$25 offered million for plan on the removal of CO2 from air

Again, I don't follow you. Mars icecaps are made of CO2 - it's atmosphere is 95% CO2. It's late summer there, the southern icecap should be pretty well depleted, while the northern one should be somewhat beyond maximum.

No, I mention it because last Fall, NASA put out a news release that said:

"for three Mars summers in a row, deposits of frozen carbon dioxide near Mars' south pole have shrunk from the previous year's size, suggesting a climate change in progress."
"The images, documenting changes from 1999 to 2005, suggest the climate on Mars is presently warmer, and perhaps getting warmer still, than it was several decades or centuries ago"

But you've dismissed the idea that Earth's warming since the end of the Little Ice Age 150 years ago could have been caused by anything other than Man. The Sun couldn't have contributed, because the scientists who suggested it were bribed by oil companies...

But it sure would help explain why two planets are getting warmer.

The Mars bit smells like a huge evasion. Two planets that aren't anywhere near the same in atmosphere and have different orbits? Give me a break.

So since they are both undergoing climate change, it must be the same climate change?

DrunkenSleipnir wrote:

So since they are both undergoing climate change, it must be the same climate change?

That was sort of my question. Climatology is a pretty darned complex science and doesn't really translate between planets. Though Martian climate change is interesting in its own right, drawing that sort of conclusion is a bit much to ask and smells like a massive evasion.

But you've dismissed the idea that Earth's warming since the end of the Little Ice Age 150 years ago could have been caused by anything other than Man. The Sun couldn't have contributed, because the scientists who suggested it were bribed by oil companies...

No, I have not. Both points are different from what I've presented, both in argument and in references.

Earth's warming is partly caused by anthropogenic sources, but not completely. They add on top of natural causes.

The sun's contribution was until a year or two ago regarded as a possible large contributor, whose influence could equal or exceed that of humans. That contribution has been greatly reduced by recent work by researchers in...Switzerland, I think? They showed that the earlier estimates of solar forcing where higher than actually occurred. Hence, it's not of the same magnitude as human caused forcing.

Both Earth and Mars could well be getting more radiation from the Sun. However, that contribution is not enough to be responsible for an amount equivalent to anthropogenic additions to temperature change, as has been asserted in the past. (That is, the argument that the additional increase is due to solar forcing rather than anthropogenic sources has been shown to be incorrect by current data.) As always, new data could change this, but that's my understanding of the orthodoxy as it stands.

I remember posting in a thread in 2006 about recent solar forcing papers and the reduction in climate change attributed to solar input.