natural cycle of temperature would result in slight increases in temperature.

If we're in a natural heating cycle, then the increased CO₂ would result in even greater heating.

I am very, very skeptical about the chatter about the current warming cycle. For the past ten years, the most credible climate scientist on the planet were telling us that anthropogenic global warming would not be observed until well past 2020. Suddenly, with the current trends in temperature, we have folks like James Hansen talking as if this is what they predicted all along.

Global warming from human causes is serious and it is looming; I just don't believe it is here yet.

[kestrel91316]

20. Nope, it's all or none, one or the other. Can't have none of those

phony liberul GRAY AREAS now, can we????

[Speck Tater]

3. Now THAT would be a REALLY inconvenient truth!

After we've all shot off our mouths about how it's human-caused, we could end up looking like fools.

Looks like to save face we'll have to stay the course in denial of this possibility. After all, truth is only truth when it's consistent with our politically beliefs.

[yardwork]

5. So one scientist in Russia, who is disbelieved by every other reputable scientist on Earth

is more credible to you than the thousands of scientists who have "shot off their mouths" about the causes of global warming?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

13. That word, "we." I don't think it means what you think it means.

[Zuiderelle]

15. LOL. We could end up looking like fools.

Indeed. Especially if we drop all the scientific evidence we have up to this point to believe "one scientist's controversial theory."

[Jack Sprat]

31. but Igor has been working in his lab

on this global warming theory since Tuesday afternoon.

[yardwork]

4. If you read the entire article, you will find that nobody agrees with him

"Perhaps the biggest stumbling block in Abdussamatov's theory is his dismissal of the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric gases such as carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped near the planet's surface.

He claims that carbon dioxide has only a small influence on Earth's climate and virtually no influence on Mars.

But "without the greenhouse effect there would be very little, if any, life on Earth, since our planet would pretty much be a big ball of ice," said Evan, of the University of Wisconsin."

[NoGOPZone]

6. Last line of the first page of artcle.

"Abdussamatov's work, however, has not been well received by other climate scientists"

[Cerridwen]

9. And this from a journalist who investigated rather than taking

dictation had this to say:

--snip--

Oddly enough, most of the news coverage neglected to mention that the document released on Feb. 2 by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was not the latest multiyear assessment report, which will run to something like 1,500 pages when it is released in May. It was only the 21-page "Summary for Policymakers," a document written chiefly by government bureaucrats — not scientists — and intended to shape public opinion. Perhaps the summary will turn out to be a faithful reflection of the scientists' conclusions, but it wouldn't be the first time if it doesn't.

In years past, scientists contributing to IPCC assessment reports have protested that the policymakers' summary distorted their findings — for example, by presenting as unambiguous what were actually only tentative conclusions about human involvement in global warming. This time around, the summary is even more confident: It declares it "unequivocal" that the Earth has warmed over the past century and "very likely" — meaning more than 90percent certain — that human activity is the cause. (emphasis added)

--snip--

link to article

edit: update formating

[FogerRox]

10. I cant even call that science.

[MADem]

14. If you'd just turn down the thermostat on the sun, why, there'd be no problem!!!

Ka-ching, he'll be cashing his check in no time!

Geez, we ought to come up with a few theories of our own....

[leftofthedial]

16. My house is a mess

I haven't really cleaned up in weeks.

Today I saw a picture of a really messy house in Alabama.

I guess I'm not a slob after all!

[Cerridwen]

17. Abdussamatov - Global Cooling - no need for Kyoto Protocol

--snip--

Dr. Abdussamatov goes further, debunking the very notion of a greenhouse effect. "Ascribing 'greenhouse' effect properties to the Earth's atmosphere is not scientifically substantiated," he maintains. "Heated greenhouse gases, which become lighter as a result of expansion, ascend to the atmosphere only to give the absorbed heat away."

The real news from Saint Petersburg -- demonstrated by cooling that is occurring on the upper layers of the world's oceans -- is that Earth has hit its temperature ceiling. Solar irradiance has begun to fall, ushering in a protracted cooling period beginning in 2012 to 2015. The depth of the decline in solar irradiance reaching Earth will occur around 2040, and "will inevitably lead to a deep freeze around 2055-60" lasting some 50 years, after which temperatures will go up again.

Because of the scientific significance of this period of global cooling that we're about to enter, the Russian and Ukrainian space agencies, under Dr. Abdussamatov's leadership, have launched a joint project to determine the time and extent of the global cooling at mid-century. The project, dubbed Astrometry and given priority space-experiment status on the Russian portion of the International Space Station, will marshal the resources of spacecraft manufacturer Energia, several Russian research and production centers, and the main observatory of Ukraine's Academy of Sciences. By late next year, scientific equipment will have been installed in a space-station module and by early 2009, Dr. Abdussamatov's space team will be conducting a regular survey of the sun.

-snip-

"There is no need for the Kyoto Protocol now. It does not have to come into force until at least 100 years from no w," Dr. Abdussamatov concluded. "A global freeze will come about regardless of whether or not industrialized countries put a cap on their greenhouse- gas emissions."

link to article

I guess we're just doomed. Don't bother to do anything. *sigh* /snark

[kestrel91316]

18. Ok, so this proves that the Greenhouse Effect doesn't exist, and

that CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas, and fossil fuel use doesn't give off CO2, and the earth isn't a closed system, and there has been NO increase in atmospheric CO2 since the Industrial Revolution, and all the earth's climatologists are just mental defectives.

Whoopee!!!!!!!!! I got me a license to pollute to my heart's content with NO consequences!!!!!!!!!!! I'm gonna go get me a HUMMER and go to Disneyland!!!!!!

[symbolman]

19. Here's what a right winger would say to him

if he was a Liberal Scientist..

"So HOW do you KNOW this? Have YOU ever BEEN THERE? No. No ONE has been there... But unless you've received the 'Grant' from the American Enterprise Institute already, we can't take you seriously.. One other thing, you must also have evidence of Noah's Ark type floods on Mars as well.. Did Jesus DIE for the Martian's SINS as well?"

Deranged.

Not like BILLIONS OF CARS and FACTORIES could have anything to do with it.

Sure there have been swings, but there's PROOF in the ICE that it's NEVER Been this bad, or as fast.

THough I will grant this, 99% of Most LIFE is EXTINCT in the history of the planet, and that's oddly enough no cause for alarm :)

[Peace Patriot]

21. National Geographic has published at least two rightwing spin articles in recent

issues that I have noticed--one on Venezuela, and another on Saddam Hussein (visually equating mass deaths he was allegedly responsible for with Nazi death camps). I was amazed at the rightwing political spin on Venezuela (an issue circa 2006). I'm not sure of the year on the Saddam Hussein article (read it in a doctor's office). National Geographic is not politically neutral, and I'm beginning to wonder who has taken it over, or perhaps it was always sneakily pro-corporate, pro-rightwing, and I never noticed before. The Bush Junta and its war profiteering corporate news monopoly propagandists have prompted me to look into a number of national and international matters that I had not investigated very much, and to become 100% distrustful of everything the Bush Junta and the corporate news monopolies say. Neither can be trusted on even the simplest facts, nor, of course, on analysis and opinion. National Geographic has now fallen into this category, in my view. Not to be trusted. So it does not surprise me that they have found and promoted the one scientist among tens of thousands of scientists on planet earth who questions the man-made causes of global warming. The logical question to ask--besides, does Exxon-Mobile now own National Geographic as well?--is: If the sun is increasing earth's temperature, how stupid is it for humankind to keep pouring pollutants into the atmosphere that exacerbate that impact? I haven't read the whole article, so I don't know if it ever raises this logical question. But I'll tell you that it wouldn't surprise me to next see National Geographic touting some obscure, "lone gunmen" theorist about evolution, who "questions" the facts and analysis of tens of thousands of other scientists that life on earth, including our own, evolved over the millennia, and was not the work of one day, by an all-powerful God, as the Bible says. You heard it here first. National Geographic is showing signs of rightwing political influence, and is not to be trusted.

[IDemo]

26. There are still some good articles to be found

I posted a link to this one a day or so ago. It describes the disastrous effects that oil has had on the people and environment of Nigeria, with the Nigerian government and military operating along with Shell Oil to trash the Niger delta. Definitely worth the read.

Not to say that some pieces, such as those you referred to, couldn't have been done in a more balanced manner.

[depakid]

34. Their issue on the future of energy was laughable

They should probably stick to ecology and anthropology....

[shadowknows69]

22. Ok, just one more time

WE DON'T CARE WHOSE FAULT IT IS. PLEASE FIGURE OUT HOW TO FIX IT.

[TheBaldyMan]

23. cigarettes are good for you too, lead is safe as a fuel additive

I'd take a pinch of salt with this report.

[POAS]

28. Woody Allen proved cigarettes are good for you in

the 1973 movie "Sleeper".

[TheBaldyMan]

32. I think those were cigars, taken along wirth high-fat foods & alcohol.

but who needs facts ?

[POAS]

36. I'm pretty sure it was all tobacco products

besides facts are such inconvenient things! :evilgrin:

[Johonny]

24. I think he's wrong

Solar irradiance isn't increasing.

[daleo]

25. How does he explain Venus, if he doesn't believe in the CO2 greenhouse effect

Venus is the classic case of a greenhouse effect gone wild. It is much hotter than it should be, given its distance from the sun. I can't believe this guy runs an observatory.

If you google his name, he is getting picked up by every right wing anti-environment media source and blog on the planet.

On edit - Apparently his Mars claims are based on one area of Mars, observed over three solar years. The Wiki discussion of his claims (on a forum, not in an article) are interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Global_warming

[murloc]

27. I'm not a scientist, but its obvious this guy an idiot.

Simple common sense.

"Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures."

So the planet is "enjoying" being warmer? On what basis does he assert this? Did he interview Mars? :)

Clearly this is an idiot who is trying to foster the notion that warmer is "better" for Earth...afterall its better for Mars.

A variation on the "if you cant beat'm join'm" theme.

[slackmaster]

29. Interesting observation but there is no quantitative comparison

Between the ice caps on Earth and Mars, and to me it seems difficult to conceive of how one could be designed.

We have known for a long time that Earth's climate has (recently at least) had about a 100,000 year cycle of glaciation and melting. But the present situation is different than any that can be gleaned from the best available evidence for past atmospheric composition, which is the ice core data.



The level of carbon dioxide has been rising steadily, and there is no evidence that it has ever been as high as it is today - 300 PPM around 325,000 years ago, more than 370 today. Ice core measurements are less precise than direct ones, but it's pretty hard to get around the Keeling Curve:

[AnOhioan]

30. No words, just.....

:eyes:

[depakid]

33. This has repeatedly been debunked

Shame on National Geographic for continuing to promote this shit.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/10/global-warming-on-mars/

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/12/17/222712/69

[rug]

35. Not to worry, martians are changing their light bulbs.