Fascinating that so many people opt for an "either/or" stance.
Why can't global warming be due to BOTH man and the sun?

Matt, London,

The warming of Mars suggests that the main culprit for global warming is not C02 as alleged but something to do with the sun. In which case we would better concentrate on other polutants than CO2. There are plenty.

We have reduced a lot of pollution over the years, DDT,sulphur emmissions from industry (London Fogs of old), rivers are much cleaner, and the Ozone hole is getting smaller again. BBC are Highlighting Plasic packaging currently. This is a problem, and perhaps a more seruious one than CO2. One that is easily resolvable if people just stop throwing rubbish in the ditch, or the sea.

Stead, Acharacle, United Kingdom

Must be that martianpogenic climate change! Eee Gore!!!

Jay, Victoria

Jaymo, Victoria, Canada

I wish as many people would push for peace in the middle east as they do for the global warming issue..
If we could learn to live together in peace then who know's, we might even start working together to improve our society, the wasteful materialisim, and maybe we'll change our attitudes to the planet.
If we worked and lived in our community, produced our food in our community, became a bit more independant from the current system, then our impact on the enviroment would change from negative to positive.
But our leaders keep telling us we need glodal trade and global economy.. Do we really?

Joel, London, Europe?

I wish as many people would show concearn for peace in the middle east as they do for Global warming
If we could learn to respect our neighbours and live in peace then who knows what could happen, perhaps our ideas of society could change, maybe we would end the wasteful materialisim.
If we worked and lived in our local communities and produced our food in our communities and became more independant (free) from the current system then our impact on the planet would turn from negative to positive.
Our leaders keep telling us we need global trade, global economy, global government a New wolrd Order. Do we?
Seems to me things would be much nicer without coorporations and central governments and war industry, and we live like humans are supposed to. Free and Inderpendant in our local community..

Joel, London, Europe?

Gee, two planets in the same solar system warming at the same rate; could it be the sun is radiating a bit more energy?

Neil, Victoria, Canada

Oh my goodnes. The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Better get somone up there right away and find out who the guilty are and prosecute. File this thought away with the village idiot Al "I'm covered by my carbon credits" Gore. Pleeez

ROBERT, San Antonio, usa/Texas

Global warming is the least of our problems.if you were to address the real problem global warming wouldn’t be an issue. Let’s talk about over population; this is the one thing that has influence on all the other ills of the world. Fix/control the population problem and you will solve many of today’s problems.

AntTrap, El Verano, Ca.

Contrary to what was said below, CO2 is not triangular. It is linear. Not a biggie in this discussion but my job revolves around such details.

Wally, Tahuya,

I strongly believe that the real reason for the "Larm-Reports"
concerning "The Greenhouse-effect" may be the fact that
countries like China and India are demanding a greater bite
of the "Oil-Cake"Which may be very inconvenient for the other
Industrialised Part of the world .Thus we "Ordinary People" must be induced to save fuel for the factories and ,not least for the military supplies! The ice caps on Mars is melting !That can hardly be our fault!-Can it?

K. Lund. Gothenburg Sweden

Kjeld Lund, Gothenburg, Sweden

Too many opinions and not much in the way of genuine evidence in this whole climate change 'industry'. The truth is that a person will believe whatever suits their preconceptions unless they are genuinely willing to change - and that is indeed a rare thing for a creature as arrogant as a human being. Water and CO2 share similar properties in terms of thermal capacities. They are each tri-atomic molecules with similar 'triangular' structures and the same numer of degrees of freedom in terms of storing energy quanta. However, there is about 100 times as much water in the atmosphere as there is CO2 so a 1% drop in atmospheric water woulld have a similar thermal effect to completely removing ALL CO2 from the air, and likewise a 1% increase in atmospheric water would have a similar effect to doubling the CO2 in the atmosphere. Puts it into perspective, huh? Yes there is climate change but be damned if CO2 is doing it.

ben, vic, australia

If we spend trillions fixing CO2 problems, which amounts to removing almost nothing from the atmosphere, considering that the thermal effects of atmospheric water completely dwarf those of CO2, and when we have comitted ourselves to this and find that it changes nothing, the collapse of economies will lead to civil unrest and strife and inevitably to war. History teaches us that this is what happens when societies become competely deluded by their own granduer so much so that they think they can control everything - and CO2 just happens to be conveniently controllable. To tell us that something beyond our control is causing climate change is political suicide for any public figure, especially 'greenie' groups. So far all suggestions as to the cause of Mars' polar melting are just that - 'suggestions' - and we are expected to take this as proof, yet when it comes to real evidence that CO2 is not the culprit on Earth, it is largely ignored. People just see what they want to see.

ben, vic, australia

Expressions such as "... she suggests that such winds can stir up giant dust storms..." and "...temperature differences between the two are thought to be stirring up more winds..." do NOT constitute scientific evidence but rather conjecture on a possible explanation based upon unproven hypotheses. This is not proof, just an unproven and theoretical model and should be seen as such, not an explanation of anything. The question on the Mars icecap melt is still WIDE, WIDE open.

ben, vic, australia

If you compress the atmosphere of Earth to the same density as liquid water it would be about 10 metres thick over the face of the planet. Compare this with the depth of the ocean. So, if we heat the ocean (not the atmosphere), this leads to much greater evaporation and having pockets of denser and warmer atmospheric water vapour and gas floating about colliding with pockets of colder and drier air leads to bigger and more intense storms. Also the greater quantity of atmospheric water will cause global warming, not the CO2 which contibutes but a nat's whisker to the whole shebang. Although I am highly opposed to producing pollution when we don't actually need to, the whole CO2 scapegoat is a laughable joke and anybody with even an ounce of understanding can do their own research to prove it. You do not need complex models, just basic thermodynamics and basic understanding of thermal capacities. Who is gaining by this CO2 beat up apart from greenie groups and climate scientists?

ben, vic, australia

pointing out the hypocrasy of the philanthropic is the the utlimate hypocritical act. Nobody is perfect and he who is without sin and all that... The charge of hypocrite just allows people to justify their own inaction by debunking other peoples attempts to do good.

Get over your cynicism and take some direct action.

Dann, Bath, UK

In the 1970s and 80s, NOAA and other climatologic
"experts" were warning that the earth was rapidly cooling,
that we would by now be in a new little ice age, with massive
crop failure, decreased growing seasons, migrations,
dislocations, perhaps starvation. One possible remedy
suggested was to dust the polar caps with soot from
massive cargo planes, to melt the caps and prevent
glaciers from heading, especially into Europe and N.
America....the bread basket areas.

Nicholas H. Kalvin MD , Naples, Fl.

I say we all grab a beer and enjoy the show!

Bruce, Regina, Canada

You forgot to mention the fact that Al Gore's mansion consumes more electricity than 20 average American homes. His heated pool house consumes more than $1000.00 of natural gas a month, he flips around the planet in "polluting" aircraft to spread his message, yet he has the hide to tell us to turn off the lights and cycle to work. What a collossal hypocrite.

raymond duncan, Cairns, Australia

Hasn't the world been changing for milllions of years ?
Why doesnt the government reward my recyling ?
How often does the weather man get the day today weather wrong ?
Did the dinosaur's drive around in cars ? what happened to them ?
Why's the government looking to tax the weather ?

Finally do u trust what a politician says ?????

Mikey Jackson, London,

We had to watch An Inconvemient Truth in science class. It was half graphs about carbon dioxide, and half a montage(sp?) about Gore losing to Bush. By the way you could clearly see the carbon dioxide spikes came AFTER the temperature spikes.

One of the best descriptions of Gore I have heard was brodcast over the local radio. Comidically, it said, " 'Scientists declare shortage of water' Gore heard on the news. He said, 'Hmmm......' as he got out of his 50 minute shower and brushed his teeth with the water on." A great analogy to Gore.

Tom, Flint,

Solutions? Kill humans? Change lightbulbs? Increase use of nuke power?

v Racer, Atlanta, GA

In 1421, before automobiles, power plants, and 8 billion people, Zhou Wen sailed his junk around Greenland. Try that today! It must have been a lot warmer then at the close of the Medieval Warming period. Thank God we are not going into another Little Ice Age! Just read history folks.

Allen Bruner, Reno, Washoe / Nevada

I agree with Phil of Liverpool, Though I don't know him, a "Green Tax" is always going to be a Tax.

As to Al Gore, come on, he lost to Bush, so he's humiliated, and then tries to rebuild a power base somewhere else.

Why does he have to jet off around the world to tell us to use planes less?

I'm not sure what the CO2 emissions are from a Prius, but they sure as hell go up when you drive it at 100mph, and then start emitting other smokes into the atmosphere.

I am an environmentalist, but a practical one. I don't believe we are responsible for Global Warming, I'm just hoping when people realise that they don't just start living inefficiently.

Recycle because it's efficient, not because of "Global Warming".....

andy, liverpool, England

I would like to add to why the earth is exsperiencing warmer clients, I hope Al Gore reads this! The moon is also retreating from the earth and it controls how fast the earth spins, therefore for every foot it moves away from the earth is a few miliseconds to seconds that the earth slows down in rotation and it also controls our tilt on the axis. It has been proven that long time ago the African deserts were once lush and green and then the earth lost a foot, just a foot of it's tilt and bam deserts! So HELLO people it is going to only get warmer and green house gasses are just a very small part of why. Once a large valcano errupts we will cool back down but until then pull out your summer clothes folks the cool days are over for awhile! Just wait til your kids kids are bitching that they are freezing their butts off!!

rosa, memphis, tennessee

Whether we have caused climate change or not isn't the point. We don't live in a way that is harmonious with nature. The amount of plastic we use and throw away (old toothbrushes, razors, plastic cups and wrapping take 1000 years to biodegrade and produce toxicity in the process which pollutes our planet and therefore us.) I agree with Green hippies in that mass consumerism and mass degredation of this beautiful planet and our wasteful lifestyles do not help the planet thrive in the slightest. Green hippies woke up a long time ago. Have you?

jo ballard, plymouth, uk

I don't claim to be a science nerd or anything like that, but my theory on this basically revolves around governments in our respective countries trying to hike taxes.

Most scientific reports on climate change are more often than not funded by the government, of course they are going to read in favour of whatever policy they want to follow.

Why have they failed to inform us more regularly of the heating up of Mars and the rest of the solar system? Maybe because it casts doubt on them!!!!!!

All you green hippies wake up and realise its just a natural cycle.

Phil, Liverpool, UK

Ron In Atlanta said it best. We do not blame 70 to 80 degree seasonal temperature changes on man, why do we blame 1 degree global change on man. In January we had -15 degrees as a low temp. Today 95 degrees. That's a 110 degree difference. Quite a change but I don't think my SUV caused it.

One point I'd like to make. I seem to remember back in my youth some very well respected scientists screaming bloody murder about the coming Ice Age. They appear to have been wrong. I find it ironic though that some of the very same people who said we were all doomed to freeze to death are the very same ones who now claim we are going to fry. People who remember this little tid bit from the 70's look back on it and laugh. Ha Ha what a bunch of morons! I suspect that 30 years from now the youth of today will look back and laugh and say what a bunch of morons.

Someone has already said it, But it needs to be said again. As an American I would like to apologize for Al Gore. We are very Sorry!

Randy, Romeoville, USA/Illinois

If we would put all the money and energy into helping the (poor) people that suffer from the current climate change, instead of on 'reducing the CO2', we would actually make a difference for many!

Maaike Dooper, Nøtterøy, Norway

The general missinformation floating about man induced climate change is amazing. While the earth is undoubtly undergoing a warming trend rememeber it has gone through at least 6 ice ages in the last 750,000 years. Guess what? Ice ages are seperated by warming periods. The Earth has been warming for 11,000 yrs. Guess what? The CO2 levels reasonably track these climate changes. Sorry, the industrial revolution was not occuring 100,000 or more years ago, and not several times over!

In fact through out geologic time CO2 concentrations have been much greater then now. For instance during Jurassic period it was 1800 PPM, and the Ordovician period > 4000 PPM. If you take the time to graph CO2 concentartions, Earth's average temperture its more likley a consequence of Earth's warming, not its cause.

Instead of looking at something that makes up .04% of Earth's atmosphere(CO2) why not look at the 800 pound gorilla- Solar variations are much more likley the cause.

Barry Weinman, Plano, Texas

Add to the warming of Mars, that most recent sealevel change may be the result of groundwater pumping (spread a good part of 1,000 cubic kms of water a year over the oceans and see how thick the layer is). Then add the question, who said glacial ice is a leak-proof container for CO2 gas, over 650,000 years? Add that CO2 on drill-bit impact at 3 kms will explosively phase shift to liquid, and then later, on its way up the hole, to gas. Then look at the deep ice core graphs for CO2. Then add the question, how likley is it that one atmospheric trace gas, produced by one species of ape, is controlling the climate? Then remember that when you cut down trees, you lose the huge latent heat of vaporisation cooling they were contributing. Then think about cows in Greenland in the Middle Ages. Then chuckle, adapt, waste less and plant a tree or two. We are not done for yet.

Signalman Second Class Jones, Samford, Queensland

"...in the form of emitting CO2, has SPEEDED up climate change..."

Hey there teacher, (Rick Glatz). You might want to go back to school. Shouldn't your sentence read, "CO2 has SPED up climate change" ? I'm Edward Gibbs, a geophysicist , encouraging you to do some more research!

Edward Gibbs, Bellingham, WA, USA

"speeded up"
"immisions"
sped up? emissions? Come on, it isn't that hard.

Anyways, while there may be natural cycles of heating and cooling without human involvement, it is pretty clear that we have a huge effect on the climate. CO2 is currently at 383 ppm (parts per million) as opposed to 280 ppm before the industrial era. a 50% increase over a hundred year period is HUGE. We need to get our act together soon, raise gas prices so we can move on to new technology, use cleaner energy, use less energy, etc.

Evan, Houston,

Hi, I am a debate teacher in middle and high school in New Hampshire. I have listened to both sides for years. Our judges have rigorous standards for presenting research. My students do a much better job than many of you here in documenting their sources. I am also a science teacher. After listening to all sides here is my personal conclusion: Yes, there are cycles and astronomical events which can affect global climate, BUT,
human activity, in the form of emitting CO2, has speeded up climate change and the intensity of its effects and must be dealt with. Anything less is the continuation of a dangerous experiment. I (and my students) welcome your comments. Sincerely,

Rick Glatz, Merrimack,

Stop the war machine, legally make corporations responsible entities, plumb the world, stop the abuse and poverty of using people as slaves,and give our children a future. The message my kid got from an "Inconvenient Truth" is that they (the kids) have twenty years of life left on this earth. It seems the more money one has, the more one can afford to pollute and the only change the rich and powerful seem to want is one for their own profit. So, lets let the rich, get even richer and allow them to be given dollar for dollar tax breaks and money to go green, hell let's print them up so much money that they can be the richest ever there was and if that doesn't fix things....eat them.

A. Van Holderbeke, Courtenay, Canada

My theory on global Warming is that the sun is burning hotter at the moment.I know carbons and immisions dont help our planet at all and we should do more on our part.But thats my theory the sun is either burning hotter at the moment or there may be a cycle where we dip closer to the sun for 10-25 years.I dont think theres no large planetary object out there like sitchin stated thats aload of horse crap im affraid.It was on bbc news here in england about 10 days ago that geologist's are finding the polar caps are melting at a faster rate than estimated.Once those ice caps melt and flood the gulf stream do you know what will happen then? the big freeze lol.We live on a very unstable planet unfortunatly hehehehe.

Colin, Manchester, England

If ever there was proof that global warming is caused by the sun and not by CO2 this is it. Of course we should do everything in our power to preserve the earth’s resources as best we can, doing anything else would be very unintelligent. But we would be very foolish to think we can halt global warming by living as we did during medieval times.

Jimbo, Norwich, Norfolk

In our life time we'll probably see what comes of global warming. A few years back I thought it was slightly comforting to think I'd have given up my carbon based entity before damaging changes occurred.

But now, I prefer if we'd all collectively do something to stem the temperature rise. I'll cycle more, plant as many trees as my mom allows, vote for Greens, keep informed, be open minded to nuclear, gaze at Mars and wonder if it's a solar cycle up there. I'll also be inclined to believe the scientists. They prompted the action and seeming success with the ozone hole. We believed them then. So why not believe the almost all climatologists now?

As to our famed human modesty, that we are too-little-beings to influence the great planet above and around us. It only takes a (damaging) long distance flight at night to see how much of the world is covered by human fires, lights and use of fuels. We are in the position to change the physical world.

Phelim Doran, Ballycroy, Ireland

Global warming is a cycle in my opinion. I believe that it is out of the control of the world's goverments. Too much empahsis is put on who is the cause as opposed to what needs to be done NOW about the real changes that are occurring. All the planets in our solar system are heating up. We are heating up from the inside out, not from the outside in. I am in no way an expert but it seems that something is affecting the electomagnetics of our solar system. The sun has a lot to do with it. Zecharia Sitchin has a good handle on it. A large planetary object is approaching and throwing things out of whack. This is not the first time it has happened. The Vatican knows the truth. That is why they own a few observatories. They are watching and waiting.

DJ, NYC, USA

Never having believed half the rubbish about a largely human cause for global warming (and being of the opinion that this is a dangerous assertion at best) this theory is a welcome one. The fact that it is largely dismissed as going against popular theory highlights the lack of open scientific thinking amongst 'experts'.

Gavin Harrington, London, England

I believe that global warming is FAKER than michael jackson's nose. Over the past millions of years the world has had some warm times and cold times, and right now we're just on a tid-bit warmer time...thats all

Billy Bob, London, France

I think that there are crazy alien people that have a be magnifly glass and are going to heat us up like a ant!!!!! Look out there coming there coming!!!!!!!!!

Steven , Darwine,

the data shows that CO2 follows the warming of the earth, and not before, therefore CO2 can't be the "global warming trigger", I suggest that the variations in the sun/sunspots/cosmic radiation have a greater effect on the climate changes.

frank M, perth, australia

If CO2 is responsible for global warming why were temperatures 200 million years ago so much higher than today?. Surely our planet has gone through many warm and cold periods before humans even existed.
We hear many things about our climate such as `Global Dimming` , `Global Warming` with so many theories banded about ,which are we to believe?. Lets have less of the `Doomsday` talk and more positive attitude from these so called `Experts`.

D.Williams, Arbroath, Scotland

Al Gore is right in that the debate is over. It should be obvious by now that solar fluctuations are causing "Global Warming". This is an inconvenient truth for Mr. Gore.

John Wiggins, Orlando, USA/ Florida

Funny...You start with scientific method then finish with science by concensus? The fact that you can't produce scientists who disagree at the moment means global warming theory is true? I don't think there is one scientist who will tell you the earth isn't heating up. That isn't the real debate. The debate is...are humans responsible? That's where they spit. Where is the data?

Stephen Spencer, Co Springs,

For those who still believe that rising CO2 causes rising temperatures, please look at the post-2000 analyses of the Vostok ice core data. Also instructive is the 500-million year geologic reconstruction. Both completely refute the notion that the greenhouse effect is a major contributor to climate CHANGE, and, specifically, that atmospheric CO2 has a significant role in global temperature change.

To believe the IPCC's view, you must be willing to believe:

1. Atmospheric CO2 can change temperatures hundreds of years in the past (see Vostok ice core analyses, post 2000).

2. Human activity is responsible for global warming on Mars.

3. Solar magnetism/sunspots/radiation changes/"wind" and cosmic radiation changes have no impact on climate change, despite the long history of lockstep agreement between the two.

The IPCC is a political organization and a lot of government science jobs now depend upon governments who have invested in the fiction produced by the IPCC.

Bob Webster, Andover, New Jersey, USA

with regards : "Or perhaps, if you read their reports, they have both considered that and have an explanation: the sulphur based aerosols produced in the industrial expansion of WW2 and its aftermath. These aerosols reflected sunlight back and efeffect (in the Northern hemisphere, not globally) was to lower temperatures. "

so between 1945 and 1978 global warming was reduced or even reveresed by aerosols - is it just me or isnt the obvious thing to do to bring them back and reverse the spectre of global catastrophe for good ? perhaps the stuff could be added to jet fuel - then the more we fly the cooler it gets - problem solved !

Clive Brown, Cambridge, UK

"an equal number of scientists can be produced who do not subscribe to that theory (and yes, it is a theory). You are free to practice any religion you like, but don't try to push junk science off as fact."

You clearly don't understand the scientific method. In science, facts are based on empirical evidence - oberservations. For instance, it is an observed fact that CO2 concentrations are 30% higher than in 1750. It is an observed fact that tempertaures are measureably and significantly higher than then. A theory (as opposed to a conjecture or hypothesis, which you appear to think are synonyms for theory) is a generally accepted explanation of the observed facts. In this case, the well understood greenhouse gas physics is an excellent explanation, well accepted by the scientists who study this field, for the observed facts of global warming. The science is actually much more complex. If there are "equal numbers" of scientists who disagree with this, can they declare themselves?

James PhD (Physics), Hampshire, UK

"Hey Dan, one volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire history of mankind. Stop confusing CO2 with pollution. As for deforestation logic says the more CO2 the better off our forests would be. CO2 = plant food. And besides only a fool would think that the sun would have anything to do with the temperature
on Earth...Right?


Alan D, Avondale, PA / USA"

Check out the US Geological Survey (presumably not in the pocket of the EU). They estimate that man made CO2 contrinbutes 150 times that of volcanoes.

Check out the IPCC reports. They state the various factors that they estimate affect global temperatures, including solar and CO2 contributions from various sources. If you don't believe them, produce the counter evidence, but not with this type of soundbite science!

If your reason for not believing them is because they have a vested interest to get funding, the best way to get funding for science is to emphasise UNCERTAINTY. The IPCC is no longer doing that.

Rene Descartes, UK,

To Steve Cramer and others: A quote from the website of The Royal Society, the oldest, and arguably, the most respected SCIENTIFIC body on this planet.
"... the overwhelming majority of scientists who work on climate change agree on the main points, even if there is still some uncertainty about particular aspects, such as how the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will change in the future. In the journal Science in 2004, Oreskes published the results of a survey of 928 papers on climate change published in peer-reviewed journals between 1993 and 2003. She found that three-quarters of the papers either explicitly or implicitly accepted the view expressed in the IPCC 2001 report that
human activities have had a major impact on climate change in the last 50 years, and none rejected it".
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=4761. You will find a wealth of info there which can help us. The intolerable bigotry displayed in these pages will not.

Richard, London,

"Damien from Katterbach - check out the CO2 and Temperature records from the 1940s to 1970s. CO2 rose while temperature fell.

Foster, Houston, Texas"

Wow. Have you told the IPCC about that? This stunning revelation totally blows their silly greenhouse gas theory out of the windows!

Or perhaps, if you read their reports, they have both considered that and have an explanation: the sulphur based aerosols produced in the industrial expansion of WW2 and its aftermath. These aerosols reflected sunlight back and efeffect (in the Northern hemisphere, not globally) was to lower temperatures.

Sceptics may feel the IPCC conveniently explains all these little things away, but this is a very complex area of science with many factors involved, all interfering with one another.

However, the "what about this then?" style anecdote approach that your example typifies is similar to creationists out to prove the earth is only 6000 years old and discredit evolution.

Rene Descartes, UK,

The report on Mars / Earth mirror tempature rise was first reported here in Oz nearly four weeks ago. I have posted that information on several sites concerned mainly with blaming it all us mere humans, but the new save the earth industry is getting in to top gear and really dont want to know. A couple of senior CSIRO made tv appearances, and quickly rebuked the so called experts claiming that we have stuffed up our planet. Their comments were that human beings were showing a bit to much vanity by boasting that we were capable of reaching that level so soon. Their other comments were that there are a lot of people making very nice incomes from writing books and becoming government so called expert advisors.

As everyone knows Australia is the oldest continent on the planet and its scientists have through drilling and producing deep cores, discovered that these cycles have occured on many occasions over thousands of years.

Mike, Brisbane, Australia

The Global Warming Religion is complete tripe. Like all religions it is spearheaded by a few intellectuals and fuelled by a hoard of ignoramouses.

It may or may not be possible to argue that Earth is heating up. It certainly cannot be proven in any way shape or means what is causing it. CO2 levels taken from one specific part of the globe and compared to a series of globally dispersed, historically inaccurate temparature series is not good science by a long shot.

As a GeoChemist I could use so many sets of spurious data to argue any cause in any direction that it is close to pointless. Ice caps thickening, ice caps thinning, balh blah blah.

HOWEVER...what is relevant is that we are excessively wasteful as a society and we must redress this as a matter of urgency and if this mindless religion can achieve this then pass me the plate.

Tim, London, England

Katie, the IPCC is a political body, not a scientific body. The sheer number of real scientists who have removed themselves from its makeup should tell you something. For every scientist you can find in support of man-made global warming, an equal number of scientists can be produced who do not subscribe to that theory (and yes, it is a theory). You are free to practice any religion you like, but don't try to push junk science off as fact.

Steve Cramer, Yorktown, US/Virginia

Hey Jon Carry of Nevada, did you know that John Kerry was in Vietnam??? :) Also Big Ketchup (his wife) is supporting Algore's enviornmental group financially!!!!!

Davide Caprio , Severna Park, Md USA, United States of America

It is amazing how all of these EUROWEENIES from the UK have bought into this Global Warming crap. It easy to see why the once proud nation caved to Mamud Akmagenocide aka Stinky and why thier Sailors and marines fell so easily.

Davide Caprio , Severna Park, Md USA, United States of America

"In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual. "

G.G, Holy See Prison,

Keep Up the fight my fellow Americans.

Davide Caprio , Severna Park, Md USA, United States of America

Martians with their SUVs are killing the Mars environment !!!
We need to get the government to "dooo somethinggg... For the chilll-drennn."

Mark, Reston, VA USA

Huw Peach, there may be a consensus about climate change, there is no such consensus about it's causes. The intergovernmental climate change panel, including many non-scientists, and which by its very name has a political agenda, has decided that CO2 is the root cause of all evil, other climatologists and scientists can find no such correlation. The amount od CO2 in the atmosphere is minute, but unfortunately we all breathe it out. Therefore even without cars and industry there would have been an increase in CO2 levels commensurate with the increase in the population. As we cannot persuade billions of people to throw themselves on their swords for the common good, we have to blame something else.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

Alan D, Avondale, PA / USA: "Hey Dan, one volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire history of mankind. Stop confusing CO2 with pollution. As for deforestation logic says the more CO2 the better off our forests would be. CO2 = plant food. And besides only a fool would think that the sun would have anything to do with the temperature
on Earth...Right?"

Hey Alan, Of course the sun is a factor, but so is the unparalleled amount of pollution (including CO2) that we're putting out. As for the forests, if there is so much less in the way of trees then you kinda have a problem with the amount of oxygen being produced, no?

Dan, Hampton, UK

D'argent, London - There's those words again - "the same". Who said anything about the global warming being 'the same' on Mars as it is here on Earth? Certainly not the writer of this article.

Consider this: There is gravity on both the Earth and the Moon - but by no means are they 'the same'. What you call 'selective thinking', I call a healthy sense of scientific sceptisism and an unwillingness to jump to unfounded conclusions. Science isn't just skin deep.

Assumptions such as yours have led to some of sciences biggest mistakes in the past - it wasn't that long ago, historically speaking, that people assumed the Earth was flat. Right now, I think we'd all be better off considering ALL points of view and not just our own limited interpretation...

ian, Lancaster, UK

Can everyone please listen to the following where the scientist concerned makes it plain that warming on Mars and warming on Earth having nothing to do with each other and that Mars warming is due to shifting light and dark deposits, leading to a slight change in the colour of Mars and so it absorbs more heat from the sun. It has nothing to do with more radiation from the sun. Those using Mars warming to hit at Earth based climate change are incorrect and are just repeating oil companies propaganda. Listen to the science!

nick ayres, huddersfield, UK

Interesting,..... Earth is warming,.... so is Mars. I wonder if there is corelation between the two,.... an increase in Solar Output perhaps? I agree with DJ from Yuma. Pseudoscience has pushed the global warming issue to laughable extremes. The general public is being fed "convienent facts" and starved of real science. Anyone who dares to suggest alternatives to Global Warming are austersized and black balled in the scientific community.

WD Canada

Will, Edmonton, Alberta

Sorry but although your comments may be logical, they are based on a lack of knowledge and understanding. Firstly, the warming on mars may not be related in the slightest. In fact the majority of research suggests this. It certainly isnt a basis on which to decide whether climate change as a result of anthropogenic activity exists or not! Secondly, the evidence supporting the theories of climate change, though not conclusive, is extensive and accepted by the vast majority of the scientific community. The media, which traditionally presents a balance of both sides of an argument has been biased for many years so that the small minority of scientists that dispute climate change have their views greatly amplified! Climate change is not nearly as controversial an issue as it is often shown to be. The Intergovernmental panel on climate change (look it up) produces reports which are a collaboration of hundreds of scientists across the world and its findings and methods are supported by the..

katie Luxmoore, London, UK

You can drive your 4x4 on Mars only if you use biofuel, otherwise Mr Brown is going to have to tax you more!

Veronica Jones, Hatfield,

lets send Al Gore to help out

Mark, Sanford, FL

How in the world can anyone say that satellites have shown little change in radiation output from Sun in the past 30 years?! Check any graph of solar radiation output, and you'll see an incredible change. As further confirmation, check any graph of cosmic ray incidence, and you'll see an incredible drop in the past 30 years; cosmic ray incidence is linked directly to the solar wind--a higher solar wind, which results from higher solar activity, pushes cosmic rays away more. Cosmic rays have also been linked as a direct factor in precipitation and cloud formation--greater cloud formation means greater albedo, meaning lower temperature. Furthermore, on Mars, greater solar activity means greater carbon dioxide sublimation at the polar caps, meaning not only a decrease therein, but much greater wind activity to stir up dust, thus increasing the effect, just as the effect is increased on Earth due to the effect on cosmic rays and thus cloud formation.

Jason, Charlottesville,

Anyone consider that perhaps the sun might be involved?

There's already a well-established cycle of sunspot activity - wouldn't it be possible for there to be periodic cycle in radiant output as well?

That would account for the warming of the earth and of mars, both taking place in the same time period - without the hand-waving and theorizing about weather patterns and atmospheric gas compositions. Easy to check too - just compare data on all the planets over the same time period.

That type of thinking could lead to a VERY inconvienent truth tho, I'd imagine.

Marc, Aurora, IL

Ed Zuiderwijk, Cambridge, UK: "Dan, from Hampton. Sorry, but you're talking nonsense."

Wow, ED - if YOU say it, then it must be so - right? Have a more detailed look at the variables involved before you jump to conclusions.

Dan, Hampton, UK

We must DO SOMETHING about global martian warming now!

Wayne Rogers, San Jose, Ca

Damien from Katterbach - check out the CO2 and Temperature records from the 1940s to 1970s. CO2 rose while temperature fell.

Foster, Houston, Texas

I suppose that the scientists will say that its our fault too!

Badger, Poole, Dorset

To those postings that apply. Calling carbon dioxide a pollutant is like calling water vapor a pollutant. Furthermore, CO2 comprises less than 0.05% of the Earth's atmosphere. Hardly significant in the larger order of things. The current popular mania over anthropogenic causality of global warming is much (very expensive) ado about nothing. This hysteria is based on nothing more than an unproven and untestable hypothesis which cannot support a valid theory. Computer modeling can, of course...be "modeled". Beware those with an agenda! The real inconvenient truths are those that go unmentioned in AlGore's idiotic hoax of a movie: "An Inconvenient Truth."

DJ, Yuma, USA/Arizona

Steve Savage - yes, natural cycles and temperature fluctuations are well known...everywhere. Including Earth. Why is nature responsible everywhere else, but we are the only culprits here?

d'argent, London,

Was the Martian Ambassador at Kyoto?

Walt, Troy, MI

Check for news articles telling about how the sun
has been more active.

Helen Peck, Fort Worth, TX

Dan, from Hampton. Sorry, but you're talking nonsense. The dust and sand were there in the 70-ties thirty years ago as well, and so was the atmosphere. If those characteristics have changed, then what caused the change? We didn't do it, and actually it is extremely unlikely that something fundamental has changed on Mars just while we were looking. That leaves an external cause for the observed warming as the most likely candidate, whatever that cause may be.

Ed Zuiderwijk, Cambridge, UK

I think they should send algore to Mars to check it out.

Poysun Ivy, Phoenix,

Quick call Al Gore. Do you think that the Mars warming and the polar ice cap melting could be because of Martions or is it Dick Cheney, George Bush and Haliburton?

KBary, Boston, MA

Look, not to discount pollution, which is obviously a bad thing... but this does suggest and to some even confirm that global temperature change might have other sources then the man-made ones. This is a perfect example of why science should not to walk around pretending that it has all the answers, because it is far too easy to argue specifics. However, I think anyone can agree that pollution is bad... which is why I can't understand why we need to get into Global Warming and its theorized causal catalyst CO2 simply to get the idea of reduce/eliminate pollution.

moduz, Wilmington, DE

I'd like to hold a world-wide concert to raise money and awareness about the most serious crisis we now face-"Martian Warming." Any money raised can be used to fund my personal research facility which is devoted to studying the effects of the earth's own gradual global warming on the carbonation level of domestic versus imported beer.

Rich Lynough, elmira, New York

Why are the people who insist on denying the science of global warming almost always politically conservative? Could it be because they are also devoutly religious and therefore cling to irrational, nonsense thinking not based in reality? As we all know, throughout human history, religious people and science have always been like oil and water. This unfortunate situation evidently continues.

jeff clauser, chicago, USA/Illinois

Dan's recipe for convincing the ignorant:

One part self-righteous posturing
One part snide sarcasm
Two parts anti-Bush "frenzied bleating"

But you left out: Shaken, not stirred

David Littlejohn, Piqua, USA/Ohio

At last, proof of life on Mars! Everyone's favorite Martian drives a SUV too!

Charles, Dallas, TX

I guess Martians must wipe their butts with tp too.

Tom Greeley, Racine , WI

Contrary to what the (mostly North-American) commentators are saying here, there is a SCIENTIFIC consensus about global warming on our own planet (see Naomi Oreskes' Science Magazine article on peer-reviewed climate change papers, 3rd December 2004).

This report about Mars adds to our understanding, but it does not suddenly mean that carbon pollution in Earth's atmosphere is any less dangerous, does it?

I just thought some of the contributors to this forum who have not yet made up their minds, might be interested.

Huw Peach, Shrewsbury, UK

Perhaps the sun's activity has something to do with Mars' global warming, just as it does on earth. As I understand it, this is the point being made by the "dissident scientists" who refuse to be steam-rolled by the current political movement that embraces mankind as the major culprit for our warming. I would hope that this might give the "Al Gores of the world" pause for thought but I doubt it. There is far too much money and political power to be made re-engineering humankind's activities.

Geoff MacPherson, Renton, WA

This isn't news. Mars has always had a cyclical shrinking and growing of ice at its poles. They've been observing that for decades.
It has nothing to do with global warming on earth.

Jupiter's red spot also has changed over the past 300 years, again it has nothing to do with global warming on earth.

I'm sure Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Malkin, O'Reilly and others will pounce on this one even though none have a degree in climatology or even astronomy.

Steve Savage, OKC, USA/ Oklahoma

Alex, Cambridge - why exactly will there be nothing to inherit? Go and check out Lomborg, and you 'll see that the planet has become a much nicer place over the past three decades.

d'argent, London,

What is clear to me is that the radiation being emitted by the solar systems second fireball, Earth is heating up the other planets as well.

In reality we probably are heating up the earth more by burning things, etc.. so as the ice caps melt and there is more surface area of water, evaporation should increase and the Earth will cool down on its own.

I mean cmon people Al Gore wanted to conserve water by lowering the flow of water through your toilet! Does he think that once you go potty that water is forever gone??? Al Gore IS junk science.

Walt, Troy, MI

You can produce mountains of evidence.... but the left will still cry for more government regulations.

Tim, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Global warming is a naturally occurring cycle. Manmade pollution, also, is a cycle. When man has polluted the planet that he lives on such that he can no longer survive as a species, the cycle of nature that recycles the remains of humans and their pollution will complete. Nature will reclaim all that which man has produced. And, I suppose, another form of life will then be enabled to progress to that same point of no return, when the cycle is repeated. We, as humans, do need to recycle as much a possible, use energy wisely (after all, it is free from the sun), and try not to pollute our planet beyond habitation. Our grandkids will thank us for our wisdom.

Winford Nettles, Jacksonville, Florida

Chicago, IL was once under 30 feet of ice when the earth was colder and The Great Salt Lake is a remnant of an inland sea when the earth was wetter and warmer. Both are likely to occur once again in the future. As much as we modern humans would like to belive human acitiviites can control the climate, this only reflects the same primitive belief system centered around the concept that humans could control their environment. Whether by human sacrifice that might cause rain in a drought or result in a bountiful harvest or driving a Prius might forestall climate change the fundamental underlying human need to feel in control is the same.

The hsyteria with which the proponents of anthropogenically induced global warming promote their belief system in the face of contrary scientific evidence is quite remarkable. It is evidence that climate change has trancended science and become a religion of enviromentatlist zealots. Exchange you Aztec obsidian blades for a the death of capitalism your burning stakes for stifling economic development, as nothing changes slower than human evolution.

Matt Lafleur, Madison, MS

"As an American, I would personally like to apologize for Al Gore"

-

Apology accepted :)

Cliff, Marseille, France

Life on Mars? As we all know, global warming is caused by CO2 emissions from industrial activity. There is global warming on Mars. Ergo there must be life on Mars that is generating industrial CO2 emissions. QED

David, Middletown, USA/CT

Your all taking this too seriously. Everybody calm down and relax. Have an Island drink, and relax.

Jerry Fitzgerald, Peabody, MA

Scientists already know the Sun can chnage our climate, solar storms or the fact the Sun is putting out more heat. Anyway, Global warming/climate change could be changed via human intervention. To jump to the conclusion we may or may not be the cause of it,
doesn't really matter?

No it doesn't, the point is whatever is changing our climate to a harsher one is really going to put a stress on the way we live. Perhaps if humans understood how nature works and how this climate change is going to affect us, then we can see how important it is to keep our planet the way it is. Or even try and cope with the change in itself and survive.

chris, essex, uk

it seems evil Martian conservative Republicans driving around in their SUV's are having the same effect as here on earth. What Mars needs is ALgore to go and fix the proble there also with his carbon offsets.

Wesley, New Bedford, MA

Correlation is not causation?!?!?!?! Outstanding argument, so if we can correlate the fact that Carbon increases with Temperature, can we also argue that the correlative and causative effect there are still not understood specifically since there are scientists out there that are still explaining that there is no positive proof that CO2 comes before temperature increase. They do however agree CO2 and temperature are both related in some manner. (ie they both increase at a rate).

Damian, Katterbach, Germany,

Global Warming in terms of CO2 emissions is almost certainly poppycock and balderdash. These cycles of climate change have been happening across the millenia.
Global Warming ,in terms of marketing, taxation and associated restrictions and penalties, has become a very CONVENIENT 'TRUTH' for those who wish to extort more money from the frightened and gullible. It has dollars and pound signs written all over it.
The notion that mankind should use earthly resources more efficiently and sensibly is a completely separate argument but one which is being steadily hijacked by the 'recycling police'.
We are caught up in an era of disinformation, where the ultimate goal is totalitarianism on a global scale.

gillray, doncaster, england

This provides just the rationale I think we all needed to be sending Al Gore to another planet to work on this issue. Or perhaps we can launch him to the Sun as it just could be part of the cause.

Or, maybe this just proves that there are Martians after all- driving Martian Humvees and burning coal for power all under the surface of Mars.

martin, Memphis, TN

Actually the facts do show an extremely active solar period in the last 15 years. I wish the media would report opposing views to their "darling" mr. gore.

jeff gopon, chicago, il

I LOVE some global warming. Looking forward to another 0.6 degrees C here over then next few hundred years. You know, palm trees... toes in the sand... mai tai's... yeah baby! Please, lets all do our part and drive what Algore rides in (last time I saw him on Alki Beach with Joe) which is a real nice, BIG black SUV. Also planning on getting a Gore-sized house. Hopefully everyone will follow suit.

This is happening on Venus too by the way.
Nice try with the sand storm theory.

Scott G, Seattle, WA

Hey,
Even, Lillehammer, Norway...How do you know what has been happening for the past 3.5 million years?
Joe-Denver

Djoe, Denver, CO, USA

In answer one of your contributors, the reason that the Americans don't accept that global warming is man-made is the same reason that the majority of British people don't believe it. They are not sheep who are willing to be told how to think by career Greens, sycophantic left-wing, anti-middle class journalists and tax-hungry governments.

The global warming debate would attract a lot more public credibility if governments dedicated resources to improving emissions rather than used the issue as an excuse for imposing more spurious taxes on middle class voters. But, that would require those governments to believe what they are saying, which is wholly unprecendented.

MARK, London, UK

A few years ago a danish research suggested that the present temperature rise on earth had to do with increased solar activity. It was put aside by many scientists and environmental groups as their research results were considered to be in support of anti environmentalists. Maybe that study should be looked at again as this result seems to support that research. Global warming? Just a case of space weather.....

Robert, Leiden, Holland

A lot of people are assuming the 'Mars cooling" conclusion is based on 1 set of photos taken in the 1970's and and set taken recently. It that true?! A much more likely scenerio is that the conclusion is based on hundreds of thermal images captured from telescopes on earth over the last 3 decades and the most recent photos were just confirmation. It is hard for me to believe serious scientists would make such an idiotic mistake as to think martian temperatures do not vary from year to year without some kind of cooling or heating trend.

Chris Green, San Jose,

It amazes me how that we experience wide temperature fluctuations of 70 to 80 degrees F. every season due to the natural tilt and orbit of the earth yet we want to blame a miniscual temperature rise on our own activities. What if our orbit has shifted slightly closer to Sun or the tilt of Earth slightly more than previous. Regardless, the fact remains which cannot be disputed is the increase in solar activity affecting not only the Earth but Mars as well. If something is going to destroy the earth it certainly isn't going be me or 100 million other people driving SUVs. Global Warming already caused an end to one ice age without fossil fuels or domesticated cattle. Climates change, that is a fact. What we need to be concerned about is the scare mongers (Al Gore's of the world) creating this catostrophic doom and gloom atmosphere in order to make money off of "Carbon Offsets" while attacking a free capitalistic society with unreasonable envirionmental laws doing the planet no good.

Ron, Atlanta, GA

New research has shown that dusty tornadoes called dust devils and gusty winds have helped the surface of Mars become darker, allowing it to absorb more of the sun's rays. This process has decreased the planet's albedo, its ability to reflect solar radiation. The team's results, published in this week's issue of the journal Nature, show that the decrease in Mars's reflectivity has caused a warming of 1.17 degree Fahrenheit (0.65 degree Celsius) between 1975 and 1995. The study also predicted that Mars will continue to warm, due in part to a cycle caused by the planet's darkening surface. "The darkened surfaces warm up, heating up the air just above the surface. This encourages formation of dust devils, which sweep up dust and [further] darken the surface," Fenton explained. In addition, she said, the temperature difference between Mars's light and dark areas may cause an increase in gusty winds, which further perpetuates the cycle. Or if you believe the other comments it's martians!

andrew, manchester, uk

Many species went extinct before homp erectus existed, the reslulf of Darwinian natural selection.

ldaily, Houston, TX

Most people now are pretty well convinced that global warming is human induced...or at least seriously impacted by human activity.

Here is an interesting article that suggests that is may be extra, i.e. solar in origin...feeding the argument of a variety of interests (coal, oil, etc) that it's just a natural phenomenon.

The important thing though, is the human proclivity (in a global sense) to decide one thing is false and another true. I suspect it is almost against our nature to even consider that these suspected causes are not mutually exclusive. They are likely both true.

Why would we not want to use the intelligence we have evolved (at least some of us) and do what ever can be done to limit the effect of this "natural" phenomenon to at least attempt to preserve the world as we know it?

Is it wrong to fight "nature" ?

O.K. Next time it's -5 degrees spend the day outside without a coat.

Lorenzo Lacovara, Edgewood, USA / New Mexico

John, from College Park, MD;

Climatology is a interdisciplinary subject involving many topics. Most of the major topics involved, for example fluid dynamics, thermodynamics and statistical mechanics are well established branches of physics. Climatology is thus a science in its own right.

As to why they cant accurately predict hurricane path or strength, at the first level it is because the models required to describe the climate are highly complex involving many parameters and even if they could be written down as exact equations, it would be impossible with modern computing power to solve them in a human lifetime. For this reason, the models are simplified to show general trends over seasonal variations and not exact answers.

John Service, Oxford, UK

Chicago, IL was once under 30 feet of ice when the earth was colder and The Great Salt Lake is a remnant of an inland sea when the earth was wetter and warmer. Both are likely to occur once again in the future. As much as we modern humans would like to believe human activities can control the climate, this only reflects the same primitive belief system centered around the concept that humans could control their environment. Whether by human sacrifice that might cause rain in a drought or result in a bountiful harvest, driving a Prius in order to forestall climate change reflects the same primitive human need to feel in control of their environment.
The hysteria with which the proponents of man made global warming promote their belief system in the face of contrary scientific evidence is quite remarkable. It is evidence that climate change has transcended mere science and become a religion of zealots. Exchange your Aztec obsidian blades for a the death of capitalism. Intellect optional.

Matt Lafleur, Madison, USA/MS

Gerald, USA.

Why is the moon not heating up?

The moon has no atmosphere, that's why.

RMR, Kinston, Canada

This article is about Mars and has nothing whatsoever to do with Earth. The anti-science, religious based Republican crowd must really be hurting for entertainment.

jeff clauser, chicago, USA/Illinois

If CO2 is such a powerful greenhouse gas, why has Mars, with an atmosphere of 95% CO2 not warmed any more than earth, with it's .3% CO2? WIth the martian polar ice caps melting, that should pump even more CO2 into the atmosphere, resulting in even more warming. That it's not happening says to me that CO2 ain't all it's cracked up to be as a global greenhouse gas.

Without energy from the sun, the temperature of earth would be a few degrees north of absolute zero, so to say the sun has no influence over global warming is absurd.

"The mechanism at work on Mars appears, however, to be different from that on Earth." Well, duh! The two planets are totally different. What they do have in common is the warming energy from the sun.

I think the fact that both planets are showing basically the same temperature increase in spite of their huge climatic and atmospheric differences points to the sun as the major culprit here.

Lee, Birmingham, Alabama/USA

These comments have all made me laugh hard. Seems there is no shortage of wit yet in the US. And I am glad that we as a country here in the US have been sceptical of the whole "warming" mantra, as I think our scepticism will prove to be warranted in the years to come as science catches up.

It seems the rest of the world however bought the whole thing hook line and sinker, as we see by the deafening silence here in the comments from the global commenters. That makes me wonder what it was about our national character that made us able to rebel against the line that was being forced down our throats by a global "consensus" of elites. Maybe there is something about our educational system in the US that isn't so bad after all. It seems to help us to think for ourselves.

Claudia, Atlanta, USA

Is the Mars Rover a SUV? Next thing you know the government is going to impose a "green tax" on space probes to Mars.

Tom, Rugeley, Staffordshire

To...Dan, Hampton, UK

Hey Dan, one volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire history of mankind. Stop confusing CO2 with pollution. As for deforestation logic says the more CO2 the better off our forests would be. CO2 = plant food. And besides only a fool would think that the sun would have anything to do with the temperature
on Earth...Right?

Alan D, Avondale, PA / USA

Let's not compare apples and oranges.

Apples are reddish, oranges are orangish. Neither have anything to do with the sun. Without the sun, apples and oranges will do just fine on their own. Because of consensus science, I know these things.

But, we must explain how CO2 can cause the temperatures to rise in such a manner to leave out that remote possibility that rising temperatures can cause CO2 to rise. Because of consesus science, I know these things.

And finally, because of consensus sciene, we know that temperatures on such vastly different planets as Mars and Earth could not have anything to do with the Sun. So let's not compare Apples, Oranges, Mars or Earth with the Sun. You silly non-scientists.

K Michaels, Orem, Utah

Sheree Gibson,Rickmansworth.

Much of what you say is undeniable but your opening statement is for the most part wrong.
"Ok, so no one can agree on whether or not global warming is or is not occurring."
Few people disagree on Global Warming but they do disagree on:

A: What is the cause.
B: what is the cure.

This is important because it involves huge expenditures and contrary to popular opinion ,governments do not manufacture money. It must come from the tax payer via taxes.
You decry over-mining,over=fishing,over-foresting to supply peoples wants but is it true. Overproduction of anything destroys the market.and thats the last thing business wants to do.

Humans returning to the stone age may solve this problem
but are you willing to lead the way???

Trying to solve the worlds problems is a noble endevour.

But you need to think with your brain,not your heart.

Saladin, Greenwich,

Methane, a "greenhouse" gas which traps heat at a much faster rate than CO2, is also much more abundantly generated by human activity; i.e., cattle raising for hamburgers. While I wholly support clean energy alternatives, we simply must greatly reduce beef consumption if we wish to put more than a pinprick in the global warming diasaster. I have not eaten beef in over 30 years and found it to be a virtually effortless dietary modification. Also very good for the health! The cattle industry also dangerously reduces atmospheric O2 via massive deforestation, and the runoff creates E Coli contamination of our vegetable crops. If you're looking for a way you can personally fight global warming, abstaining from beef is a very powerful, effective and inexpensive tool you can start using right now! Let's give the Big Macs a rest!

Geoffrey A. Mazer, Los Angeles,

I strongly suggest to all of those saying that the mechanisms causing global warming on Earth are different to Mars and that we should look at the evidence here on Earth to do just that.

Whenever the Earth has had lots of dust in the atmosphere, say from a volcanic eruption, the Earth has COOLED DOWN. What do you think would have caused a nuclear winter, radiation?!?!

Far from the assertions of (mostly European) posters, there has never been direct evidence that higher CO2 levels cause higher temperatures rather than higher temperatures causing higher CO2 levels. A correlation dust not explain causality, merely a relationship. Incidentally, CO2 fallen over the past few years, but have temperatures? No.

Attempts to explain away the evidence against made made global warning are getting more and more hysterical.

Christian, St. Neots , UK and not the US

As a member of the next generation, which will still be around to witness a) global warming annihilate our planet or b) the debunking of a politically motivated myth (both expected to occur within 50 years or less) I would like to respectfully request that those of you who are going to be dead by then anyway please stop pointing out what a scam it all is.
As a member of the next generation of climate scientists and engineers in particular I would like to respectfully request that those of you who will be dead by then please refrain from abusing our planet and resources; we shouldn't have to clear up your mess just because you had no motivation to stop.
I don't care if it turns out to be a lie. I don't want to take that chance. And although our generation will one day inherit the earth from yours, I'm beginning to wonder if any of us really want to. It's not like there's going to be much left.

Alex, Cambridge,

"Maybe you just need to go back to college..."

I wonder if certain commenters on here actually went to college.

Right. Let's get this straight. This is not about "tree hugging". It's about people. Global warming is likely to kill off the human race. We will never destroy Earth, and nobody is arrogant enough to presume such a thing. But we will destroy humanity. If you can live with that, go on, do your worst.

starling, Lancaster,

There is substantial evidence that global warming is taking place on nearly every body in the solar system, from the Sun whose output has gradually increased to Pluto whose atmosphere is not freezing as predicted at this point in its orbit. It is naive and egotistical for Mankind to think it has so much power as to effect climate change, or that we can do anything about it.

The Universe is not only queerer than we imagine, it is queerer than we can imagine, to borrow a phrase.

Bernard Grover, Houston, Texas

why are all the "what climate change?" types jumping all over this as evidence that 'it's all the sun's fault", without the slightest wondering why the moon, for instance, wouldn't be warming up if it were due to the sun?

gerald zuckier, hamden, usa

If there were little green (or red) Martians, and if they had access to the internet, they would undoubtedly be chuckling over their cornflakes at the almost incredulous stupidity of the majority of the comments posted here. Of course the Sun is likely to be the ultimate cause of climate change on both planets. It is, after all, the primary source of energy in our solar system. However, it does not follow that it is the only cause of climate change. The real point of this article is that climatic conditions matter and it is perfectly possible that our actions are either causing or accelerating a process of climate change. Of course, we do not know that this is the case, and sadly, we may not know for sure until it is too late. For my own part, however, I am not sure that it is a chance that I would like to take simply for the sake of massaging a politicised bigotry, of whatever affiliation, or a self serving desire to drive a tank to work.

Richard, London,

Climate change hits Mars
We cannot control the PLUTO, Cannot control the Arctic and the Antarctic,NASA has bags and bags of money to look for the new planet for water then we boil this too. Where are our brains? Darwin may have been right. I dont' know . When I meet him I will ask.

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

At this time America is being demonized as the worlds

greatest producer of Carbon dioxide.

The best data available indicates that by yearend 2007

China will overtake the U.S. in CO2 emmisions.

Will China be demonized ? or is the entire Global Warming fiasco simply part of a Hate America program.

Saladin, Greenwich,

Brian Konash says of Mars: "Less airborne dust, more sun, it gets warmer."

Exactly the opposite of Lori Fenton's theory.

Which is it to be?

What fun to see cultists in a panic.

Dan Baynes, Barton Seagrave,

Halliburton helped build the Mars Rover! They must be responsible for the melt. We should close them down before they destroy the whole universe.

charles Akins , College Station, TX

Silly rednecks, Mars isn't mentioned in the Bible so it doesn't exist anyway.

Oldhickory, The Hermitage, USA

Ok, so no one can agree on whether or not global warming is or is not occurring. Fine. But not one person can disagree that humans are having a huge impact on the planet. Im not necessarily talking about Co2 etc, but deforestation, deep sea fishing, and all the other irresponsible selfish actions that we as humans do to fulfill our energy "requirement" and wants and needs (mahogany furniture or palm oil anyone?). Species biodiversity as a result, is being decreased due to human-caused extinction. Humans as a species are evolved to be selfish, but how come pretty much all other species manage to, if left to their own devices, survive in synchrony with their habitat, their environment. Humans dont seem to be able to do this, we just consume consume consume, then leave the left overs for others in other generations to deal with. Like i said, selfish. And i thought that humans were supposed to be all-loving? Maybe not.

Sheree Gibson, Rickmansworth, UK

What Does A;l Gore have to say about this? I am sure he will have an explanation....

SBhatt, Louisville, KY

There must be Republicans on Mars! We may,indeed, be seeing evidence of life ,on other planets.

Jim, Dallas, TX, USA

Climate change on mars? Based on a set of readings in the 1970's and a new set of readings thirty years later? I guess it hasn't occurred to scientists that you can get different readings from one year to the next. As far as earths temps rising, in the 1970s we were experiencing a period of cooling and the scientists were saying we were entering a new "ice age". Well put 2 and 2 together all you so called scientists! If temps had cooled in the 1970s then the readings you took at that time were lower than average, so when you compare 1970s temps to temps thirty years later it's going to appear that the worldwide temperature is rising, DUHHHH! Science often makes the mistake of over anylizing a given subject and ignores the obvious answers right in front of their faces! If man causes global warming then how did we come out of past ice ages before we had the industrial revolution? They are inventing a crisis so they can receive grants to study the situation. Follow the money! Wake up!

Bruce Smith, Chesterfield, U.S.A. / Virginia

People keep saying that just because it is warming on Mars we cannot say that the warming on Earth is correlated to it. This is ridiculouos. I can just as easlily say to them that just because CO2 is at a higher level now than 100 years ago, we cannot say for sure that the warming we are experiencing is caused by it. I think the fact that Mars is warming along with a sun that is more active should be considered when determining legislation to deal with warming. Can't there be several reasons we are warming? Perhaps CO2 has a minimal impact. Perhaps we aren;t as smart as we think.

Bob, New York,

I Believe in Al Gore. I Believe in Gobal warming. I believe, I believe, I believe you are all wrong. Oh No! I see a fact coming! Run. Run. Hide your self and you will be safe. I believe in Al Gore. I believe ...

Jerry , Bozeman, Montana, USA

Wow! How far our 'sinful' earthly lifestyles can go!

Enezio E. de Almeida Filho, Campinas SP, Brazil

Graham Washington DC and vincent rhodes, seattle, wA,

There are no greater deniers than those who fail;t to see truth.You cannot control the climate. I
want you to test this:
During the next Thunderstorm, I want you to go out and stand with your hand's raise and yell out 'Peace , be still!'
See if anything happens. Don't stop trying. Stay there all through the storm until it passes. After it stops you can say you stopped the storm.

Solar system, hmmm. I wonder why the brightest scientists called it a Solar system.

Randall, PhD Physics, Arlington,

This planet apparently had an ice age (before my time). I'm pretty sure that my 4 x 4 didn't melt it. However, I will continue to pay extra high road tax if that helps to make it freeze up again. Haven't seen a 4 x 4 on mars so can't comment.

kaye, swanley, U.K.

I wonder when Al Gore's scare flick about Mar's warming will be coming out.

Rich, Arlington, VA

We have to do something soon before we destroy the rest of the universe... Somebody please buy some carbon credits to protect Mars!

Echeverri, Miami, FL

Ian - Lancaster. If a planet next to our exhibits the same warming that we are apparently undergoing, and does not have all the stuff that people claim is causing it here (cars, planes and all that other stuff) then why should we look for alternative explanations to the sun? As for the state of our planet, I refer you to Lomborg - another voice that the green movement would rather not hear about. I cannot really follow your logic when you claim to want compelling evidence for the sun's effects on planetary climate but state that the arguement here on Earth is tipped in favour of green-house gases. Selective thinking, I suggest...

d'argent, London,

In addition to Mars, Neptune, Jupiter, and Pluto are also experiencing 'global warming." We obviously need to begin warning the space aliens on those other planets to stop driving their equivalent of our SUV's, change to more efficient energy using devices, and cultivate more of their version of our plants and trees to reduce their carbon footprints.

Gary, Jackson, MS

Its down to Martians taking more holidays, those flying saucers are terrible contributers to atmospheric pollution.

mike gee, bournemouth, UK

If only people understood science.

It can be made very simple:
If you take an aquarium and put living mice in it, and then close the lid (you now have a closed system) - what happens if the mice produce more emissions or crap than the plants within the aquarium can assimilate?
Answer = There is a build up of emissions and crap.

This is the same scenario on earth. We are creating a build up of emissions and crap because our rates of resource consumption and rates of waste generation are greater than our ecosystems' ability to assimilate and renew. We end up with accumulation of emissions and crap, meanwhile draining our ecosystem resources (air, water, fertile soil, plant based life etc...).

Whether this results in global warming or not is somewhat irrelevent - the point is that this societal path is unsustainable and eventually the ecosystems' will collapse - and your are children left to suffer the consequences.
Nice work nay sayer's - go ahead and be ignorant.

r, ottawa, canada

I wish that the person that wrote this story would explain how this description differs substantially from what is happening here on earth? Also, Ms Fenton, higher heat can generate higher winds, as anyone who has experienced a summer thunderstorm can attest. I smell a political agenda.

bob t., southern pines, nc

IPCC consensus is a fraud. There is decent on the finding's of the report. I've read other planets and moons in our solar system are heating up besides, Mars. To extrapolate that co2 emissions are causing global warming when H2O has significant more green house effect is ludicrous. Democracy in science does not make it so. ie(speed of light, flat earth, geocentric universe,....) The increase in co2 very well could be the result of global warming. Increase in solar activity is a very clear and logical hypothesis making more sense than Man as the primary cause.

Scott Damow, Columbus, NE

Both sides of this view, in their own way, are correct. Mars is indeed warming, and it is close to the sun- an obvious and direct correlation. Our (as in the US) carbon emissions are a way of life (has anyone paid attention to the statistics on cow feces and the carbon they produce?), and granted, they aren't the best for the environment . But why are we the ones taking all of this upon ourselves? China is the greatest producer of factory products and emissions, and they do NOT produce those emissions with any of the environmental care that we do. Why shouldn't we start with China, and then take a look at how good we are doing?

Gina, Orange County, CA, USA

Obviously if the sun is to blame for global warming on Earth and Mars, we should perhaps write angry letters to the sun asking it to reduce its 'carbon footprint' CO2 emissions, perhaps even consider trade embargos. I personally will not be buying any produce manufactured by the sun until a definite answer is resolved.

Dan, Mancheter, UK,

If you haven't seen the British TV series "The Great Global Warming Swindle" you should! Even BBC showed it. It is a series rebutal by reputable weather scienist with no political agenda. Google it for access.

Gerry Huestis, HARTSVILLE, usa/PA

Now, the trick for the government is to find a student thesis on the internet, showing that there is life on Mars capable of invading within 45 minutes, that the only way they can reach the surface of earth is through holes in the ozone layer caused by the generation of greenhouse gases, and that we therefore need urgent tax increases to save humanity.

Come back HG Wells. Your country needs you now!

MARK, London, UK

"The mechanism at work on Mars appears, however, to be different from that on Earth."

that is because of the lack of grants and taxpayers money being spent on programs whose real goal is to induce changes in behavior

John Stevens, Goshen , IN

So. Dust particles on Mars cause warming. Dust particles on earth (such as a nuclear explosion) cause "nuclear winter?" Guess we suffer from different laws of physics. Perhaps Pope Gore the First can explain it to me, after all, he invented the internet!

Dan, Shamrock Lakes, Indiana

I think that an immediate congestion charge should be levied and that Ken Livingstone should get up there and make certain that it is implemented.

E J Murray, Kerry, Ireland

Mars and Earth are warming at the same rate??? sooln we will find another planet also warming at the same rate? and yet the religion of the Wacky MAN IS NO GOOD
WE ARE KILLING THE PLANET do not see a correlation. What ever happened to Occam's razor? If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck and walks like a duck.. perhaps... just perhaps?? It is not the Purple Goose from outer space they say it is...

edward, Chiang Mai, Thailand

That makes sense - blame the warming on the Martian wind kicking up dust. I'm sure there was never any wind there before.

Foster Linn, Naperville, Illinois

As I understand the debate, many (most?) climate scientists would agree with a statement like the following, "The world is getting warmer, and it is more likely than not that man-made CO2 emissions are at least part of the cause." What I have a problem with, is the AGores of the world telling me we must, therefore, immediately turn our economy on the head. Then the third world chimes in, because the sensible solution is for the US to send them a lot of money for carbon offsets. News of this sort should certainly give one pause about how much (if ay) we atttibute to CO2 and what steps we take. I am, however all for reducing oil use so that we stop enriching mideast fanatics, but Canadian oil shale or US coal might be a good alternative.

The problem with the whole global warming panic is that it has happened before (no more ice age), and that to suppose that we should panic implies that we can do something about it, and that we know that the current temp is the right one.

Scott, Minnepolis, USA

Hardly coincidence, since we know that solar radiation fluctuates. Since we also know that a small solid object with a dark surface warms up much faster than a large wet object with protective reflectors (clouds to the non-scientific), Mars warms up at the same effective rate as Earth.

I'm sure that those that rely on the same Laws of Thermodynamics to get around the planet will try to disprove this. The resulting crackpot theories should prove interesting diversions from run-of-the-mill science fiction stories.

But it won't stop an ice-cap from melting.

KR, Stockport,

There is one big problem with the sun "theory" of global warming (advocated by so many here, but unfortunately without any evidence): the radiation from the sun is NOT going up and hasn't been for the last three decades. So there must be something else behind this. Some think the solar system could be passing through clouds of dust in the universe (the milky way is moving you may know) in periods, and this could cause cooling, and warming when there is no dust. We just don't know. What we know is fx: when huge volcanoes send out lots of CO2 in the atmosphere 55 million years ago, the earth warmed quickly by maybe ten degrees celsius. Probably that was the last time there was so much CO2 in the earth's atmosphere as there is now (380 ppm) - and some more. For the last at least 3,5 million years there hasn't been more than 300 ppm at most.

Considering what we know: it's just not smart to run the risk of tampering with the earth's thermoregulating systems as we do. Reduce emissions

Even, Lillehammer, Norway

Question:

A- Are temperatures rising because of increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere????

B- Are concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere increasing due to increasing temperature on the earths surface?????

If you want to believe "A "you will.

If you want to believe "B " you will.

And all the scientific data from here to hell will not change your mind one iota.

Ergo,thereore and to wit:

This has become totally political problem.

Saladin, Greenwich,

How in the world can anyone say that satellites have shown little change in radiation output from Sun in the past 30 years?! Check any graph of solar radiation output, and you'll see an incredible change. As further confirmation, check any graph of cosmic ray incidence, and you'll see an incredible drop in the past 30 years; cosmic ray incidence is linked directly to the solar wind--a higher solar wind, which results from higher solar activity, pushes the "cosmic wind" away more. Cosmic rays have also been linked as a direct factor in precipitation and cloud formation--greater cloud formation means greater albedo, meaning lower temperature. Furthermore, on Mars, greater solar activity means greater carbon dioxide sublimation at the polar caps, meaning not only a decrease therein, but much greater wind activity to stir up dust, thus increasing the effect, just as the effect is increased on Earth due to the effect on cosmic rays and thus cloud formation.

Jason, Charlottesville,

If I remember right. About a year ago or maybe a little longer. NASA released a report saying all the planets in the universe would warm up by about 3 degrees F, in the next 5-10 years. If so,looks as if they may have been right.

Mike, Drummonds, TN

Peter Kay of Honolulu: extrapolating long-term trends to give expectations of a likely climate in 100 years is presumably easier, or more likely to be accurate, than forecasting what the weather will be like in a particular month, where very local and temporary factors could seriously affect the weather.

Will Duffay, London,

I can just picture all those Martians up there driving their big, gas guzzling SUV's and causing martian global warming...

Uh... kool-Aid drinkers of the Ch