Global warming causes...biggest con since 9/11... Mars proof

[mason-free party]

"GLOBAL WARMING "IS A GOVERNMENT CON...DUE TO SOLAR ACTIVITY NOT CARBON EMISSIONS (SOLA) Add Favourite

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.ht ml?source=rss

AL GORE...YA FULL OF S-H-I-T-E

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says
Kate Ravilious
for National Geographic News

February 28, 2007
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".)




Enlarge Photo



Email to a Friend

RELATED
Photo Gallery: Global Warming
New Mars Pictures Show Signs of Watery "Aquifers" (February 16, 2007)
Climate Change Predictions Not Exaggerated, Analysis Says (February 1, 2007)

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.

Solar Cycles

Abdussamatov believes that changes in the sun's heat output can account for almost all the climate changes we see on both planets.

Mars and Earth, for instance, have experienced periodic ice ages throughout their histories.

"Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said.

By studying fluctuations in the warmth of the sun, Abdussamatov believes he can see a pattern that fits with the ups and downs in climate we see on Earth and Mars.

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

[Light Infantree]

[Pikey]

Thanx for that MFP. I also believe its a con and that its due to solar activity.

This ties in with the ancient knowledge and the reserach and discoveries made by the likes of Graham Hancock ("Fingerprint of the Gods"), Robert Bauval, etc. and the Mayan cycle

[John White]

The cause of global warming appears relevant (or even if its occuring at all), and to a certain extent it is, if government uses global warming as an excuse to lurch towards totalitarianism: but I wonder if it truly is. Whether the planet is changing becuase of mans activities or solar radiation, or even a photon belt, does nothing to change the fact that the way humanity treats it's one and ONLY home is retarded: and thats the point I always try to hammer home

[Dogsmilk]

Just one thing - why is this always either/or?

I see no reason why the propositions

a/The earth heats through natural solar cycles
b/Human activity releases 'greenhouse gasses' that cause the planet to heat up

Can't both be true.

Even if the earth would be heating up naturally anyway, perhaps we could also contribute to it...?

[paul wright]

This isn't either/or, dogsmilk
The earth is warming as the solar vibration attenuates and the magnetic fields weaken
There may be a contribution from carbon emissions but it's not the only factor
The vibratory field element is the most important
The earth's warming because it's vibrating faster
Simple as that

[ian neal]

This thread title is highly misleading

The link MFP links to and similar information posted on this thread do not deny global warming, they challenge whether it is human caused. Big difference

Claiming global warming is a con is counter-productive

What dh is referring to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schumann_resonance

[mason-free party]

[Newspeak International]

Telgraph even says human impact is exaggerated:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=VZSX1A5FO4QDVQFI QMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/02/11/warm11.xml

[ian neal]

Hi MFP

I'm just trying to point out that such a title can and probably will be interpretted by critics as saying

[alfsevic]

just my opinion,
in the seventies, Margaret Thatcher discovered that nuclear energy was much cheaper than thousands of coal miners digging away. So she employed thousands of scientists to prove that coal and oil was not so good, just so she could sell her nuclear power, "mainly because there were so many CND demonstrations in England then". OK a scientist can prove the cause of something, and if his existence depends on it he can come to any result that is expected from him. Actually it´s about the same with the media. So we´ve got global warming now, and millions of fundamentalist brainwashed greenies really believe that the doomsday is nearing without even thinking about ice ages and interglacial times.

like i said just my opinion

[johndoe]

the solar variation theory was debunked a while ago. if solar variation did have such an impact then we would need to rethink such fundamental questions as the young sun problem.

[Ignatz]

[andyb]

Thursday Channel 4 9PM:

The Great Global Warming Swindle

[rodin]

[ian neal]

[johndoe]

"there is the potential that global warming is the primary cause of greater releases of CO2/greenhouse gases into the environment."

it could be true but in fact the carbon cycle relies on an increase in temperature resulting in an increase in erosion and therefor carbon lock up.

"What's your explanation for the simultaneous warming of Earth and Mars?"

it could of course be coinidental. remember mars and earth are very different planets

[Leiff]

[rodin]

[johndoe]

"They might be very different planets but one thing they do have in common is the laws of physics eg. if the temperature rises enough - ice melts... "

only half true, there are other ways to make ice melt without increasing the temperature.

"I could have added and every other member of the solar vsystem. They are ALL warmıng up probably due to structural faılure brought about by the ıntense heat..."

care to provide any evidence for this?

[Leiff]

[johndoe]

my hypothesis? hardly, a bit of well known physics.

[rodin]

[johndoe]

well lets' see.... if i want to be a pednat i could always kick pluto back on the basis that it's not planet. unless we are going to count "member" as object and then your proof of warming on every "member" in the solar system as was claimed gets much harder.

but let's allow pluto and just look at the source and see what it says

"The change is likely a seasonal event"

"The increasing temperatures are more likely explained by two simple facts: Pluto's highly elliptical orbit significantly changes the planet's distance from the Sun during its long "year," which lasts 248 Earth years; and unlike most of the planets, Pluto's axis is nearly in line with the orbital plane, tipped 122 degrees. Earth's axis is tilted 23.5 degrees."

oh my god an object rotatating around the sun has seasons, do you want the front page for that one?

as for jupiter it actually gives out more heat than it can possibly absorb from the sun anyway so the effects of any solar variation are also going to be insignificant.

also two of your sources are far from reputable, try to find something with a little less bias from now on. it does your argument no good.

[James C]

[Leiff]

[johndoe]

okay leiff but we'll need to start at the beginning.......

mars is a smaller planet than earth and because of this lost it's internal heat much quicker.

so it doesn't have a liquid core.

because of this it no longer has a dynamo effect like earth has.

this is why it doesn't have a magnetosphere.

the magnetosphere stops the solar wind.

without the magnetosphere the solar wind can erode the planetary atmosphere.

less atmosphere = less pressure.

less pressure = lower melting temperature.

lower melting temperature = less ice.

this has been an ongoing process on mars, it started out as a moist warm planet with a hospitable atmosphere, but this has slowly changed and it will eventually end up a cold, dry, dead planet.

[Leiff]

I see, but the article mentions three summers in a row...

[rodin]

[johndoe]

"and this is causing a 5 billion year old planet to melt its ice caps in the few decades timescale of the global warming phenomenon? "

who said it was limited to the last few decades? this has been an ongoing process we just haven't been looking for the last 5 billion years.

we are noticing now because we have the technology to.

"So I don't think they are referring to the gradual process that you describe and I guess the thinner atmosphere and lack of magnetosphere would make Mars more susceptible to variations from the sun despite being further away than the Earth."

well no...... the magnetosphere protects the planet from the solar wind not radiation (the solar wind is made of electrons and protons not photons). and what would be truly important to surface temperature is distance from the sun. and you have it backwards over the atmosphere, in fact if mars had a thicker atmosphere it would be hotter.