Talk:WASP-96b
Add topicLatest comment: 4 years ago by 2A01:C22:B018:8600:A5B6:94E3:F286:D2E3 in topic Clouds or No Clouds?
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Clouds or No Clouds?
[edit]While it is written in the article, that this planet's atmosphere has no clouds, in the next abstract is stated, that there are clouds, indeed. What a contradiction within a few lines, in a very short Wikipedia article! I hope, we can improve it! 2A01:C22:B018:8600:A5B6:94E3:F286:D2E3 (talk) 17:14, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
- Came here to ask the same question. I'm assuming the "no clouds" theory was created to explain why it was so bright, but that recent evidence now contradicts this. I would say there still isn't enough evidence to discount either theory (the evidence from JWST is merely suggestive of clouds, not conclusive evidence), so I would suggest keeping both theories in the article but clarifying the language to say something along the lines of "it is theorized that a cloud-free atmosphere is the cause of this planet's brightness, but recent evidence from JWST would seem to contradict this". 20:23, 12 July 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.112.34.194 (talk)