Digging further into the details of Martian climate, I see we may be both oversimplifying it. The very high percentage of CO2 notwithstanding, Mars thermal inertia is very low, in its very thin atmosphere, its soil and lack of liquid water. I imagine its eccentric orbit doesn't help.
They do a lot of cherrypicking. Compare their postings to those on Skeptical Science. And he needs to tighten up his moderation policies as the occasional insightful comment get drowned out with all the diatribe directed at Gore, Hansen, Mann etc, even when it's not particularly relevant. Basically you can get away with posting almost anything so long as you don't call someone a denier.
If the big tsunami didn't hit anything, it's still big but not as significant, except as a warning. If those huge flares don't hit us or are deflected, it's the same as your big tsunami.
As you point out, flare and sunspot activity is not necessarily tied to high or low irradiance so if we only have 30 yrs of reliable data, we don't know if the "Solar Grand Maximum" had any significant impact, given that our star is typically fairly consistent in its average output.
The Martian atmosphere is thin compared to Earth's but it's 95% CO2 vs only 1/2 a percent here on Terra. So there's significant heat-trapping potential complicated by the significant amount of dust in the Martian sky.
Comparing Mars, Earth and the Moon is problematic as only 1 has extensive and deep oceans, which store a huge amount of heat.
Mars also get cold enough that as much as a quarter of it's CO2 freezes out of the air at the poles during the winter.
I hear a lot of talk about warming in the solar system, mostly from denialist sycophants enamored of that bug-eyed Englishman. But they also claim that we've been in a solar lull for several years and this is one of the weakest cycles in a long while.
As far as anyone knows, it's never happened this quickly, going from 40% melt to 97% in only a few days. The ice cores likely can't tell us how quickly earlier events like this set in but we do know that globally the 1880s were significantly cooler than nowadays.
The question is if that year or period saw as much of a warm spell in the northern latitudes or Arctic region.
But, the pro-AGW perception is not really mine but that of the WUWTians (wah-woo-shuns?); they react swiftly and negatively to any story that even has the appearance of referencing global warming, so much so that Watt's postings on a given story usually appears at the very top of Google rankings within a few hours.
You won't find too many of the denialists agreeing with Kaku ( he's been roundly criticized ) on WUWT. But, it's all good when he says something that aligns with their world view.
You are aware that this is a PREDICTION by Kaku, not an observation, right?
Despite the recent flare activity, this is one of the weakest solar cycles (so far) in many decades. How many satellites and power grids have been knocked offline by solar activity?
By the way, we haven't yet hit the peak - probably still a year away , but it likely won't be much more severe that what we've seen so far.
Electron and gas flows involve the exchange of positions. I'm sure a lot of homeless guys would be happy to exchange places with Mitt "the Schitt" Romney. Somehow, I don't think he'll be too agreeable to that "law of the universe"
Slashdot Mirror
I sincerely hope you're not considered the optimist in your family.
Europe has a well interconnected grid and more links are being built. There's still some room for pumped hydro in the UK, Scandinavia and Belgium
Another AC citing bullshit and seeding FUD.
Fuck the hell off.
A speaker at TED demonstrated this was due to rampant ringtone piracy.
There's no reason for those 2 things to be exclusionary
Clinton, Dubya and Obama have all been drug users
Doesn't Hawaii also have really good geothermal potential?
Digging further into the details of Martian climate, I see we may be both oversimplifying it.
The very high percentage of CO2 notwithstanding, Mars thermal inertia is very low, in its very thin atmosphere, its soil and lack of liquid water.
I imagine its eccentric orbit doesn't help.
They do a lot of cherrypicking. Compare their postings to those on Skeptical Science.
And he needs to tighten up his moderation policies as the occasional insightful comment get drowned out with all the diatribe directed at Gore, Hansen, Mann etc, even when it's not particularly relevant.
Basically you can get away with posting almost anything so long as you don't call someone a denier.
Spend some time on his site and you'll quickly learn just how much garbage he and his sycophants produce.
I'm not clear on the implications of that. Please explain, thanks.
If the big tsunami didn't hit anything, it's still big but not as significant, except as a warning.
If those huge flares don't hit us or are deflected, it's the same as your big tsunami.
As you point out, flare and sunspot activity is not necessarily tied to high or low irradiance so if we only have 30 yrs of reliable data, we don't know if the "Solar Grand Maximum" had any significant impact, given that our star is typically fairly consistent in its average output.
That's probably as accurate as any of the denialist tripe
Step 4: Profit!!
The Martian atmosphere is thin compared to Earth's but it's 95% CO2 vs only 1/2 a percent here on Terra. So there's significant heat-trapping potential complicated by the significant amount of dust in the Martian sky.
Comparing Mars, Earth and the Moon is problematic as only 1 has extensive and deep oceans, which store a huge amount of heat.
Mars also get cold enough that as much as a quarter of it's CO2 freezes out of the air at the poles during the winter.
I hear a lot of talk about warming in the solar system, mostly from denialist sycophants enamored of that bug-eyed Englishman. But they also claim that we've been in a solar lull for several years and this is one of the weakest cycles in a long while.
So what's warming the solar system?
Interesting links, thanks. Am disappointed so many of the yellow dots on the Big Arctic Map don't have any data, especially the ones around Greenland
As far as anyone knows, it's never happened this quickly, going from 40% melt to 97% in only a few days.
The ice cores likely can't tell us how quickly earlier events like this set in but we do know that globally the 1880s were significantly cooler than nowadays.
The question is if that year or period saw as much of a warm spell in the northern latitudes or Arctic region.
But, the pro-AGW perception is not really mine but that of the WUWTians (wah-woo-shuns?); they react swiftly and negatively to any story that even has the appearance of referencing global warming, so much so that Watt's postings on a given story usually appears at the very top of Google rankings within a few hours.
Tsk, tsk, TonyWattsFanBoy.
Had trouble digging it out of the ol' asscrack?
You won't find too many of the denialists agreeing with Kaku ( he's been roundly criticized ) on WUWT.
But, it's all good when he says something that aligns with their world view.
You are aware that this is a PREDICTION by Kaku, not an observation, right?
Despite the recent flare activity, this is one of the weakest solar cycles (so far) in many decades.
How many satellites and power grids have been knocked offline by solar activity?
By the way, we haven't yet hit the peak - probably still a year away , but it likely won't be much more severe that what we've seen so far.
Anthony Watts denialist site: WattsUpWithThat.com
Sorry, thought it was better known around here. They sure get their thongs stuck in awkward places when Slashdot posts a pro-AGW story.
But, but, ,but, he invented the Internet - how did he not control it?
I see you're up to date with the latest cooligan diatribe at WUWT
Which fag marked this as Offtopic?
Electron and gas flows involve the exchange of positions. I'm sure a lot of homeless guys would be happy to exchange places with Mitt "the Schitt" Romney.
Somehow, I don't think he'll be too agreeable to that "law of the universe"
Whatever turns your, er, crank.
Gay porn alert, /.tters! Do not click, well, unless that's your thing.