Talk:WASP-96b
Latest comment: 1 year ago by 2A01:C22:B018:8600:A5B6:94E3:F286:D2E3 in topic Clouds or No Clouds?
 | This article is rated Stub-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)