Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space News

Mars Orbiter Sees Changes 354

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the no-dead-batteries-on-this-probe dept.
pin_gween writes "The long-lived Mars Global Surveyor (8 yrs and flying) has enabled scientists to see changes in the surface of Mars. From the article: 'New gullies that did not exist in mid-2002 have appeared on a Martian sand dune. New impact craters formed since the 1970s suggest changes to age-estimating models. And 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 probe's primary mission ended in 2001 and scientists are hopeful the orbiter's life can be extended for another 5 -10 years."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mars Orbiter Sees Changes More

Mars Orbiter Sees Changes

Comments Filter:

  • puberty? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Our little orbiter is finally becomeing a man.

  • Wouldn't it shake things up if... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @05:29AM (#13612088)
    ...the orbiter shows that the climate on Mars is heating up at the same rate as Earth's?

    • Re:Wouldn't it shake things up if... (Score:4, Funny)

      by Freexe ( 717562 ) <serrkr@tznvy.pbz> on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @05:37AM (#13612113) Homepage
      It would show definite evidence that man is affecting climate change.

      Every we go we seem to fuck up the climate.

      • Re:Wouldn't it shake things up if... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Pharmboy ( 216950 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @09:11AM (#13613337) Journal
        Surely, this is W's fault, right? ;) Let the doom and gloom conspiracies begin!

        Actually, it clearly shows we do not have enough information about weather to make "predictions". Sometimes I wonder how we humans can be so arrogant. We can't figure out where Katrina is headed or how powerful it is, but we are "smart" enough to establish that global warming is real and will cause $x degrees increase over $y years.

        If we were as powerful as we think we are, why didn't we just stop the hurricane while it was in the Gulf? We aren't powerful, we don't understand long term global weather, we probably need to take reasonable steps to reduce pollution, but we need to stop making "predictions" about things we, as a species, are very ignorant of.

        • Re:Wouldn't it shake things up if... (Score:5, Funny)

          by WindBourne ( 631190 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @11:31AM (#13614545) Journal
          It amazes me how many ppl love to mix truth with lies. It also amazes me that you got modded up for your posting, showing that there are a lot of fox news type ppl here.

          Katrina was accurately predicted. That is why they started evac of NOLA 2 days ahead of time (a none prediction would have waited until it hit). Of course, it was not predicted 4-5 days ahead, but only 2. Just as right now, the prediction is that Rita will hit somewhere in Texas. It may hit NOLA again, but the prediction is that rita will hit at Houston or just south. And that is 4 days out.

          Now, as to global warming; That is also real. That is fact. The fact that glaciers all over the world are shrinking at an unheard of rate is absolute proof. Print not good enough for you? Then there are plenty of pix of glaciers from 100 years ago, that clearly show they were much larger. Google a bit. In fact, the only ice that is growing is Antarctica which the models clearly showed would happen due to increased moisture in the air (it is still DAMN cold there).

          The real issue is not Global Warming (which even your leader has now accepted as happening). The issues are
          1. how is it occurring
          2. are we a major or minor issue with it
          3. How far will it go, if changes are not effected.
          4. And what happens?


          As to stop making predictions based upon ignorance, well, yes, I would very much like that. In fact, it would be nice to not deal with posts made on ignorance as well. My prediction is that neither will occur.
      • Sure. Next you are going to say man is responsible fore the new impact craters formed since the 1970's. Haha.

        Oh, wait. I forgot about the Beagle 2 probe the brits lost. Nevermind.

        I sure hope the scientists didn't count that one in their age-estimating models.

    • Given the fairly different ecologies of Mars and Earth, I'd say it would have to just be a co-incidence (unless it's external pressures such as the sun causing it, although I doubt the sun has THAT much influence). Although don't worry, the Republicans would still use it as evidence against global warming.

      • Re:Wouldn't it shake things up if... (Score:5, Informative)

        by mosb1000 ( 710161 ) <mosb1000@mac.com> on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @06:08AM (#13612209)
        "I doubt the sun has THAT much influence"

        WTF? It's practically the only thing heating up these planets in the first place. What could possibly have more of an impact on global temperatures than the sun?
        • WTF? It's practically the only thing heating up these planets in the first place. What could possibly have more of an impact on global temperatures than the sun?



          Guess why it's hotter on Venus than on Mercury.



          (And no, the answer does not involve women in any way)

          • Re:Wouldn't it shake things up if... (Score:2, Informative)

            by Anonymous Coward
            It is hotter on average on Venus, but not hotter as far as absolute high temperature. Mercury is cooler on average because there is no atmosphere to insulate the side away from the sun, so the ground is exposed to near absolute zero temperature. But on the sun side of the planet, the temperature is much higher.

            One 'day' on Mercury is 176 Earth days, so the ground gets a very long exposure (88 days) to a very close sun, followed by a very long exposure (88 days) to deep space. Averaged out, it is cooler than
          • Probably has nothing to do with the sun, if your bullshit argument is to be believed.

            I never said there weren't other factors, but without the sun both of these planets would have temperatures near 3 K, and the sun is the primary reason they are so much hotter than this. Add to that, the fact that Venus could not have a gaseous atmosphere were it not for the sun.

            So yes, the sun most certainly is the primary factor.

      • You must be kidding? (Score:2, Interesting)

        by jscotta44 ( 881299 )
        You don't think that the huge flaming ball at the center of our little system has "that" much influence over our temperatures? Just where do you think we are getting our heat from? On a more serious note, has anyone done a calculation for the ratio of sun temperature changes to the expected rise or fall of temperatures here on earth? In other words, if the old Sol's temperature goes up by 500 C, what will that do to the earth's temp? On a similar vein, what would happen if the sun didn't change its actual
        • On a similar vein, what would happen if the sun didn't change its actual temperature, but rather it expanded thus putting the photosphere closer to the earth. What would be the effect for every X miles increase in photosphere size?

          Actually, if the sun increases its size, then the effects on earth are not as much due to the closer photosphere than to an increased luminosity due to the larger size of the sun.
          And by the time that happens, we should look for a way to relocate really quick, preferably to s

        • Re:You must be kidding? (Score:2, Informative)

          by jnik ( 1733 )
          On a more serious note, has anyone done a calculation for the ratio of sun temperature changes to the expected rise or fall of temperatures here on earth?

          Yes; on the back of an envelope (it's a simple calculation). The variation from solar min to solar max would be very small and dwarfed by the changes we've seen on Earth in the past thirty years. Unless you can suggest a mechanism for a sudden solar heating or enlargement, there's not much point to proposing it as an explanation for global warming. And i

      • Given the fairly different ecologies of Mars and Earth, I'd say it would have to just be a co-incidence (unless it's external pressures such as the sun causing it, although I doubt the sun has THAT much influence).

        I wouldn't doubt that the sun has that much influence. Perhaps a stable sun SHOULDN'T have that much influence - but then there's a great deal we don't know.

        There are some theories that part of global warming is due to differences in the sun's output. Many who subscribe to that theory are the den
        • Gathering data from Mars gives a possible 'control' in the experiment we're all running with earth's atmosphere. If we find earth's temperature rise slows (or goes backwards) at the same time Mars does the apparent same, then there's more study to be done on what's affecting earth.

          Studying Mars climate is useful in general to help improve climate models, but it doesn't work the way you think it does.

          Climate change on Mars is predicted and expected, and it is based on factors that are radically different fro
    • What all the "climate change happens naturally, wtf" posters seem to miss is that if, as a result of changes in the sun, there is a general increase in the solar energy reaching Earth, we should be making MORE attempts to minimise our release of greenhouse gases because the effects will combine. I don't react to the temperature rise in summer by putting on thicker clothes.

      I have yet to find a scientist (I mean a real one with a science degree, not a PR person or a journalist) who would disagree that adding

      • Re:No, it would increase the urgency (Score:5, Insightful)

        by jmichaelg ( 148257 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @08:24AM (#13612850) Journal
        I have yet to find a scientist (I mean a real one with a science degree, not a PR person or a journalist) who would disagree that adding CO2 to the atmosphere is increasing the greenhouse effect. If the sun is getting hotter, that does not give us a license to ignore the problem.

        First it has to be established that Earth's heating is anthropogenic. That hasn't happened and there's a piss-pot full of data that shows the earth has been hotter in the past than it is now. In fact, for the past million years, every 100,000 years or so the earth has heated up just like it is now. And yes, the last time it happenned was 100,000 years ago. Before you go chasing CO2 as the culprit, you'd better be sure it's the guilty party otherwise you're wasting resources that could be better used elsewhere.

        The second issue is that the developed world represents about 1.5 billion people whereas there are another 5 billion people out there who have yet to get out of crushing poverty. As they climb out of that hole in the next century, their contribution to CO2 is going to drawf whatever cutbacks we would make. Even if we cut back 100%, it's still going to rise. IF CO2 turns out to be the hazard some would have you believe it is it makes more sense to figure out how to get it out of the atmosphere because there isn't much prospect of preventing those 5 billion from adding to what's already there. You can't very well say to them, "No, you're stuck in grinding poverty because if you crawl out, you'll make the world warmer."

        • Indeed. If CO2 is indeed a serious problem, then turning off every CO2 producing object isn't going to remove the extra CO2 already in the atmosphere.

          And if CO2 is that serious, what do we do about all the volcanos?
      • "I have yet to find a scientist (I mean a real one with a science degree, not a PR person or a journalist) who would disagree that adding CO2 to the atmosphere is increasing the greenhouse effect."

        http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg15n2g.html [cato.org]

        To show why I assert that there is no substantive basis for predictions of sizeable global warming due to observed increases in minor greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and chlorofluorocarbons, I shall briefly review the science associated with those


    • > ...the orbiter shows that the climate on Mars is heating up at the same rate as Earth's?

      That would in fact be surprising, since Mars is a smaller, cooler planet with no oceans and a thinner atmosphere. Even if you applied the same stress to the two systems, you wouldn't expect to get the same results.

    • ...the orbiter shows that the climate on Mars is heating up at the same rate as Earth's?

      It would only really be interesting if there were another outside factor responsible for the heat increase on both planets, like if the sun were in a period of increased activity...

  • Climate change? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jarich ( 733129 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @05:29AM (#13612089) Homepage Journal
    And 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.'

    Not saying we don't have issues we need to address as well... but isn't that an interesting co-incidence?

    • Global Warming on Mars? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Shivetya ( 243324 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @05:34AM (#13612107) Homepage Journal
      Well if Mars is going through what appears to be similar changes as the Earth then perhaps we need to go back and look at what we share in common, namely the sun.

      Now of course with Mars we have even less history of their climate than our own but we could extrpolate from earlier photos just how much the visibile frozen material changed on the poles.

      One could hope that since climate study on Mars should not be easily politicalized, at least early on, it may give us new isights into our own.

      • Re:Global Warming on Mars? (Score:5, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @05:39AM (#13612119)
        NO, NO, NO - just think about the percentage increase in cars on Mars in the last few years! :-)
      • "One could hope that since climate study on Mars should not be easily politicalized"

        Not a chance - global warming is highly politicised here on Earth, and it immediately becomes politicised on Mars if someone tries to make a connection - by BOTH sides

        I can see it now:
        Greasy Capitalist Oil Baron: "Clearly we can see that this proves that global warming is actual a solar-system wide effect that has nothing to do with hydrocarbons"
        Rabid Socialist Masquerading as Environmentalist: "Destroy the corporation
      • Quick! A Kyoto Treaty for Mars!
        In all seriousness, this really could alter the whole GW thinking. This could be a solar-system wide cycle OR a trend.

      • spinning and agendas (Score:5, Insightful)

        by idlake ( 850372 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @07:16AM (#13612442)
        Well if Mars is going through what appears to be similar changes as the Earth then perhaps we need to go back and look at what we share in common, namely the sun.

        Congratulations! That's an excellent use of rhetoric. In a single stroke, you make climatologists look like idiots ("The sun! Oh my god, we forgot about the sun!") and you push your political agenda.

        Do you really expect readers to be naive enough to believe that Martian or terrestrial climatologists have not incorporated solar output into their models? Of course they have, for as far back as those measurements exist. Solar output is taken into account both for climate models on Mars and on earth, and it fails to account for global warming on earth. Climate change on Mars is expected and has been predicted.

        • Re:spinning and agendas (Score:4, Insightful)

          by sstidman ( 323182 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @10:39AM (#13614106) Journal
          His post was reasonable and thoughtful. Your post was an ad hominem attack. Just because someone disagrees with you does not automatically mean they are pushing a political agenda. Not everybody believes everything they are told; some folks ask questions. Just stick to the science, please, open your mind to other possibilities and consider the possibility that some of what you believe might not be true. As I'm sure you well know, even scientists get it wrong sometimes. We are allowed to question them.

          Climate change on Mars is expected and has been predicted.

          Interesting. What is the cause of that climate change? Can you point to a source, please?
      • Say that Mars really is undergoing global warming, and that the rate matches that of Earth's. Say also that this proves conclusively that the warming we're experiencing here on Earth is entirely due to an increase in solar output, and nothing at all to do with the actions of man.

        It still doesn't change anything. We still need to do something here on Earth, otherwise it's going to get hotter and hotter - *especially* if we know that the sun's output is increasing.

        So it makes no difference whatsoever what the

      • Just do the liberal thing (Score:4, Insightful)

        by SengirV ( 203400 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @08:42AM (#13613005)
        Disconnect your brain and blame Bush for this as well. Information? Facts? And understanding of processes? We need none of these. Instead we should stifle businesses without knowing what's going on. Why? Because we will FEEL better about ourselves for doing our part. Who cares if our efforts actually do anything, we'll have a clearer conscious.
    • Dont worry, the environmentalists will find *someway* to pin it on us oil consumers. Seriously tho, noone doubts the fact that a planets climate changes naturally, its the extent to which man made emissions effect the natural rate of change that has people worried.
    • A very interesting coincidence. Given that the Earth has had a fairly consistent history of relatively hotter periods followed by colder periods (including the last ice age), does anyone know if there is any evidence to suggest that Mars has followed a comparable pattern?

  • Buildings (Score:2, Funny)

    by doktorstop ( 725614 )
    Who cares id the ice cap is melting there... any buildings or roads they have built in 5 years?
    • Those ice caps are nothing more than disguises for mobile WMD labs. They have probably moved underground now, due to the increased surveillance.

  • And in other news... (Score:4, Funny)

    by flowerp ( 512865 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @05:34AM (#13612106)

    The Mars face has started to smile.

  • Age? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by nonuttin ( 851992 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @05:46AM (#13612142)
    Studies suggest new impact craters might appear at only about one-fifth the pace assumed previously

    Okay, we're using impact craters for age definition. On a surface as windy and subject to sand storms as Mars' is, isn't that a bit subjective? Can they really extrapolate the age of a surface based on erosion?

    In the next paragraph they state,

    However, the extent and duration of dust storms varied from year to year.

    Seems to me they may need to reevaluate age determination some more.

  • Bad puppy! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @05:49AM (#13612153)
    New gullies that did not exist in mid-2002 have appeared on a Martian sand dune.

    Beagle II has been digging to bury alien bones!

    • Bady puppy!

      To which Beagle II responds "Woof!" and then happily hikes his leg and pees all over the newly discovered Martian ruins. And your pants leg. Sorry.

  • Martian climate change (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ihlosi ( 895663 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @06:01AM (#13612191)
    And 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.'



    While it may be tempting to draw parallels to what is happening to the climate on earth, keep in mind that:

    * Correlation does not equal causation.

    * Data from Mars is only available for three years, while data from Earth is available for thousands of years.

    * Climate dynamics on Mars might be completely different from Earth.

    • It does show that climate can change rapidly on a global scale without the help of man.

    • Re:Martian climate change (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Scarblac ( 122480 ) <slashdot@gerlich.nl> on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @06:22AM (#13612260) Homepage

      Besides, it would be total mystery if Earth wasn't warming up due to human activity.

      We know CO2 is a greenhouse gas, we know we're increasing its levels by a lot, it would be a massive shock to science to find out that those two didn't mean the planet was heating up.

      • Hell yes, someone finally understands how to best look at this problem. Global Warming is certainly one of the most talked about and pressing topics of our day, but I'm sure that once this line of logic is accepted we'll realize that Global Compaction is actually a much much much worse problem. The basic logic is exactly like yours...

        We know people are heavy (and getting fatter!), we know we're drastically increasing the # of people (and their getting fatter!), it would be a massive shock to science to fi
        • Our only hope is to sign an international treaty that would limit the amount of food each person ate and would require excercise.

          To clarify this point, because I think it's the only thing people may actually be concerned about (the logic being sound of course). By excercise, I mean LOW impact activities like riding a stationary bike, swimming, or doing sit-ups. You absolutely would be prohibited from jumping, running, power lifting, or any other activity that resulted in a concentrated force being applie
      • Thirty five years ago, scientists were predicting that the greenhouse gas emissions would increase in climate decrease. They had many complex scientific models how we would all be in an ice age by 2015.

        We also know that the cattle on this planet offput more "greenhouse gas" through the methane in their farts and bowel movements, or the output from volcanoes.
      • Besides, it would be total mystery if Earth wasn't warming up due to human activity.

        Yes, but the facts often get in the way of a good theory. The evidence for mars points to the fact that at least part of the warming may not be anthropogenic.

        We know CO2 is a greenhouse gas, we know we're increasing its levels by a lot, it would be a massive shock to science to find out that those two didn't mean the planet was heating up.

        Unfortunately climatology isn't so simple. We also know air pollution, which goes

    • To figure anything useful out, we'd probably have to look at orbits as well. Is Mars moving closer or further from the sun at this point in the orbit? and the earth? To draw corrilations, we'd probably have to look at some other nearby planets (Venus?) and plot the orbits/temps together.

      And have more than 3 years of data.

    • Re:Martian climate change (Score:4, Funny)

      by Puls4r ( 724907 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @06:42AM (#13612327)
      That's where you're wrong. I can categorically gaurantee that the number of Pirates on Mars right now is quickly approaching Zero. That can quite obviously be tied to the increase in temperature. I think we've already established the relationship between Pirates and global warming. Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
      • Phsaw...

        Pirate jokes are SOOOO two days ago.
      • Talk like a pirate day was, what, two days ago? are you marooned in the past? Did you post that by bottle?

        Also, on Earth, piracy is actually a worsening problem [ibc-asia.com] in areas like the Malacca straits. Our climate is getting warmer, though. So it's not an inverse correlation at all, is it? Huh?? Seems like pirates might be contributing to the problem.

        Personally I think we have a much bigger set of information -- across multiple planets and decades of data -- showing that unmanned interplanetary probes inhibit

    • Re:Martian climate change (Score:5, Informative)

      by pease1 ( 134187 ) <bbunge@l a d y a n d t r a m p.com> on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @06:45AM (#13612338)
      There is more than 3 years worth of data.

      Studies of earth based photos/images and drawings over decades have also suggested the South Polar Cap has been shrinking for a couple of decades. Nice to see the MO data supports this.

      Those of us who image and track Mars with amatuer telescopes have known this for quite a long time.

      Currently, the North Polar Hood, a blank of clouds that form over the north polar area during the start of the Martian winter has become larger and more complex then any of us have seen going back to the 1950's.

      I've just always found it amazing most pro global warming folks toss aside with little worry solar effects. Measuring solar energy output is not very easy and hasn't been done over long periods of time.

    • Actually we have data of things like argon gas concentration in martian meteorites that allow us to exptrapolate temperatures on Mars and Earth millions of years ago.

    • Correlation does not equal causation

      You're right. The fact that Mars' climate may be warming at the same rate that Earth's climate may be warming does not mean that Earth's climate change is causing Mars' climate change. Very good observation.

      Sarcasm aside, more study is needed on both situations. I tend to believe that while man's pollution may be contributing to climate change, it would be happening regardless. Darwin was almost right. It is not survival of the fittest. It is survival of those most ab

  • It's a million to one chance but why risk it?
  • This is remarkable. Just when we thought that no changes of any kind (except due to sand storms) were happening on Mars' surface, we discover this.

    We really need to send humans there to explore and search for that bacterial life that I personally believe once did evolve there, and might still exist.

  • DO NOT (Score:2, Insightful)

    by tjic ( 530860 )

    And 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.'

    DO NOT believe the evidence! Just because warming trends are happening on two different planets is NO reason to think that there might be a common cause, like the solar energy cycle [stanford.edu]. DO NOT read up NASA predictions for solar cooling and cooler weather on Earth [udel.edu]. DO NOT look at the graph showing the correlation between solar out [web.dmi.dk]

    • Re:DO NOT (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @07:55AM (#13612652)
      Okay so it's possible that global warming isn't entirely, if at all mans fault. We don't have all the data necessary to say without a doubt that one model is correct and another is wrong. There are still a lot of hypothesis that could be correct. Including some theories that doesn't lay all the blame at just one source.

      It is important to not thought that this is data runs just THREE YEARS. This could be a fluke, or it could be mars warming. Again it just the last THREE YEARS. This is by no means a smoking gun.

      Finally, the Kyoto Protocol. First of all, lets go with the why. We don't know why the climate is warming up. We have various ideas, but like I said before the data isn't there to concretely state that one of them is correct. What we do know is that it the Earth is heating up and it could cause us some problems.
      That being said taking some reasonable steps to try to reduce what ever effects we might be having on the environment wouldn't be a bad idea.

      Also it wouldn't have been all that hard to meet the kyoto protocols. The technology is already here for the most part. The biggest thing would have been speeding our assets more wisely. For example improving public transit, and not rolling back EPA rules. Yes you are correct that developing nations were not asked to reduce as much as americans. However there are some important differences.

      Mainly that the average American is producing so much more green house gasses then some family in the Congo burning a wood fire to cock their meals. The average american manages to produce more than even other develop nations. So yeah whatever

  • How about Jupiter (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jimijon ( 608416 )
    Didn't a big new color band of weather suddenly appear on Jupiter last year? It seems to me that "fast" changes in weather are happening all over our Solar System.

    Who knows, but I have a feeling that certain cycles are coming together to really shake things up in this solar system of ours.

  • Pirates on Mars (Score:4, Funny)

    by Ingolfke ( 515826 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @07:33AM (#13612535) Journal
    Does this mean there are pirates on Mars?
  • How our beautiful mind works... We see changes because we start looking. The changes do not start to happen when we are looking. And because both A and B happen at the same time we think A and B are connected.
  • And 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

    Isn't this somewhat similar to what's happening at the North Pole here [independent.co.uk]? More ice is melting than is refreezing, something they say is caused by global warming - but if something similar is happening on all the planets...?
  • Obviously we humans are drastically impacting the fate of mars through um... the rovers, yeah! and heating up its climate!

    Oh, what's that you say? Both Earth and Mars have this fucking huge ball of plasmic gas burning not too far away from us, thousands of times the size of our planets? And its going through a cyclical "hot" season?

  • I wouldn't say "didn't exist" (Score:3, Informative)

    by Muad'Dave ( 255648 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @07:58AM (#13612665) Homepage

    From TFA:
    The gullies simply did not exist on July 17, 2002.
    After looking at the images, I'd say that the gullies became more prominent, but not that they didn't exist. I can clearly see evidence for the source of the more 'northerly' gully as well as a channel leading to an eroded area in the valley for the more 'southerly' gully.

    I agree that the findings are very interesting and important, but to state that the gullies "simply did not exist" is overstating the facts, IMHO.

  • Sun Energy Output At Over 1,000 Year Peak (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ekeup ( 915383 ) on Wednesday September 21, 2005 @08:21AM (#13612822)
    In other news...

    Sun Energy Output At Over 1,000 Year Peak
    http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002242.html [futurepundit.com]

    Hmm...

  • Terraforming Mars (Score:2, Interesting)

    by biraneto2 ( 910162 )
    If they are noting a decrease in the polar caps I wonder how is this affecting mars atmosphere. Scientists believe they could terraform mars by increasing it's temperature [slashdot.org] and melting some ice [cbsnews.com].

Slashdot Top Deals

You know you've landed gear-up when it takes full power to taxi.

Close