The “man-made global warming” fanatics have something else they need to explain (beyond why huge increases of CO2 here on Earth has not raised temps more than a fraction of a degree). They also need to explain why Mars is also affected by “man-made global warming”:

Mars is being hit by rapid climate change and it is happening so fast that the red planet could lose its southern ice cap, writes Jonathan Leake.

Scientists from Nasa say that Mars has warmed by about 0.5C since the 1970s. This is similar to the warming experienced on Earth over approximately the same period.

Since there is no known life on Mars it suggests rapid changes in planetary climates could be natural phenomena.

Emphasis mine – because the denial is deep with the liberal media! “Could be”? Are they kidding? Of course it is a natural phenomenon. And it clearly is solar system wide. And it tracks PERFECTLY with the heating seen here on earth. And yet there is no man made CO2 driving it – none! Man generated CO2 did not travel through the vastness of space from Earth to heat up the red planet. But what we do have is the control sample from which to compute man’s component of warming here on earth. And now for some real science

Since the Martian temperature has increased 0.5° C and it is a completely independent and isolated system then a similar, if not higher, amont of heating from the same source (not from man) would be seen here on Earth. The reason it should be higher is the only source of heat is the Sun, and since we are much closer to the Sun we would get a slightly higher heating effect. But let’s assume it is the same between the two planets (to be conservative).

From a graph over at Wikipedia we see the Global temperature has gone up betweem 0.5-0.6° C here on Earth since 1970. Again, lets assume it is 0.55°C to split the difference and be conservative. That means only 0.05°C, or 10%, of the effect outside the solar system wide heating can be from man. 90% of the effect (or less) is from outside our planet. 90% of warming is not due to human activity!

The Kyoto treaty will not effect Global warming at all because it plans to lower CO2 by 10%, which at the most could effect the temperature 1%. For those who do not do a lot of math that means Kyoto would have had the maximum possible affect on the temperature change of 0.01°C, meaning instead of a .5°C rise we would see a 0.49°C change. For all the pain and suffering that is not a result one would expect. But the Kyoto fanatics never did make their case. Personally I don’t think it will change the global temperature much at all, as long as there are more massive forces at work.

Update:: From the aptly named “Bad Astronomy” comes some truly non-scientific excuse making.

First off, I want to make a very big point here: the changes in the Earth due to global warming, while real, are somewhat subtle. Yet the Earth gets most of its heat from the Sun, so if the Sun were the cause, we’d expect the effects of warming to be much stronger on Earth than any outer planets.

OK, this guy is a young astronomer who seems to know very little about the earth and its climate. First off, Mars is seeing the EXACT SAME increase as the earth, with the earth showing a slightly higher increase. But the reality is Mars and Earth are not the same. First off, we have a magnetic field which deflects a lot of energy – Mars lost its magnetic field. Earth has a much thicker atmosphere, clouds and 75% of its surface is water – which is one of the most thermally conductive substances known. The deep ocean depths become a heat sink which can absorb a lot of energy. We also have much larger amounts of ice to offset the cooling. And in vegetation which absorbs solar energy and converts it and you have all of these factors which moderate the actual atmospheric response. His claim is almost 3rd grade in scientific depth of understanding the forces at work here.

He goes onto rant about “cherry picking” in a lame attempt to ignore the solar system evidence! As I said up front (which he seems to have missed or did not get) is the heating of other planets in our solar system point to a source of heating that is OUTSIDE the Earth.

These planets are controls – they have NO HUMAN activity to influence their warming. Mars has a dead internal core, that is why it lost its magnetic field and all its volcanoes are dead. It does not suffer from massive gravity forces like Io does from Jupiter. In essence ALL of its heat is from the Sun – nowhere else. All the rationalizations aside, unless the Sun produces MORE heat, Mars is not going to get warmer. The Wind theory in the original article was hilarious – and only a theory. The point is whatever is heating Mars (the Sun) is heating the Earth too and the two temperature rises match.

Now, if Bad Astronomer has made the claim the Earth could absorb and moderate an increase in solar output I would have bought that argument. But the level of denial on his part, and his cherry picking, is a sign of how bad science has gotten on this subject. Let me address his naive point about the other planets and moons in the solar system:

What about Mercury, Venus, Saturn, Uranus…

Mercury is already very hot – but it also has no atmosphere (geez, you would think an astronomer would know that?). These are atmospheric temperatures – duh! Venus: Venus is already cocooned in a thick atmosphere of CO2 and various acids. The temperatures there are already very, very high. To differentiate the solar influx from the existing pressure-heat would require a probe. On Venus the atmospheric pressure creates a lot of heat and probably inundates any small solar variations (and we are talking small variations which take decades to show a 0.5°C increase). Saturn and Uranus are gas giants and much farther away and smaller than Jupiter. Jupiter is large enough and close enough to capture a significant amount of solar energy. Saturn and Uranus (and Neptune) are probably not presenting sufficient surface to a ever dwindling solar flux (with distance squared) to see an increase. The moons are problematic because the gravitational forces from the gas giants again dominate the heating. IO gets a lot of heat from gravitation forces, a lot more than it does from the Sun. Pluto is the one moon sized planet (or planet sized moon) which is not tied to a Jovain-type gas giant. Again, its heating must come from the Sun and the Sun alone.

But he does have an aptly named site!