Changes

== URANUS COOLING -- NOT CERTAIN ==

== URANUS COOLING -- NOT CERTAIN ==

I read the referenced article on Uranus cooling, and I think that -- while it is interesting and should be mentioned -- the data does NOT confirm that Uranus is in fact cooling.  The C. article should say that it MAY be cooling.  However, the measurements at issue where taken from different parts of the planet.  The higher (earlier) temperature measurement was taken from the DUSK side of the planet.  That is the side that had been in sunlight all day long.  The lower (later) temperature reading was taken from the DAWN side of the planet.  That is, the side of the planet that had been in darkness all night long.  Therefore, it is unknown if these measurements actually represent a cooling planet Uranus or simply the effects of day versus night.  I think fairness and integrity calls for mentioning the observation.  But I DO NOT THINK THE OBSERVATION SHOULD BE STATED AS CONCLUSIVE, when it is uncertain and subject to further observation.

I read the referenced article on Uranus cooling, and I think that -- while it is interesting and should be mentioned -- the data does NOT confirm that Uranus is in fact cooling.  The C. article should say that it MAY be cooling.  However, the measurements at issue where taken from different parts of the planet.  The higher (earlier) temperature measurement was taken from the DUSK side of the planet.  That is the side that had been in sunlight all day long.  The lower (later) temperature reading was taken from the DAWN side of the planet.  That is, the side of the planet that had been in darkness all night long.  Therefore, it is unknown if these measurements actually represent a cooling planet Uranus or simply the effects of day versus night.  I think fairness and integrity calls for mentioning the observation.  But I DO NOT THINK THE OBSERVATION SHOULD BE STATED AS CONCLUSIVE, when it is uncertain and subject to further observation. Jon Moseley