Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming

March 3rd, 2007

That humans are causing global warming is one of the most pervasive memes in the world at the moment. I pretty much believed it, as much as I believe anything establishment science says, which is to say that I consider it along with all other perspectives.

Then I met Andrew, a friend of Becky’s. Andrew is a PhD climatologist. He’s working in the field right now. Oh yeah, things are heating up. When I asked him what he thought about the cause, he kindof grimaced and said, “That’s a tough one.”

That’s a tough one?!

I thought it was a mathematical certainty that humans were causing it. Wrong.

Ever since that conversation, I’ve been watching the global warming news, and the increasing linkages to crackpot laws and proposed legislation that have nothing to do with global warming, and everything to do with fascism. Replace “the war on terror” with “global warming” and you’ve got the same damn philosophy with different nouns.

You guys know how I feel about religions (including atheism), fascism and dogmas of all types. The thinking person knows that it’s never that simple. Is it?

I know that many of you might find it personally offensive that I would link to a story that goes against the mainstream scientific view that humans are behind global warming, but Cryptogon isn’t about pleasantly stroking your dogmas, or mine.

After reading this National Geographic piece, and remembering my conversation with Andrew, to not post this would be grossly irresponsible.

I find Hummers and the typical American energy footprint as obscene as any other tree hugging dirt worshiper. (I’ve lived in the choking pollution of Los Angeles.) Over the years on Cryptogon, I have focussed on multiple technologies that could drastically reduce the use of hydrocarbon fuels. But what we are starting to see is a sort of global warming fascism, while, for decades, simple solutions to the alleged problem have been available.

There’s something wrong with the global warming picture, and the more credence it gains in the Hollywood-limousine liberal crowd, the more skeptical about it I become.

Via: National Geographic:

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.

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.

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.

22 Responses to “Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming”

  1. Neal says:

    Sadly fascism is probably the only way to reduce Americans’ energy footprints short of massive economic dislocation. I think some of the proponents recognize this.

  2. david says:

    air, water, soil. keep those three clean, and you will sustain life, regardless of hot or cold climatic conditions.

    the entire global warming thing is starting to sound too religious. hard to take seriously when here in canada they still use drinking water to flush the toilet. seems a waste when grey water systems, cisterns are used around the world. need to change the building codes, not likely to happen though.

  3. fostermeister says:

    It also seems less sunlight is reaching the earth’s surface. Whether this contributes to greater atmospheric warming at the expense of sea warming I don’t know:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/feature/story/0,,1108853,00.html
    http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000C3AAE-D82A-10F9-975883414B7F0000

    What interests me is the many ways solar activity may be affecting the earth:

    http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=fee9a01f-3627-4b01-9222-bf60aa332f1f&k=0
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Solar-cycle-data.png
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Solar_Activity_Proxies.png

    “With respect to global warming, though solar activity has been at relatively high levels during the recent period, the fact that solar activity has been near constant during the last 30 years precludes solar variability from playing a large role in recent warming. It is estimated that the resdiual effects of the prolonged high solar activity account for between 18 and 36% of warming from 1950 to 1999.”

  4. Mike Lorenz says:

    Interesting story. I’m going to post a reply that might be more at home somewhere like Rigorous Intuition, but here goes:

    The ancient Aztec (or is it Mayan?) calendar ends in 2012. They believed that at that time, the universe as we know it will come crumbling to and there will be some sort of cosmic rebirth. Or something like that.

    Global Peak Oil (engineered or not) has been widely forecasted to occur sometime between 2010-2015.

    I seem to recall reading that if current climate trends continue (whatever their main cause), that sometime in the next decade it could trigger positive feedback loops which would bring about catastrophic climate change, potentially making earth uninhabitable.

    Could it be that the priests and shamans of the ancient, pre-Columbian civilizations actually did perceive the coming of some sort of cataclysmic change? What if they envisioned the precarious situation we find ourselves in right now, and simply lacked the means to articulate that horror in a way that didn’t include jaguar gods and flying serpents? Is it possible that the current agents of corporo-fascism who seem hellbent on destroying the world around us are, in fact, part of a cosmic scheme for death and rebirth that was foretold 600 years ago?

    Maybe. Of course they could just be a bunch of greedy pricks who are detirmined to exploit and oppress as much of humanity as possible.
    – Mike Lorenz

  5. tsoldrin says:

    It’s cool that you brought this up, I think it’s a topic worthy of discussion. I’d imagine some of the hippy types will be blazingly mad, but really there’s nothing that shouldn’t be questioned.

    That said, I must admit I don’t agree with this article. Mars I think is a poor choice as an indicator, since it has such a weak magnetic field and barely an atmosphere to speak of and thus is subject to the whims of whatever comes its way more than most other planets. One might ask also, why venus and mercury which are far closer to the sun than Mars aren’t showing similar effects. Perhaps we just can’t tell with those, I’m really not sure.

    One thing that doesn’t fit with my own personal views well is when you look at who is trying to suppress or obscure man-made global warming (can these possibly be the ‘Good Guys’?): BushCo, Big Oil, Israel (through proxies like Jim Inhofe – I believe in an Israeli backed global warming suppression scheme whereby they are delaying the knowledge while they consolidate regional water resources – like Lebanon’s), and Fundamentalists who cannot accept the fact that humans are potent enough to effect God’s creation.

    This last group peaked (pun) my interest recently when on a forum someone posted that Man could not possibly have any effect on earth’s environment. Well, I did some quick googling and came up with a temperature change graph and then started checking through a “On this date” page, matching up events to temperature fluxuations and there seemed to indeed be corelations. Some were natural, like the tunguska event seems to have lead to a temp dip, also many of the large volcanic eruptions presage temp dips of varying size. Some though, seem to coincide with human activity… world war II is clearly visible in a steady temperature rise (lots of activity!)right up to the bomb, whereafter it plumets (dust in atmosphere + end of frenetic activity?). Even the phony gas shortages appear to be visible.

    I can’t find the original map I used, but this one seems similar, if anyone wants to match up events with temperatures: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
    Of course there are plenty on google too.

    Besides that, shouldn’t there be a fossil record of regular die-off events if this were part of a normal cycle? Also, from my reading of the solar cycle theory, we should have just eneded one and therefore it should be getting cooler and it’s not – maybe I read it wrong, it seemed a bit confusing.

    I’m no expert, but it seems clear to me that we humans (well, probably not Kevin 😉 are causing a significant part of global warming. It’s probably too late to do anything, but I want to be on the record as believing that humans are the culprit in this case.

  6. tsoldrin says:

    Sorry, I forgot to mention… I don’t buy this as a new way to implement more fascism. They just don’t need it. They’ve got it all wrapped up already in the War on Terrorism… and it’s a lot easier to fake another false flag event than con the entire scientific community.

  7. Big Gav says:

    I believe that global warming is real and human caused – as far as I believe in anything that I can’t personally perceive going on right in front of me anyway.

    However, I think its worthwhile trying to make sure that solutions to global warming (and solutions for peak oil) aren’t based on heavy handed government regulation and control – the term for this (I think Tim Flannery coined it, and he’s as much a global warming alarmist as anyone) is the “carbon dictatorship”, which I view as governments doling out carbon rations to the plebs while the energy industry remains firmly in the hands of the fossil fuel industry – they keep the money (and control) and we all make do with less energy…

    I think the solution (and it works for peak oil as well as global warming) is electric transport and distributed energy generation from renewables (or free energy, if you’re that way inclined), with everything hooked up to a smart grid with plenty of storage available (via V2G storage etc).

    There is still a risk someone (EEStor for example) corners the EV battery market and gains a monopoly position, but its a lot better than the alternatives…

  8. David says:

    For all who still believe global warming is a phenomenon caused by human mega-industrial economic behavior,

    and not a meme being used by Them to encourage you and me to drastically cut our energy use so They may take the energy resources we don’t use and, in turn, use said resources to enslave us and to build more mansions, yachts, etceteras,

    please explain why global warming occured numerous times in the past despite the lack of modern human industry and economic behavior during those time periods,

    and then explain, in the context of known climate maniplating technologies (http://www.asp.bnl.gov/),
    how you have concluded with certainity and beyond a shadow of a doubt that global warming’s modern occurence and the PURPORTEDLY NATURALLY-OCCURING associated climatologic effects are mostly the result of human economic behavior.

    If men and women who understand the vast innerworkings of the world’s climate and who have studied those innerworkings for decades can’t reasonably conclude that global warming is being caused by human economic activity, I find it absurd that some of you lay people assume you have it all figured out.

    If anything, you should place your bets on the side of history, which dictates that all global warming of the past, and, very likely, the present, has been of solar origin.

  9. SB says:

    ok…so sending gigatons of ancient carbon into the atmosphere while simultaneously destroying systems that scrub carbon out of the atmosphere (deforestation,ocean plankton,etc.) doesn’t have an impact on climate? If the amount of CO2 and other gases (methane, water vapor,etc.) increase, the temps will rise. Look at Venus.
    Gimme a break, humans are fucking with the program bigtime and there’s gonna be hell to pay…for some folks anyways.

  10. the stranger says:

    Sb, I know where you’re coming from; please consider the following.

    Kevin, I feel like I could have written your post. Well, not word for word, I mean from a revelation standpoint. If there is one thing I didn’t need to further study, it was Global Warming – checked it out years ago before it was popular; humans cause Global Warming. Logical no-brainer, move along…

    I read a book a while back, Not by Fire, But by Ice. Not without flaws, but loaded with much original thinking. I couldn’t set it down; finished in about four days – good for me. Seems most books along these lines trace some of their data to a book called Path of the Poles (I’m halfway through that one) and it has an interesting forward by Albert Eisenstein.

    Anyway, I think Climate Change is real, but I no longer believe the Global Warming theory. And think about it, when have you read a MSM Global Warming article that mentions plate tectonics, or the sun, or solar system?

    As far as the fascism angle, it fits pretty well. I can imagine TPTB encouraging a human die-off, but killing the planet? …where’s the profit in that? I’ve downed a good half dozen each of books on peak-oil and financial collapse, and ever since I ran into this, I lost interest in the former. Climate Change and its cause, scientific advancements of the last few decades, and the relevant archeology are enthralling.

    And if there is anything to 2012, it seems unlikely it would be financial collapse or peak-oil. Both are man-made and seem a comic coincidence. But does it imply a greater “natural” cycle? It implies it is knowable. Ask me in a year, I will know more about this.

  11. bob says:

    i would suggest that sunlight is not the only thing the earth, or the rest of the solar system’s planets, receive from the sun. the reduction in light energy can be offset by electromagnetic energy being pumped into the earth’s core and heating it just like any other energized filament. (think of placing a flourescent tube near a tesla coil) this could also suggest a mechanism of warming to the rest of the planets, that do appear to be experiencing some odd changes in climatic behaviour.

  12. Technofreak says:

    Oh what a mess!! 🙁

  13. cb says:

    Here’s another not so popular theory:

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/crispin8.html

  14. Dendrite says:

    The essential difficulty is to stroke your own prejudices, some people call it being consistent with their own opinions, whilst trying to maintain an open mind and be objective at the same time. That is a tight rope that is easy to fall off especially if the thing you are asked to judge is itself the subject of opinion or is so esoteric that you are working outside the limits of your knowledge.

    I am not for 100% sure what Kevin meant when he said “-while for decades simple solutions to the problems have been available” but if we believe Tesla found the answer to free energy or rather utilizing the resources of the universe instead of those of planet Earth then his efforts were buried by JP Morgan who was bankrolling him until he realized that he couldn’t make any money out of him. Such is the nature of the world we live in. Even if those who are following now in Tesla’s footsteps come up with the goods and they are adopted throughout the world, is this necessarily a good thing? All that will happen is that population will continue to grow unchecked, using up the Earth’s resources at an accelerating rate so if the right hand doesn’t get you the left one will. Overpopulation is the real enemy of the planet, so is what the elite have in store for us a bad thing so far as the planet is concerned? There is no doubt that it would certainly be a bad thing so far as we are concerned. The Chinese program of limiting each female to one child during her lifetime seems to be a more honest attempt to solve the problem.

    Here is an interesting graphical representation of population growth and the pollution it produces for those who have not seen it before.

    http://www.breathingearth.net/

    The problem for us ordinary mortals in attempting to opine non provables is sorting out the Messiahs from the crackpots. One interesting take on global warming is the dark star theory. Apparently our sun is not alone in the solar system, it has a partner which is a dark star but unlike many other binary systems they do not revolve around each other. Moreover the dark star, which is a tad bigger than Jupiter, is on an elliptical orbit which is out of plane with the other planets and swings around close to the sun before traveling off into fairly deep space. At the moment it is hurtling towards our sun which is the real reason for its increased activity and hence global warming. Could this be what killed the dinosaurs? There again, if astronomers have found dark stars in distant galaxies then why not in our own solar system, and if it is for sure then why not tell us about it? One interesting adjunct to this is that chemtrails are microscopic particles of aluminium released high into the atmosphere in an attempt to reflect the suns increased activity and the reason they are covert is that individual nations which might object to this cannot be excluded from the global program.
    If this sounds half plausible, then what about this from the same source; atomic explosions which include all the tests ever done, cause ‘rips’ in spacetime which not only let undesirable ‘entities’ into our system from other time ‘portals’ but also start off new time portals from the point of the rip. There are now so many different parallel time portals the whole situation is a complete mess and whenever we try to fix it we make matters worse. Maybe some clever person can explain to me what this means.

    http://www.projectcamelot.net/livermore_physicist.html

    You will not mind if I mop up the snake oil before someone falls and hurts themselves, but there again, on the other hand, if you did want to discredit something which was real but inconvenient you wouldn’t confront it you would just make it look ridiculous.

  15. David says:

    SB,

    No one is saying human-generated CO2 can’t have an impact, and, indeed it may be having an impact; the point is that the earth’s climate is so complex that no one can determine for sure what is causing global warming.

    Anyone with the intellectual capacity of a donkey will come to this conclusion, and, examine said conclusion in the context of the despotic political desires of the Ruling Class.

    When the conclusion is examined in such a context, it’s very easy to see how the concept of global warming, whether of natural (as I believe) or human origin, is being hijacked by Them and used as terror-meme #2, in an exhaustive effort to enslave both you and me.

  16. David says:

    Dendrite,

    How long have you been on Their payroll (They should fire you, as you are ridiculously transparent)?

    p.s.

    Your Malthusianic impulses should be reserved for your Employers and Their progeny, as they are the wicked uber-overconsumers; however, to turn your gun on the robber instead of the robber’s victims wouldn’t benefit your financial bottom line would it??

    Well, guess what; to Them, you’re expendable too.

    I suggest you become better at the task given you by your Taskmasters, lest you become a victim of Their Malthusian impulses.

  17. Dendrite says:

    Well done David, you have certainly sussed me out!
    Actually, I don’t have an employer, I am generally considered to have done my bit for society and now I have more time on my hands to think and enjoy life. But you are right, I have no more to directly contribute and therefore I am expendable. Since I was never on their books it seems to me that this is a more likely possibility.

    Guess what David, we are all wicked over-consumers, it is only a matter of degree. If you don’t believe this, then look up Jevons Paradox. This says that the more efficient we become at extracting or utilizing a resource, the more of that resource we will use rather than less. For instance if we can generate electricity more efficiently or develop more efficient electrical motors we will buy a bigger fridge rather than save on the electricity bill. As car engines become more efficient we do more leisure driving etc.

    The ones who you assume to be my employers have become jaded with worldly things and therefore have two alternatives to soothe their souls; one is religion but since they have played this card so many times for their own advantage it is unlikely they will end up believing their own script. The other is absolute power and control. This appears the more likely option, which brings us nicely on to Malthus. The problem with Malthus was not that he was wrong (or if you think so I am sure we will hear your reasons) it was just that his views were unpopular to hear. It is like death, something that you know is inevitable but not something that it is nice to dwell on for too long. What he said was that unchecked population growth will always exceed the growth of means of subsidence. It is a very simple concept to understand. For instance, people in the third world know that there is regular famine but they breed until famine arrives and then they die of hunger. The West then has to have a pop concert to give them a hand out which then gives them a feel good factor and lets them breed some more and exacerbates the original problem. TPTB do not own Malthus’s ideas, many people now recognize that the world is over populated. The connection probably comes from the fact that when the WB or IMF makes a loan to poorer countries it is a standard condition that the receiving country must introduce some population control measures. This is purely self seeking because they do not want to see their repayments being spent on feeding an exploding population. If you are a logical conclusions man, I expect you will have seen the cartoon where everybody in the world has one square meter to live on and one person says to his neighbour, “I will make you a very attractive offer for your square”. Of course it is a joke because after a certain population density there is nowhere left to grow food but it makes a point.

    Most countries and organizations, the Catholic Church for instance (although I do not want to get drawn into side issues) recognize that there is strength in numbers and therefore do not want to be the ones to unilaterally reduce numbers in case their rivals take the advantage. Therefore they put more strain on world resources. India had a half hearted program of population control in the 60’s and 70’s but as mentioned above, China, who has a thousand million people more than the USA is the only nation to take the consequences seriously and I don’t believe they have much truck with TPTB.

  18. fallout11 says:

    Even if only a tiny portion of global climate change is caused by man, as opposed to natural/celestial/solar/magnetic/whatever forces, that is the portion we, as a species, have some ability to control. As such, we would be irresponsible to just ignore the one part we can do something about.
    To draw a parallel, you may not be able to put out a house fire singlehandedly, but you can help, perhaps saving something or someone in the process, lessoning the impact and making a difference.

  19. David says:

    Dendrite,

    I’ll rip your argument apart tomorrow; I’m short of time tonight.

  20. tsoldrin says:

    “We don’t need to disprove them, we just need to get them fighting about it, sow the seeds of doubt” – Anonymous quote from any number of elite conferences.

  21. […] Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming Posted in Environment | Trackback | Top Of […]

  22. e says:

    Another couple of articles on this subject:

    1.http://www.detailshere.com/solaractivity.htm

    2.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/18/wsun18.xml

    Also, the book “Catastrophe? A New Theory As To The Cause of Global Warming” by by Keith Foster looks interesting…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.