"CO2 flows have not been imaged on Mars, nor will they be, at least not the kind that the "White Mars" hypothesis envisions. But that's all right."

Agreed Flows observed to date have not as massive as those known to have occured in the past.

"The problem for "anti-wet" Mars folks is that there is an absolute abundance"

Not really all that much - you can see how much there is in each region by looking at the gullies streaming from the craters caused by small impacts.

"of near-surface water (which could be ice, liquid or chemically bonded)"

try a clathrate "solution"

"that must be recharged from deep reservoirs."

the strata of clathrates are observable to some depth.

"Those reservoirs are almost certainly liquid,"

NO.

"and probably very extensive."

yes, the clathrates cover the entire planet.

"From time to time, liquid water has been discharged directly to the surface from the interior, causing most of the extended channelling and catastrophic chaos we see on the surface today."

Yes - released first from the clathrates by massive impacts, which releases in turn cause yet more releases - think of a chain reaction...

"Rainfall has historically occurred on the surface and snowfall occurs to this day. There is nothing to prevent liquid water temporarily at the surface, either now or in the past. In some places, liquid water may persist at the surface for hours every day; it can persist under an ice cover for quite a long time, indefinitely so long as there is some means of recharge."

Yes, but not in enough quantity to account for any of the "geological" (try "marseological") features observed.

"Impact has of course affected surface conditions."

Now there's an understatement.

"However, many circular formations on the surface have been misidentified. When the actual cratering history of Mars is better known, the implications and consequences of these impacts may begin to be better understood. But right now, the misidentification of so many circular formations as impact structures interferes with reasonable understanding. Venus and Io provide some alternative circular formations (internally generated) for consideration (and both provide a startling lack of impact structures)."

The checks on these cratrer counts are going to come from automated programs run against the datasets for the moons of Jupiter and Saturn. Until the impact rate is known, it will be nearly impossible to even roughly date most structures on Mars. How about we get the counts, and then start the analysis? This will save a lot of trees which would otherwise be sacrificed publishing a lot of meaningless BS.

"Eventually, the static model of Mars will give over to a more or less nuanced understanding of a dynamic Mars. We've been in the throes of a paradigm shift for a decade or more... given some more time, and our understanding of the Red Planet (no longer butterscotch! yay!) will be so changed that today's beliefs will seem naive and quaint if not altogether"

Huxley and Wallace had pretty much described Mars by 1908 - but the intense desire for an Earthg-like Mars causes reason to be thrown out the window. With 4 probes arriving at Mars next year, the possibility is good that enough data will be retruned to cause this paradigm shift to occur immediately. Those who shift fast will keep their jobs.

ep