I think the answer is pretty clear— those uncaring Martian Republicans are driving too many gas-guzzling SUV’s.

You have 50,000 people and not one of you can explain to me global warming on Mars, and Jupiter?
By the way there is also GW on Saturn, Uranus ,Neptune, and Pluto.

Of course NASA might be lying, right?

Wrong, You can see the Second Great Red Spot on Jupiter with your own backyard telescope. You don’t have to take their’s or my word for it, unlike the way you have to take AGW on faith in the word of Al Gore.

Really? Me too! All of my friends are expert reviewers as well.

Small world…. :D

gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

Comment by RAL — June 1, 2007 @ 2:48 am

Yes, Boeing, Ford, and all the engineering firms must not work with modelling software programs, after all, software programs aren’t valid tools for the job they are doing, but costly videogames.

Maybe computer simulations of the climante aren’t perfect, but help the scientists to understand concepts and project consequences.

Frankly, your debunking of the computer models computer is frail.

May 30, 2007 (LPAC)–Climate models are nothing more than computer games, an expert reviewer for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change told EIR News Service today.

The problem with the climate computer models, the scientist said, is that they are based on a bottom-up approach as opposed to a top-down approach. Think of a cat stalking a bird, the climate expert said. You see the cat tense, and creep towards the bird. Now picture only the bird’s nervous system, and with that information, try to model the cat stalking. That is the equivalent of a global climate model.

The expert also commented on how information-age thinking has negatively affected science writing. He noted that when he was in school you were taught to use a slide rule, and in using a slide rule you had to have an idea of what the result would be. Nowadays people just grab an algorithm off the shelf and use it, without any thought about what kind of result they will get. He pointed to the trend in articles in leading peer-reviewed journals such as Science and Nature, which use numerical values out to several decimal places, most of which are wrong.

The scientist ended by asking the following scientific question: In the past two and-a-half billion years of the Earth’s oxygen atmosphere, there have been only two climate states–one glacial and the other interglacial. In that time, the Sun’s output has increased by 30 percent, yet the temperature has only increased and decreased only a small amount over the period. So how can a mere 0.4 percent of man-made CO2 now be catastrophic?

Think about that the next time you hear Al Gore talk about global warming, or you read the next big climate change scare story.

May 31, 2007 (LPAC)–British astrophysicist Piers Corbyn, who was featured in the British Channel 4 documentary, “The Great Global Warming Swindle,” published a letter to the editor in the London Times Higher Education Supplement for May 25. Corbyn was writing in response to an earlier article by former Royal Society media spokesman Bob Ward, who had warned universities to beware of “fame-seeking climate denialists.”

Piers Corbyn replied that the global warmers would rather not face the inconvenient truth that solar cycles determine climate. They associate questioners of their creed “lurking” in universities with “holocaust denial.” They intimidate scientists into silence through fear of attack, of loss of funding, or of “Nuremberg-style climate courts.”

Corbyn writes that these attacks on climate sceptics are McCarthyism, and that the attackers have adopted measures that were used earlier by Hitler and Stalin.

Piers Corbyn gave Executive Intelligence Review an exclusive interview featured in the current issue.

See: Interview

Not sure.
But with this Bush bunch,nothing would surprise me.

here is the story with the picture:
http://www.alaskareport.com/z46136_greenhouse_gas_emissions.htm

That warming is due to a change in the albedo of the planets. And since no humans live on them adding to the heat with albedo changing things like concrete cities, highways and buildings reflecting heat there is no reason for man to worry about it now is there?
Comment by O’Really

First of all the global warming on Jupiter isn’t caused by a change in albedo, but even if it were how does a change in albedo negate the fact of warming on Mars being caused by an increase of insolance? Albedo is the reflectivity of the planet. For there to be a change making ice and dust selective with a preference to landing on colder parts (ie; more reflective) of the planet, some new mechanism (ie the sun shining brighter) must be heating the less reflective parts of the planet.

That warming is due to a change in the albedo of the planets. And since no humans live on them adding to the heat with albedo changing things like concrete cities, highways and buildings reflecting heat there is no reason for man to worry about it now is there?