This image paints two very different views of ancient Mars: one warm and wet (top left), and the other a frozen, icy world. Credit: Robin D. Wordsworth
Posted on 06/19/2015 9:49:42 AM PDT by BenLurkin
Wordsworth and his collaborators arrived at this conclusion after running 3D atmospheric models to see how water moved between Mars' surface and its atmosphere billions of years ago.
The first scenario envisioned Mars as a temperate place, with an average global temperature of 50 degrees Fahrenheit (10 degrees Celsius). The second scenario then cast the Red Planet into ice-ball conditions, with an average global temperature of minus 54 F (minus 48 C).
The results showed that the "cold" model did a better job of eroding features on the planet's surface similar to those observed by spacecraft currently on and orbiting Mars. Further, the researchers said the "cold model" was based on a more accurate representation of the sun's history (it was 25 percent dimmer at the time) and the way Mars' axis was tilted 3 billion to 4 billion years ago.In that scenario, Mars' poles would have been pointed at the sun, which would have caused a buildup of ice along the planet's equator. There also would have been a thicker atmosphere that would have exaggerated the effect: The equator highlands would have been cold, and the lower lands at the poles would have been warm.So, is it possible that Mars was warm and wet? The scientists said that scenario is more unlikely, as previous work shows that carbon dioxide, dust and clouds are still not quite enough to make the planet that way.
...
A paper based on the work has been accepted for publication in the American Geophysical Union's Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets.
(Excerpt) Read more at space.com ...
Damn you global warming!
You are so powerful, you are even warming other planets!
Also, because of the quantum mechanical property of being observed, it is man-made global warming.
So, Mars is solidly Republican?
In fact it’s cold as Hell.
Excellent.
I love science but show me a hurricane track model that can correctly predict its path five days in the future. Now go ahead and predict something thirty million years in the future or guesstimate climate behavior a billion years in the past based on a computer model. I enjoy the thought process involved but I don’t put too much stock in predicting the correct outcomes.
All this science, I can’t understand....
Cool.
It’s just my job five days a week.
Has science devolved into building computer models based on incomplete (and therefore likely misleading) information, then pretending the results mean something? That is, after all, the basis of the whole global warming cult.
“Mars was warm and wet”
Like Janet Reno?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.