Interesting finding.
But even if global warming is not a direct consequence of industry, do you really think that polluting the planet is a wise choice?
I mean, there's still acid rains, flora death, and other nasty consequences from sending tons of poisons in the air every day.
2007-03-06 03:38:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by ryushinigami 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
Only problem is the we can measure solar output pretty accurately with Earth orbiting satellites. They show a slight periodic change in sync with the sunspot cycle, but no overall upward trend. Of course the record only goes back to the first satellites, which is probably not long enough.
Anyway, just as on Earth, weather on Mars is subject to many factors other than the Sun. And we do not know what other factors are at work on Mars. So I say that melting polar caps on Mars are an OK, but not great, indication that global warming on Earth may be related to something other than CO2 levels in Earth's atmosphere.
2007-03-06 16:12:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by campbelp2002 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
STOP SPECULATING ABOUT IT
HERE IS THE REAL SOURCE And it´s the Nasa... everything is explained
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/07aug_southpole.htm
It is simply a seasonal variation since Mars also rotates around the Sun with a similar movement like our earth does.
Dry ice (CO2) melts and freezes according to seasons. The martian atmosphere is very thin and the temperatures variations are much bigger on Mars
2007-03-06 13:17:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by NLBNLB 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Mars doesn't get nearly the same amount of sunlight earth does being much farther away and therefor any increase in solar output would effect it less meaning that if that is partially to blame for global warming it means we need to do even MORE to counteract to COLLECTIVE causes of it to prevent the ecosystem from collapsing or getting thrown way out of the normal (as in how its been in the roughly 8,000 year history of civilization) range of behavior. The fact of the matter is everyone needs to understand global warming and the environment and what truly effects them and how and then come up with the best solutions (meaning the easiest to implement and live with , most economically viable and most effective) to prevent damage before it occours and clean up all the damage that has already ocoured and then implement those solutions and stick with them. It's not rocket science to continually convert to technology that has less emissions, pollution and environmental impact and phase out the most pollution emmiting enviromentally damaging technology replacing the worst stuff first and most quickly. I think that's all enviromental people really want us to do (especially concerning global warming) but don't know how to say it right. These problems all stem from the industrial revolution and the complete lack of concern for the enviroment they had at the time, and even when they did care they could only work with the technolgy they had at the time and they replaced it when better technolgy came along, that's what we need to continue doing.
2007-03-06 13:06:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Stan S 1
·
0⤊
2⤋
The 2 main gases they want to blame is pretty well taken care of. CO2 is well under control by the plants and photosynthesis.
The methane is a joke. Evidently they don't know much about. Methane is a very light gas ,and will go very high in the atmosphere.How did the environmentalist measure it,they have published all kinds of figures that are not true. They want u to think that there is a large lake in our upper atmosphere. Where is it I cant find it. They have let all the big bad methane escape???
2007-03-06 12:55:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by JOHNNIE B 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
Oh, I disagree with you on that one. Everyone knows that Martians are always trying to keep up with the Joneses. Once they found out that we has SUVs they had to come up with their own, and bigger ones also.
2007-03-06 20:10:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Amphibolite 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's old news to people who are knowledgeable about global warming. However, it won't matter a bit to those who are emotionally invested in the Al Gore Dooms Day scenario. It's a religion to these people and they're not about to confuse the issue with facts.
2007-03-06 12:01:49
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋