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."
...the orbiter shows that the climate on Mars is heating up at the same rate as Earth's?
Not saying we don't have issues we need to address as well... but isn't that an interesting co-incidence?
Agile Artisans
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.
Now of course with Mars we have even less history of their climate than our own but we could extrpolate from earlier photos just how much the visibile frozen material changed on the poles.
One could hope that since climate study on Mars should not be easily politicalized, at least early on, it may give us new isights into our own.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Okay, we're using impact craters for age definition. On a surface as windy and subject to sand storms as Mars' is, isn't that a bit subjective? Can they really extrapolate the age of a surface based on erosion?
In the next paragraph they state,
However, the extent and duration of dust storms varied from year to year.
Seems to me they may need to reevaluate age determination some more.
Does this support the stance that some "scientists" have that global warming may be caused by natural patterns in the sun's energy output?
You don't think that the huge flaming ball at the center of our little system has "that" much influence over our temperatures? Just where do you think we are getting our heat from? On a more serious note, has anyone done a calculation for the ratio of sun temperature changes to the expected rise or fall of temperatures here on earth? In other words, if the old Sol's temperature goes up by 500 C, what will that do to the earth's temp? On a similar vein, what would happen if the sun didn't change its actual temperature, but rather it expanded thus putting the photosphere closer to the earth. What would be the effect for every X miles increase in photosphere size?
That may be true, but my questions are still valid. Everyone is assuming that man is the cause of what may be the warming of the earth (ignoring facts like a single volcanic eruption spews out 500 times as much as greenhouse gases as man has every produced). But with potential evidence on a planet where we are not affecting the climate, that perception may change to real issues. Like, maybe the earth is not a very stable place for long-term habitation by a single dominant species (witness the many mass extinctions over the eons). Thus we might be well advised to spend a lot more money and time on finding a way to get off this rock if we want the species to continue to survive.
I have yet to find a scientist (I mean a real one with a science degree, not a PR person or a journalist) who would disagree that adding CO2 to the atmosphere is increasing the greenhouse effect. If the sun is getting hotter, that does not give us a license to ignore the problem.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
Didn't a big new color band of weather suddenly appear on Jupiter last year? It seems to me that "fast" changes in weather are happening all over our Solar System.
Who knows, but I have a feeling that certain cycles are coming together to really shake things up in this solar system of ours.
Mind | Body | Spirit | Cash
Isn't the human ability to jump rightly or wrongly to obvious conclusions amazing? I mean, you can't PROGRAM illogic like that, but from an Evo Devo viewpoint, post hoc ergo propter hoc has obvious survival advantages and it would sure be useful if you could!
``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
In other news...
Sun Energy Output At Over 1,000 Year Peak
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002242.html
Hmm...
If they are noting a decrease in the polar caps I wonder how is this affecting mars atmosphere. Scientists believe they could terraform mars by increasing it's temperature and melting some ice.
Despite the rant, you did post some interesting links.
One is based on 1991 science and contains this line:
"Last modified by DKS on 10 October 1997."
The other articles are similarly old.
So, did the predictions from NASA about sunspots and cooling come true?
For those who didn't read it, the NASA predictions cited were from a 1997 presentation that predicted less solar activity and cooler temperatures in the next decade.
IIRC, the value of a hypothesis lies largely in its predictive power. Since the decade from 1997-2007 is almost over, perhaps we can check his predictions.
Since I haven't read that the planet is cooling off anywhere, I conclude that either
1) I missed something really big, and so did the Republicans, or
2) He's right about the sun cooling, but we're doing such an effective warming job that we mask the effect, or
3) He's wrong.
Since you're obviously well informed about these things, which is it?
Best wishes,
-greg