Sun causes Mars "GW"

[Dr Mordrid]

Article......

Study: Red planet heating up

CHICAGO, Illinois (Reuters) -- Earth's dusty neighbor Mars is grappling with its own form of climate change as fluctuating solar radiation is kicking up dust and winds that may be melting the planet's southern polar ice cap, scientists said Wednesday.

Researchers have been watching the changing face of Mars for years, studying slight differences in the brightness and darkness of its surface.

These changes in brightness have been generally attributed to the presence of dust, but until now their effect on wind circulation and climate has not been clear.

NASA scientist Lori Fenton and colleagues, reporting this week in the journal Nature, now believe variations in radiation from the surface of Mars are fueling strong winds that stir up giant dust storms, trapping heat and raising the planet's temperature.

By studying changes in light reflected from the surface of Mars -- a measure known as an object's albedo -- they predict the red planet has warmed by around 1 degree Fahrenheit from the 1970s to the 1990s, which may in part have caused the recent retreat of the southern polar ice cap.
>

[Brian Ellis]

So what?

This is entirely expected because:
a) the surface temp of mars is ~230 K, as opposed to ~278 K on earth
b) the Mars atmosphere is ~95% CO2 and this amplifies the effect of changes iin radiative forcing
c) the solar radiation has been increasing over the last 250 years

I suppose you think that this can be extrapolated to terrestrial conditions, so let's analyse what this means.
Let's take, for ease, an average solar irradiance at the earth's surface of 1000 W/m².
The average change in irradiance over the last 250 years is estimated at 0.12 W/m² (limits 0.06 to 0.30 W/m²)
This radiative forcing, alone, would cause an increase of global average temperatures of about 0.05°C (0.025 to 0.125), which is far less than the observed increases.

The naysayers, like yourself and the "Swindle" guys, have to ask themselves, "Am I 100% sure that all climate change is beyond the effect of humans?" Because, if they are not 100% sure, they could be inviting disaster for all of us. If they are sure, they need to come up with unassailable proof; the burden is on them. If any of them have a hidden agenda, they should declare it. I have yet to see any unassailable proof that withstands scientific scrutiny.

[Dr Mordrid]

You're so darned predictable

I posted this just to see if it would bring on that response instead of a discussion about the post subject: Mars

We could have talked about the warming of Mars in the context of the massive water found at the south pole or the recently found caves at the middle latitudes and their implications for manned colonies, which is what a similar post did on a space forum.

Nope, you go into a pro-Earth warming rant as if it were a neuroreflex

[Brian Ellis]

Who is so predictable? The thread title is 'Sun causes Mars "GW"'. This is not even the title of the CNN (great scientists there!) article. No, you made it up to be as provocative as possible. You even use it to distort the article which deals mainly with surface conditions on the planet and not with irradiance, except at a secondary level.

If you have to quote what you obviously believe to be important, why the heck don't you discuss the original Nature report instead of second-hand popular media interpretations? At least, that would give you something more solid for your speculations.

[cjolley]

...
I posted this just to see if it would bring on that response instead of a discussion about the post subject: Mars
...

So it was a troll?
That's beneath you Doc.

[Dr Mordrid]

Call it a quadratic post; two possible answer forms & got the negative. I was actually hoping for a discussion of the science which would have been great, but that's not what happened is it?

[cjolley]

Call it a quadratic post; two possible answer forms & got the negative. I was actually hoping for a discussion of the science which would have been great, but that's not what happened is it?

Well, I suppose you could start that discussion yourself couldn't you?
I would be interested. but don't know enough about it to start.

PS

I posted this just to see if it would bring on that response instead of a discussion about the post subject: Mars

and

I was actually hoping for a discussion of the science...

can't both be true can they?

PPS We are all friends here Doc. No need for tricks. Just start the discussion you want to have.

[Umfriend]

I'm an Umfriend but for the rest of you, yeah, prolly true.

[Gurm]

Y'know, when my libido goes up, MY temperature rises by a couple of degrees too!

Yes I'm hot blooded! Check it and see!
Got a fever burnin' inside of me!
C'mon baby, do you do more than dance?
I'm hot blooded, I'm hot blooded!

[NetSnake]

PPS We are all friends here Doc. No need for tricks. Just start the discussion you want to have.

They are both (really) big children...
I enjoy watching them argue like this

[cjolley]

Y'know, when my libido goes up...

That's Al-bedo.
It only applies to Earth.

[Gurm]

That's Al-bedo.
It only applies to Earth.

I don't care where you apply it, I still get hot! Only application that calms it down is in my ... well, y'know.

[Dr Mordrid]

If you have to quote what you obviously believe to be important, why the heck don't you discuss the original Nature report instead of second-hand popular media interpretations? At least, that would give you something more solid for your speculations.

1. Nature

2. I DIDN'T SPECULATE!! I quoted & highlighted, never mentioning Earth; in fact I composed nothing in the body of the text except for "Article......". I even put GW in quotes in the title. YOU speculated, hence the direction of your reply.

That's Al-bedo.
It only applies to Earth.

Nope; albedo is a standard astronomical term for the fraction of incident electromagnetic radiation reflected by a celestial body; planet, moon, asteroid, whatever.

Well, I suppose you could start that discussion yourself couldn't you? I would be interested. but don't know enough about it to start.

Discussion below....
>
PPS We are all friends here Doc. No need for tricks. Just start the discussion you want to have.

My hope was that the articles link would be read before the reader replied and someone would ask your question. My suspicion was that this is what would happen. My mistake is admitting to the hunch we all get when posting potentially controversial content.

Mars has warmed .65 C just from the increase in solar activity in the last several decades (Earths warming is about .74 C over 150 years). As such its s. polar ice cap is melting, and it has enough water to cover the planet to a depth of 11 meters. More water is in its permafrost; a few meters worth.

Also found are caves; most likely 100m openings into old underground water or lava tubes. The potential for micro-habitats is not small.

This plus the new gullies probably formed by running water in the last couple of years makes a compelling case for getting human geologists, biologists and other scientists there to do a hands-on investigation.

The lunar landings, especially the last two, taught us there is no substitute for trained, experienced human eyeballs.

[cjolley]

...
Nope; albedo is a standard astronomical term for the fraction of incident electromagnetic radiation reflected by a celestial body; planet, moon, asteroid, whatever.
...

LOL, that may be the flattest on it's face one of my jokes has ever fallen.

[Dr Mordrid]

No, it isn't