Slashdot Mirror
Mars Orbiter Sees Changes
pin_gween writes "The long-lived Mars Global Surveyor (8 yrs and flying) has enabled scientists to see changes in the surface of Mars. From the article: 'New gullies that did not exist in mid-2002 have appeared on a Martian sand dune. New impact craters formed since the 1970s suggest changes to age-estimating models. And for three Mars summers in a row, deposits of frozen carbon dioxide near Mars' south pole have shrunk from the previous year's size, suggesting a climate change in progress.' The probe's primary mission ended in 2001 and scientists are hopeful the orbiter's life can be extended for another 5 -10 years."
Careful, lest ye be branded heretic by the Environmental Priesthood. Global Warming is obviously caused by SUVs (as opposed to accelerated by them). Remember, there's no PAC money if they find out that nature is simply taking its course.
nos laetus epulor qui would domito nos
While it may be tempting to draw parallels to what is happening to the climate on earth, keep in mind that:
* Correlation does not equal causation.
* Data from Mars is only available for three years, while data from Earth is available for thousands of years.
* Climate dynamics on Mars might be completely different from Earth.
Guess why it's hotter on Venus than on Mercury.
(And no, the answer does not involve women in any way)
It does show that climate can change rapidly on a global scale without the help of man.
Given the fairly different ecologies of Mars and Earth, I'd say it would have to just be a co-incidence (unless it's external pressures such as the sun causing it, although I doubt the sun has THAT much influence).
I wouldn't doubt that the sun has that much influence. Perhaps a stable sun SHOULDN'T have that much influence - but then there's a great deal we don't know.
There are some theories that part of global warming is due to differences in the sun's output. Many who subscribe to that theory are the deniers of man's contribution to atmospheric changes, but others find it a plausible contributor to SOME of the warming that's going on.
Gathering data from Mars gives a possible 'control' in the experiment we're all running with earth's atmosphere. If we find earth's temperature rise slows (or goes backwards) at the same time Mars does the apparent same, then there's more study to be done on what's affecting earth.
It's all information, it'll all be useful to us in some way. Drawing conclusions from 3 years worth of data may be premature, but the mars surveyor isn't going away any time soon. More info will come in
>
That would in fact be surprising, since Mars is a smaller, cooler planet with no oceans and a thinner atmosphere. Even if you applied the same stress to the two systems, you wouldn't expect to get the same results.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Strictly speaking, not everybody is assuming that. Those with a political motivation for assuming so often assume that, and those with a political motivation to assume the opposite often assume the opposite. Those not inclined to let their political inclinations determine their opinion (which includes those cynical enough to see past their political idealism) are a mixed lot. The environment is such a politicized issue that it's hard to take a sensible position without being shouted down by one group of zealots or another. "Obviously mankind couldn't possibly cause global warming" vs "Obviously if we hadn't elected Bush, global warming wouldn't be a problem today."
I, for one, am agnostic about how much mankind has contributed to the current bout of global warming, though I am attracted to some aspects of environmentalism or conservationism for quality of life reasons (I prefer to breathe clean air, etc.)
DO NOT believe the evidence! Just because warming trends are happening on two different planets is NO reason to think that there might be a common cause, like the solar energy cycle. DO NOT read up NASA predictions for solar cooling and cooler weather on Earth. DO NOT look at the graph showing the correlation between solar output and the Earth's climate. DO NIT read up on the data showing that most stars like the sun show variability in output. DO NOT read about how the Earth's climate has changed greatly in the past, but always oscillates in a limited range.
Read only government approved scare stories. Believe only government approved computer climate models (even if they do not yet generate outputs that conform to the real data we see). Accept as an article of faith that the "cause" of the "problem" is fossil fuels (even though the majority of warming in the last 200 years occurred before the Industrial Revolution really got underway). Accept only "solutions" to the "problem" like Kyoto (even though Kyoto does not bind the fastest growing nations to any curbs in carbon use, and even though Kyoto would drastically depress standards of living growth in the first world).
When anyone challenges the government story on global warming, accuse them of being in the pay of "Big Oil". DO NOT judge the data and theories on their own merits; preemptorilly disbelieve anything that does not conform to what you've read in Time magazine and heard in Al Gore's political speeches, even if it comes from Mars probes, or experts on solar energy.
Well if Mars is going through what appears to be similar changes as the Earth then perhaps we need to go back and look at what we share in common, namely the sun.
Congratulations! That's an excellent use of rhetoric. In a single stroke, you make climatologists look like idiots ("The sun! Oh my god, we forgot about the sun!") and you push your political agenda.
Do you really expect readers to be naive enough to believe that Martian or terrestrial climatologists have not incorporated solar output into their models? Of course they have, for as far back as those measurements exist. Solar output is taken into account both for climate models on Mars and on earth, and it fails to account for global warming on earth. Climate change on Mars is expected and has been predicted.
How our beautiful mind works... We see changes because we start looking. The changes do not start to happen when we are looking. And because both A and B happen at the same time we think A and B are connected.
Yes, I am the one with the legendary sig.
First it has to be established that Earth's heating is anthropogenic. That hasn't happened and there's a piss-pot full of data that shows the earth has been hotter in the past than it is now. In fact, for the past million years, every 100,000 years or so the earth has heated up just like it is now. And yes, the last time it happenned was 100,000 years ago. Before you go chasing CO2 as the culprit, you'd better be sure it's the guilty party otherwise you're wasting resources that could be better used elsewhere.
The second issue is that the developed world represents about 1.5 billion people whereas there are another 5 billion people out there who have yet to get out of crushing poverty. As they climb out of that hole in the next century, their contribution to CO2 is going to drawf whatever cutbacks we would make. Even if we cut back 100%, it's still going to rise. IF CO2 turns out to be the hazard some would have you believe it is it makes more sense to figure out how to get it out of the atmosphere because there isn't much prospect of preventing those 5 billion from adding to what's already there. You can't very well say to them, "No, you're stuck in grinding poverty because if you crawl out, you'll make the world warmer."
Or those celebrities who travel the globe for their tv show called "Trippin'" and claim to be environmentally friendly but really they just bought emissions points from other organizations.
Blessed be he who reads this post, Cursed be he who tells my boss.
Disconnect your brain and blame Bush for this as well. Information? Facts? And understanding of processes? We need none of these. Instead we should stifle businesses without knowing what's going on. Why? Because we will FEEL better about ourselves for doing our part. Who cares if our efforts actually do anything, we'll have a clearer conscious.
Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"
Surely, this is W's fault, right? ;) Let the doom and gloom conspiracies begin!
Actually, it clearly shows we do not have enough information about weather to make "predictions". Sometimes I wonder how we humans can be so arrogant. We can't figure out where Katrina is headed or how powerful it is, but we are "smart" enough to establish that global warming is real and will cause $x degrees increase over $y years.
If we were as powerful as we think we are, why didn't we just stop the hurricane while it was in the Gulf? We aren't powerful, we don't understand long term global weather, we probably need to take reasonable steps to reduce pollution, but we need to stop making "predictions" about things we, as a species, are very ignorant of.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!