Global Warming on Mars, Pluto, Triton and Jupiter

From National Geographic:

“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.

From MIT on Pluto

“the average surface temperature of the nitrogen ice on Pluto has increased slightly less than 2 degrees Celsius over the past 14 years.”

Since Pluto is moving further away from the Sun and continuing to warm despite that fact, it indicates that something doesn’t fit into “Solar Constant” dismissal theories.

From Space.com on Jupiter:

“The latest images could provide evidence that Jupiter is in the midst of a global change that can modify temperatures by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit on different parts of the globe.”

From MIT on Triton:

“At least since 1989, Triton has been undergoing a period of global warming. Percentage-wise, it’s a very large increase,” said Elliot, professor of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences and director of the Wallace Astrophysical Observatory. The 5 percent increase on the absolute temperature scale from about minus-392 degrees Fahrenheit to about minus-389 degrees Fahrenheit would be like the Earth experiencing a jump of about 22 degrees Fahrenheit.”

So there is Global Warming on at least 4 other bodies in our Solar System that co-insides with the recent warming on Earth. Doesn’t this point strongly towards the Sun or some other Cosmic force as the cause?

On the origin of the runaway global warming theory of CO2 Feedback and Venus (PDF):

“Why is the albedo of Venus important? When the albedo is at 0.80, the Global Warming Theory falls apart. . .

The carbon dioxide levels on Earth have risen from approximately 0.028% to 0.036% in the last few decades. It is a major stretch to compare this with Venus at a 96.500% carbon dioxide level and promote an uncontrollable runaway condition. Earth in its early history, 385 million years ago, had an atmosphere with 10 times the present carbon dioxide levels. Those elevated levels did not produce runaway global warming then, so why should we theorize that it would today?”

Pre-conceived agendas and a scorched earth policy of accusing any critics of complicity with Big Oil or the Republican Party impedes the scientific process. Likening people who do not agree with doomsday Anthropogenic Global Warming theories to Holocaust Deniers does not get us closer to the truth. In Science, when did “Skeptic” become such a bad word?

An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change:

“The best measurements of global air temperatures come from American weather satellites, and they show wobbles but no overall change since 1999.

That leveling off is just what is expected by the chief rival hypothesis, which says that the sun drives climate changes more emphatically than greenhouse gases do. After becoming much more active during the 20th century, the sun now stands at a high but roughly level state of activity. Solar physicists warn of possible global cooling, should the sun revert to the lazier mood it was in during the Little Ice Age 300 years ago.

In a box of air in the basement, they were able to show that electrons set free by cosmic rays coming through the ceiling stitched together droplets of sulfuric acid and water. These are the building blocks for cloud condensation. But journal after journal declined to publish their report; the discovery finally appeared in the Proceedings of the Royal Society late last year.”

Open Letter of Resignation to the IPCC from Chris Landsea:

“I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.”

Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence:

“But there is a more sinister side to this feeding frenzy. Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis.”

– MIT Professor Richard Lindzen

Watch this video of Richard Lindzen and tell me he’s just some crackpot:

It’s not about links. This won’t get many links.

It’s not about getting on Digg – anything that challenges Anthropogenic Global Warming automatically gets buried.

and it’s not about popularity: most of you don’t like the “anti anthropogenic global warming” stance.

It’s about the science. The scientific method has helped me to become successful in SEO, Business and many other aspects of my life – and it can help you too. Let’s make sure that the process is not destroyed to appease what’s popular.

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

23 Responses to “Global Warming on Mars, Pluto, Triton and Jupiter”

  1. ChrisWebPub says:

    Don’t you know you’re supposed to call it “Global Climate Change” now. The Anti-globalization socialists who’ve hijacked the environmental movement got together and decided that would be a better term since it covers temperature changes in both directories, as well as wind, rain, and everything else. Clever little bastards.

    By the way Quad, if you haven’t yet read Michael Crichton “State of Fear.” A work of fiction of course, but the references & supplemental material at the end are good.

    Also, I was reading this blog the other day, and it also shares the view. Plus it is a gardening blog so I don’t think anyone would say that the author isn’t green.

    http://www.thisgardenisillegal.com/2006/12/unseasonable-warm-unquestionably-nino.html

  2. QuadsZilla says:

    Case and point on the Extreme Bias on Digg, this story:

    http://digg.com/political_opinion/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle_3

    had 98 diggs at a time when stories with 42 had made the front page. It got that many in 1 hour 42 minutes.

    Then POOF it was removed from the upcoming and did not make the front page. Was it because it was inaccurate? No. It’s because desenting opinion is not allowed on Digg.

  3. icookfood says:

    You haven’t just read ‘State of Fear’ by Michael Crichton have you?

  4. icookfood says:

    One other thing… where is Triton? I know of Titan, i.e. the moon of saturn where the Huygen’s probe landed just a little while ago after being dropped off by Cassini, and getting reprogrammed on the outbound journery due to bugs discovered in the systems after they left Earth, but Triton is new one on me. Or was it a typo?

  5. QuadsZilla says:

    I have not. From Crichton, I’ve read Rising Sun + Andromeda Strain.

  6. [...] With global warming being such a hot topic, I also see a lot of people saying it just isn’t so. And this makes me want to take a look at what happens if it turns out we’ve got it all wrong. What if global warming isn’t caused by humans or isn’t the problem we think it is? [...]

  7. Pete Wailes says:

    Who cares who causes it? It’s like two fleas arguing over who’s fault it is that the dog is about to get sprayed with flea killer.

    It doesn’t matter who’s fault it is. What matters is sorting it out.

  8. sepguy says:

    I read Bjorn Lomborgs book the sceptical environmentalist some years back and it left me thinking :
    - the numbers on climate change are misleading
    - negative sells and this is a great negative sell
    - when a meme gains traction (doomsday is coming) scientists and the media become complicit in pushing a particular agenda
    - I believe the science, not the bluster
    - when will we see a tipping point back to the facts?

    Nice one Quadzilla – im going to make a post on my blog to try and spread a little common sense on this runaway situation

  9. [...]  http://seoblackhat.com/ [...]

  10. Dataracks says:

    “The scientific method has helped me to become successful in SEO, Business and many other aspects of my life – and it can help you too”

    My favorite line of the article.

  11. ghandi says:

    “Who cares who causes it? It’s like two fleas arguing over who’s fault it is that the dog is about to get sprayed with flea killer.

    It doesn’t matter who’s fault it is. What matters is sorting it out.”

    It’s not possible for mankind to “sort out” global warming.
    Unless you know how to get the Sun to reduce its activity.

  12. The sun cannot be the cause for global warming in all these places:

    Pluto: increased 2 degrees Celsius in 14 years. Pluto is 39.44 AU from the sun. Earth is one AU. Using the inverse square law, we find that an energy increase from the sun capable of warming Pluto 2 degrees is the equivalent of Earth warming up over 3,111 degrees Celsius.

    Triton’s gone up 3 degrees and is about 30 AU (I used Neptune’s distance). That would be the equivalent of a 2,700 degree rise in Earth’s temperature.

    Jupiter’s apparently varied. Let’s make it 3 degrees change. Jupiter is 5.2 AU away. If Jupiter warms up 3 degrees, Earth warms up 81 degrees.

    The data for Mars isn’t given. If Mars increased 1 degree, Earth would jump up 3.5, which would be catastrophic.

    Clearly, the solar output is not causing any of this global warming. Pluto is one funky planet, but the warming seen there demonstrates that the coupling between the atmosphere and the surface is not what was predicted. Pluto was just at it’s nearest point to the sun (remember, for a while there, Neptune was the last planet, and well, now it is the last planet for two reasons, one being Pluto never should have been a planet) and what we’re looking at is the increased warmth from that time warming the atmosphere as it radiates back out into space.

    Triton, if you actually read the article, is just undergoing seasonal changes. Every couple of hundred years, Triton gets an extreme summer due to orbital mechanics. That’s all.

    Jupiter: yes, there’s warming in some places, but if you read the article, there’s cooling at the poles. It’s just a redistribution of heat. Did you know that Jupiter radiates more energy than it receives from the sun? Gravity is still slowly compressing the atmosphere of Jupiter, and doing so produces heat. Jupiter is not a failed star — we now know it would have to be much bigger than it is to even make the failed star category, but it’s fascinating that gravitational contraction is still producing heat. That has nothing to do with global warming, but it’s really cool.

    Mars: Mars has this weird interaction between it’s orbit and axial tilt that Earth also has, and on Earth, certain combinations result in ice ages. Mars is warming for the same reason right now. It has nothing to do with a change in solar output.

    Earth: They used to think that the Maunder Minimum and the Little Ice Age were connected. Sunspots indicate a warmer sun, and so the sun was cooler during the Maunder Minimum. Turns out, though, that a) the temperature analysis of sunspots probably doesn’t hold during a minimum and b) there wasn’t a Little Ice Age. It was weird weather patterns in some of the northern hemisphere. Other places show increased temperatures on Earth during the same time.

    Solar output only varies by 1%, not enough to account for the temperature change being observed.

    To claim warming on Pluto, Triton, Jupiter, and Mars prove it’s solar output that is causing similar global warming on Earth is wrong on so many levels. What’s fascinating is, the very articles you linked to point out the reason for this various warming and that it’s not solar output driven. Did you read the articles you linked to?

    The analysis of Venus you give is hysterical, but this comment’s getting too long.

  13. I hate to admit this, but I didn’t do the analysis of the temperatures correctly. I forgot radiative temperature functions go by the 4th power, so the actualy relationship to distance is reciprocal square root, not square. You still get absurd results, just not quite so absurd.

    I’m working on a post for my blog that would give an Excel table that goes through the calculations using blackbody radiation analysis.

    Sorry for the equation error. It was stupid and I was wrong, at least in magnitude of the Earth temperature change. I admit that. The overall analysis still stands, though.

  14. [...] based on some simple calculus. I looked up how to do that calculation and realized my post had been wrong. [...]

  15. jenn1864 says:

    I thought that CNN video was very interesting. Notice how the camera cut away from Lindzen every time he spoke and showed horrible images of starving animals, icebergs breaking apart, droughts and floods. Yet every time one of the other scientists spoke, they kept the camera on their faces. Interesting.

  16. [...] This is one isn’t hard at all. Most successful bloggers have used this resource. You could, for example, claim that the sandbox doesn’t exist (big one in 2006), argue that Matt Cutts is a schmuck, question the lack of transparency and credibility on Digg’s algorithm, support the claim that global warming worries lack credibility. The list could go on and on. [...]

  17. hfuk says:

    I hate global warming, or global climate change. I really couldn’t give a toss. I am ashamed to live in this tiny period in history in which we are so self ritious. I will be dead before any of it matters. I bought some potato chips the other day and on the back it told me how many grams of co2 was emitted in the manufacturing of the packet. seriously – FUCK OFF. Are you joking. i mean. what’s wrong with people. burn all the fossil fuels, build more power stations, drive more, waste energy. fuck global warming. fuck it with a great big stick.

  18. redwraith94 says:

    Firstly, atmosphere does affect temperature retention a great deal. Pluto, and the moons of other planets have no atmosphere to speak of. The point, however is that they are ALL EXPERIENCING A WARMING TREND. Sorry, but your pathetic science based solely on distance (because of received sunlight) is pointless. you don’t take into account atmospheric content, or how the variance in reflectivity between different materials, or anything else. Your numbers are wrong. Even if you just take the difference in aphelion, and perihelion of the Earth, your numbers (of light fall versus temperature) are dead wrong, why do think they would be accurate between different planets, and over so vast a distance?

    Also explain to me why, all of the warming trends started in the 70’s Yet we have had industry in the U.S. since before World War II.

    We have nearly doubled the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, and we are supposed to wait a century for a rise of 1-6 degrees Celsius?

    “Gravity is still slowly compressing the atmosphere of Jupiter, and doing so produces heat.” No, it isn’t.

    A stars radiant energy comes from the proton proton chain, or the Carbon cycle, and fights against it’s collapse due to gravity. Gravity only causes heat when there is net movement (i.e. if Jupiter were shrinking in diameter) If Jupiter is producing more heat than received from the sun, then it is more likely due to fission processes, and certainly not due to it’s high gravity. (Unless you can show me that Jupiter is shrinking in diameter, which it isn’t.)

    At the end of the day, to be real ’science’. Global warming needs to address why the other planets are warming up. They need to address their own statistics.

    Water is a greenhouse gas, please explain how we are to reduce it’s amount, shall we pipe it to Mars for terraforming purposes?

    Greenpeace urged Australia to eat kangaroo, because they produce less Methane than cattle…That is insane: average methane concentration is on the order of a half part per million.

    I would also like it to be explained to me why the term “Green house gas” was chosen. Plants are vociferous scavengers of Carbon dioxide, so in a mostly sealed Greenhouse, the concentration of Carbon dioxide will be very low, relative to outside the greenhouse…

    If you want to fear monger, be my guest, but if you want to brand your fear mongering as science, then do some damn research you wonderful, very contributive, hippies.

  19. Frank Lansner says:

    Hi rob! And thanks for your opinion!!
    I do not agree, but first of all, thank you for at least try to argue why you believe as you do. Not many “Alarmists” has the will to go in actual debate it seems.

    But obviously, the extend of temperature heating of each planet in response to solar changes are extremely different, due to atmospheres, albedos clouds, whether, materials etc etc. In response to more heat we just know that they will heat up in to some extend.

    But take a looooong look at Pluto. The behaviour of this one planet
    (x-planet!) in one go ruins all “ALarmists” arguments: Pluto is a hard isball with hardly any mechanism to disturb observations, and what do we see??

    IT WARMS!!!
    EVEN THOUGH IT IS MOVING AWAY FROM THE SUN!!

    But if just one of these planets where cooling, the picture would be noisy. But it aint.

    “I rest my case”

  20. stan_doffish says:

    I know this is off topic, but if Al Gore, who by some accounts, has earned about $100 million speaking about global warming, has just bought a house boat. He also flies around in a private jet, and lives in a house that uses 16 times the electricity of the average American home. (Remember that about 40% of America’s electricity is generated by coal)

    If he really believes everything he says, isn’t he the worst sort of elitist-wealthy hypocrit? And if he doesn’t, then aren’t his followers being snowed? Here we are, about to ruin our own economy, in ways that TRULY harm the poorest people, based on assumptions that are not truly backed by solid science.

    What’s more, I challenge those of you think we face impending doom, not from foreign conflict or energy shortages, and those of you who believe we can get all our energy from solar, wind and biofuels alone, to practice what you preach. Before you dictate what kind of lifestyle the rest of us can live, live it yourself. Stop using oil–that is don’t just drive a hybrid, drive a bio-diesel car. Put solar panels on your roof and get ALL your electricity that way. Practice what you preach.

  21. dr_mitch says:

    Great discussion, Quadszilla! I regret that I only found it just now.

    I applaud Rob for trying to apply some common sense physics to the discussion back in Mar of 2007, but he made a huge and misleading mistake in order to shoot holes in theory that climate change is caused by solar fluctuations. He’s confusing the DISTANCE from a source of radiation with the STRENGTH of that source of radiation; they are two separate things. In a three-dimensional universe, any kind of radiation from a point source will fall off as the inverse square — you got that right (before you went off on that square root thing). But at a particular distance, any sort of measurement of any sort of radiation (electromagnetic waves, gravitons, whatever) is directly proportional to the what’s coming out of the source.

    What’s that have to do with this discussion? In the absence of atmosphere, the Earth and Pluto should be seeing similar percentage changes in radiation levels because solar cycles affect the source strength, not our distance from the sun. Therefore, the temperature changes on other planets and moons are should be in the ballpark of the changes we see on earth.

  22. denis.newland says:

    Look guys stop trying to theorize about what the sun is doing from our stand point the sun is the main item that protects us from harmful Gamma rays and any other shit out there beyond our solar system. More solar flares = more solar wind= more protection. OK. Move on.. Regarding the warming of the earth being similar to other planets. Wrong again. Voyager 1 and 2 have reached and are passing the outer edge of our heliosphere and having a bumpy ride. the heliosphere is also not totally round as it has affected these two rovers differently and at different times due to their different tragectories. OK forget about the conspiracies the fact is that we are getting closer to the galactic star stream and in december 2012 we will be ligned up with the centre. But we are even now getting close in space distance terms. Now simply put we can’t enter a major star field full of star fires that might be up to a thousand times or more bigger than our sun without feeling a little heat. We are also going from a cold gas environment into a much warmer hot gas environment (figuratively speaking) although we’re not in Hades Yet. Also there is radiated heat. Get to close to the fire and you will get burned it’s simple. Now work on the heating of the outer planets albeit in the reverse order and you will get some idea as to why other planets are getting more global warming than earth. Despite their being major solar activity from our own sun in that crucial period it will actually help protect us from these external forces due to the dramatic increase in solar wind. Yes radiation from our sun does get filtered by the protection of our magnetic field and with all the talk of polar shifts or reversals maybe that might help a bit more to protect earth. Because ultimately we cannot change global warming (as distinct from global pollution and forrest loss) we are just going to have to wait and see, however given another year or so the writing will be on the wall and our puny attempts at preventing it will be wasted.
    Finally remember that the Earth and our solar system has been through this all before on roughly a 25,000 year cycle. The Mayan Knew it the Chinese knew it the Hopi indians and others knew it the Aztecs knew it the Indians (those near the Indian Ocean) knew it etc etc so why have we been dumbed down????????????
    Dennis