Mars Exploration Must Consider Contamination 333
letxa2000 writes: "CNN is reporting that the National Research Council has submitted a report to NASA that recommends certain precautions be taken if NASA is to send astronauts to Mars to guarantee that they don't bring back Mars-based bacteria and contaminate earth; including possibly banning the return vehicle from entering the Earth's atmosphere. What is the likelihood of bacterial life on Mars infecting the earth if we ever get around to visiting Mars in person?"
Re:It doesn't hurt to take precautions (Score:3, Insightful)
And the other way around? (Score:4, Insightful)
re: Infecting Mars (Score:2, Insightful)
Why the concern? (Score:3, Insightful)
Still, I have to admit, this sounds an awful lot like, "this code should work".
Re:What about. . . (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually, I'm willing to bet Earth & Mars have already cross-contaminated each other, though at what point in time, I have no idea. Both planets have been hit hard enough to throw up ejecta which could have escaped the atmosphere and made it to the sister planet. Things change, of course, so the notion that we swapped bacteria with Mars a couple billion years ago is no reason not to wipe our feet before coming inside.
Then... _DON'T_ _SEND_ _PEOPLE_. (Score:2, Insightful)
The most ironic thing is that if a person is sent to Mars, they will almost innevitably be called a 'Hero'.
Why? Because they were able to see more than any electrical equipment? No - machines would be able to see with much greater clarity without disturbing the environment they are examining. Because they can perform actions that no machine can? No - a machine that was allowed the weight of a human being, and the environmental protection of a human being, then given the budget of a human being would be able to do thousands of times the unique experiments a human would have time to do on the first trip - and it wouldn't need to come back either.
Now admittedly, this is more of a rant - but humans do not have any special reason to take the great pains needed to go into space to explore. Machines can, and do explore much better. Once a plan is made to make an environment outside of earth livable, and a sound plan is made, then it would be beneficial to have humans live in that environment. We do NOT need a human on Mars, nor do we need to spend the overwhelming resources needed to put a human on Mars.
I know, I know - it's not science that drives this, and now mostly, the only way to get the budget is to send a senator or other large source of money where they want to go, and fit science in after the ego. But if we have to go this route, couldn't we just go ahead and put McDonalds and AOL ads on permanant banners on Mars instead of having to send a human? Maybe make little human robots, controlled in a sort of a battletech way by senators and rich people on earth instead.
I'd much rather hear the press worry about the viral influence of children looking through their new high-powered telescope looking for the Pringle's ad on Phobos than the paranoia that would come from a human being sent to mars, and all that involves.
Any other "better than sending a human" ideas?
:^)
Ryan Fenton
Re:Overly paranoid, but good (Score:3, Insightful)
sending people is more expencive but (Score:3, Insightful)
manned exploration of mars is premature (Score:4, Insightful)
Once we know one way or another what kind of life exists on mars, then we can start thinking about sending humans. But that will invariably and irrevocably change mars.
Re:Compatibility Issues (Score:1, Insightful)
The martians said the same thing...
"We don't need to worry about flesh-eating bacteria on earth; just because it killed the dinosaurs doesn't mean it'll harm us.."
Infection contrasted with Supplanting (Score:1, Insightful)
This is a NASA Red Herring (Score:2, Insightful)
So what's the bottom line of this red herring? Easy. NASA is now way too much of a fat, incompetent organization to dream of sending a man to Mars. They can barely get a simple Low Earth Orbit space station going for billions over an already bloated budget. Fearmongering is one (very low) way that they can produce classic FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) about the very idea to let them off of the hook for not being able to produce such a mission.
Re:Infecting Mars (Score:4, Insightful)
You cannot compare. Since Martian bacteria would face different evolutionary preassures. On Mars surviving extremes to temperature is more important than on Earth. On Earth surviving in an oxygen rich environment is important, as is competition with all sorts of other organisms. (Including many which have sophisticated methods of killing bacteria.)
How the hell should I know? (Score:4, Insightful)
All right, Mr. Submitter, I'll answer your question: I haven't the foggiest idea. I've learned a little here or there about microorganisms and their possible existence outside of the Earth during my lifetime, and I regard myself as a relatively intelligent person, and tend to have strong opinions about most anything, including stuff I don't know much about. But the awful truth is that I'm not the least bit qualified to speculate on the likelihood of extraterrestrial infections on Earth. That's not an informative answer, I admit, but it's honest, and I daresay a great deal more honest than nearly all of the responses you've received so far.
To be sure, there have been a few replies so far that seem to be thoughtful and well-informed, and perhaps they come from people who really are qualified to answer the question; but like I said, I'm not really qualified to make that evaluation. Almost all of the rest, it seems to me, are comments from people who may be relatively intelligent, may have read a thing or two about the possibility of extraterrestrial life, and have all kinds of strong opinions about anything, and now they are speculating with wild abandon. Which is fun, but they will give you almost no reliable answers to your question, and may lead you completely astray.
You probably wouldn't be having this problem if you had posted this question in a forum about "News for Molecular Biologists, Stuff That Matters to Astrophysicists". Why did you expect you expect to get any useful answers here?
Re:It doesn't hurt to take precautions (Score:3, Insightful)