If nothing else, we have certainly learned recently that planets undergo changes in their mean temperature, and while we can easily blame human activity here on the Earth, blaming humans for the recent warming on Mars and Neptune would be an astronomical stretch, to say the least.
No, no, no! It’s all those SUV-driving Neptunians...
You know the drill.....
Sure the sun is warming things, but humans are amplifying it! we are all going to DIE!
Pluto is also warming, which is odd since it is moving away from the sun now and should be cooling. New Horizons would reach Pluto while some of the atmosphere still remains unfrozen on the surface, but the atmosphere is not freezing out as expected. For Pluto to warm this much because of increased sunlight, earth would be really hot, way hotter than it is.
thanks, bfl
Do not confuse them with science. Politically correct conformity is far more important </sarcasm>
How did the emissions from SUVs on earth get to Neptune?
You mean...(gasp)...it’s the SUN??????
From Papal Indulgences to Carbon Credits
Is Global Warming a Sin?
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
In a couple of hundred years, historians will be comparing the frenzies over our supposed human contribution to global warming to the tumults at the latter end of the tenth century as the Christian millennium approached. Then, as now, the doomsters identified human sinfulness as the propulsive factor in the planet’s rapid downward slide.
Then as now, a buoyant market throve on fear. The Roman Catholic Church was a bank whose capital was secured by the infinite mercy of Christ, Mary and the Saints, and so the Pope could sell indulgences, like checks. The sinners established a line of credit against bad behavior and could go on sinning. Today a world market in “carbon credits” is in formation. Those whose “carbon footprint” is small can sell their surplus carbon credits to others, less virtuous than themselves.
The modern trade is as fantastical as the medieval one. There is still zero empirical evidence that anthropogenic production of CO2 is making any measurable contribution to the world’s present warming trend. The greenhouse fearmongers rely entirely on unverified, crudely oversimplified computer models to finger mankind’s sinful contribution. Devoid of any sustaining scientific basis, carbon trafficking is powered by guilt, credulity, cynicism and greed, just like the old indulgences, though at least the latter produced beautiful monuments. By the sixteenth century, long after the world had sailed safely through the end of the first millennium, Pope Leo X financed the reconstruction of St. Peter’s Basilica by offering a “plenary” indulgence, guaranteed to release a soul from purgatory.
Now imagine two lines on a piece of graph paper. The first rises to a crest, then slopes sharply down, then levels off and rises slowly once more. The other has no undulations. It rises in a smooth, slowly increasing arc. The first, wavy line is the worldwide CO2 tonnage produced by humans burning coal, oil and natural gas. On this graph it starts in 1928, at 1.1 gigatons (i.e. 1.1 billion metric tons). It peaks in 1929 at 1.17 gigatons. The world, led by its mightiest power, the USA, plummets into the Great Depression, and by 1932 human CO2 production has fallen to 0.88 gigatons a year, a 30 per cent drop. Hard times drove a tougher bargain than all the counsels of Al Gore or the jeremiads of the IPCC (Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change). Then, in 1933 it began to climb slowly again, up to 0.9 gigatons.
And the other line, the one ascending so evenly? That’s the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, parts per million (ppm) by volume, moving in 1928 from just under 306, hitting 306 in 1929, to 307 in 1932 and on up. Boom and bust, the line heads up steadily. These days it’s at 380.There are, to be sure, seasonal variations in CO2, as measured since 1958 by the instruments on Mauna Loa, Hawai’i. (Pre-1958 measurements are of air bubbles trapped in glacial ice.) Summer and winter vary steadily by about 5 ppm, reflecting photosynthesis cycles. The two lines on that graph proclaim that a whopping 30 per cent cut in man-made CO2 emissions didn’t even cause a 1 ppm drop in the atmosphere’s CO2. Thus it is impossible to assert that the increase in atmospheric CO2 stems from human burning of fossil fuels.
I met Dr. Martin Hertzberg, the man who drew that graph and those conclusions, on a Nation cruise back in 2001. He remarked that while he shared many of the Nation’s editorial positions, he approved of my reservations on the issue of supposed human contributions to global warming, as outlined in columns I wrote at that time. Hertzberg was a meteorologist for three years in the U.S. Navy, an occupation which gave him a lifelong mistrust of climate modeling. Trained in chemistry and physics, a combustion research scientist for most of his career, he’s retired now in Copper Mountain, Colorado, still consulting from time to time.
Not so long ago, Hertzberg sent me some of his recent papers on the global warming hypothesis, a construct now accepted by many progressives as infallible as Papal dogma on matters of faith or doctrine. Among them was the graph described above so devastating to the hypothesis.
As Hertzberg readily acknowledges, the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere has increased about 21 per cent in the past century. The world has also been getting just a little bit warmer. The not very reliable data on the world’s average temperature (which omit most of the world’s oceans and remote regions, while over-representing urban areas) show about a 0.5Co increase in average temperature between 1880 and 1980, and it’s still rising, more sharply in the polar regions than elsewhere. But is CO2, at 380 parts per million in the atmosphere, playing a significant role in retaining the 94 per cent of solar radiation that’s absorbed in the atmosphere, as against water vapor, also a powerful heat absorber, whose content in humid tropical atmosphere, can be as high as 2 per cent, the equivalent of 20,000 ppm. As Hertzberg says, water in the form of oceans, clouds, snow, ice cover and vapor “is overwhelming in the radiative and energy balance between the earth and the sun Carbon dioxide and the greenhouse gases are, by comparison, the equivalent of a few farts in a hurricane.” And water is exactly that component of the earth’s heat balance that the global warming computer models fail to account for.
It’s a notorious inconvenience for the Greenhousers that data also show carbon dioxide concentrations from the Eocene period, 20 million years before Henry Ford trundled his first model T out of the shop, 300-400 per cent higher than current concentrations. The Greenhousers deal with other difficulties like the medieval warming period’s higher-than-today’s temperatures by straightforward chicanery, misrepresenting tree-ring data (themselves an unreliable guide) and claiming the warming was a local, insignificant European affair.
We’re warmer now, because today’s world is in the thaw following the last Ice Age. Ice ages correlate with changes in the solar heat we receive, all due to predictable changes in the earth’s elliptic orbit round the sun, and in the earth’s tilt. As Hertzberg explains, the cyclical heat effect of all of these variables was worked out in great detail between 1915 and 1940 by the Serbian physicist, Milutin Milankovitch, one of the giants of 20th-century astrophysics. In past postglacial cycles, as now, the earth’s orbit and tilt gives us more and longer summer days between the equinoxes.
Water covers 71 per cent of the surface of the planet. As compared to the atmosphere, there’s at least a hundred times more CO2 in the oceans, dissolved as carbonate. As the postglacial thaw progresses the oceans warm up, and some of the dissolved carbon emits into the atmosphere, just like fizz in soda water taken out of the fridge. “So the greenhouse global warming theory has it ass backwards,” Hertzberg concludes. “It is the warming of the earth that is causing the increase of carbon dioxide and not the reverse.” He has recently had vivid confirmation of that conclusion. Several new papers show that for the last three quarter million years CO2 changes always lag global temperatures by 800 to 2,600 years.
It looks like Poseidon should go hunting for carbon credits. Trouble is, the human carbon footprint is of zero consequence amid these huge forces and volumes, and that’s not even to mention the role of the giant reactor beneath our feet: the earth’s increasingly hot molten core.
On a similar thread, someone had posted a group of links from varied sources that mentioned, individually, over a half dozen planets and moons in our solar system that were heating to some degree. I wish I had clipped & saved that.
If something’s getting hotter - examine the heat source - a grade schooler can follow that logic. The sun is our system’s heat source.
These findings, of course, will be totally ignored by those who have as a foundation of their faith, that ALL “global warming” is a result of, and ONLY of, anthropogenic origins.
A person who has lost faith in a core belief is the most pitiful sight in the view of man.
And of course, NOBODY wants that.
“solar irradiance “
Why have I never hear that term in the mainly-left media?
They are obviously trying to hide something.
Time to buy stock in companies that sell sun-block.
Do the Jupitarians know of this development!?
We must get the Jupitarians to dump their SUV`s
before it`s too late!
I thought the warming was caused by the rings around Uranus.
Our sun has nothing to do our planet or any other planet's warming....it is too far away!!
Why is it that only Leftists understand this??....GEEEZ!!
Forward to AlGor
Newsmax may be reading too much into this.
Abstract
“Long-term photometric measurements of Neptune show variations of brightness over half a century. Seasonal change in Neptune’s atmosphere may partially explain a general rise in the long-term light curve, but cannot explain its detailed variations. This leads us to consider the possibility of solar-driven changes, i.e., changes incurred by innate solar variability perhaps coupled with changing seasonal insolation. Although correlations between Neptune’s brightness and Earth’s temperature anomalyand between Neptune and two models of solar variabilityare visually compelling, at this time they are not statistically significant due to the limited degrees of freedom of the various time series. Nevertheless, the striking similarity of the temporal patterns of variation should not be ignored simply because of low formal statistical significance. If changing brightnesses and temperatures of two different planets are correlated, then some planetary climate changes may be due to variations in the solar system environment.”
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007/2006GL028764.shtml
Because they are both related to a more active sun
See some basic Neptune atmospheric chemistry
Clouds (On Neptune) form this way: solar ultraviolet radiation destroys methane high in Neptune's atmosphere by converting it to hydrocarbons such as ethane, acetylene, and haze particles of more complex polymers. The haze particles freeze and become ice particles. These ice particles eventually fall into the warmer layers of the atmosphere, where they evaporate back into gases, mix with hydrogen gas and are reformed as methane. Methane clouds then rise high into the atmosphere.
This fits perfectly on how a more active sun would cause global warming on Neptune
What is happening is an increase in solar output will destroy more methane in the atmosphere which then freeze out of the atmosphere as more complex hydrocarbons, which will release heat (from solidification) thus warming the atmosphere. Then as these hydrocarbons sink they will react with hydrogen and reform into methane which will again release heat and warm up the atmosphere further. The newly created methane as it rises will form into clouds increasing Neptune's brightness, as the clouds disipate the cycle repeats with greater intensities, which = Global warming on Neptune kicked off by a more active sun.
The news from Neptune comes to us just weeks after an article was published showing that Mars has warmed recently as well.
Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Triton and Pluto are all showing signs of warming, with no body with an atmosphere that we know of is cooling or remaining stable*, so that's 7 out of 7 of our controls that are also heating up, only a warped Liberal mind can find that just one big coincidence.
* The only other bodies left with atmospheres are Venus and Titan, but in both cases their clouds are too thick to know what's going on one way or the other.
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
New!!: Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH
Ping me if you find one I've missed.