Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Keeping Alien Samples Safe For Study 118

Posted by timothy from the unless-they're-allergic-to-sterility dept.
Metrollica writes: "Space.com features an article describing NASA's plans to prepare the Johnson Space Center that could one day house extraterrestrial life." An excerpt from the article: "It's human nature to clean for company more thoroughly than one would for oneself, but nowhere is this truth taken to greater extremes than at the Johnson Space Center. NASA's setting new standards of cleanliness in its labs that handle samples returning from space. And their efforts are laying the groundwork for samples that might some day contain evidence of extraterrestrial life from Mars, Europa, and other points little known."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Keeping Alien Samples Safe For Study More

Keeping Alien Samples Safe For Study

Comments Filter:
  • they must have the cleaning crew from Wright-Patterson there for a weekend getaway

  • Andromeda Strain... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bonker ( 243350 ) on Sunday February 17, 2002 @02:46AM (#3020946)
    There was no air on the moon or in high earth orbit, so there was no reason to keep the astronauts quaranteened.

    HOWEVER, it was a good idea, because they didn't know everything they were dealing with yet.

    On Mars, Europa, and Io, there exists a remote possibility for life. Retreival missions should be geared to keep this life hermetically isolated from the Earth's biosphere.... Just in case.

    • Re:Andromeda Strain... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Perdo ( 151843 )
      There was no air on the moon or in high earth orbit, so there was no reason to keep the astronauts quaranteened.

      This is sort of recent but there was fungus on the outside of mir's glass

      google cache of article [google.com]

      Mir crashed and this crap is in the ocean now after spending millions of life cycles in had cosmic radiation

      Nature at it's best through evolution and man doing stupid things to himself.
      • Now all they need to do is find a way to grow them and sell them.

        Imagine instead of owning your very own moon rock, you can now grow a patch of spacial goodness of "Space Fungus"!

  • If they find any alien microbe... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 17, 2002 @02:50AM (#3020952)
    I hope they'll organize a televised deathmatch between it and some Earth microbe, seen through a microscope. That'd be cool.

  • Server down? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by quantaman ( 517394 )
    The story went up ~5 minutes ago and I can't get anything, surly it can't have been /.ed this quickly? I would have really liked to see what kind of measures they would take to house extraterrestrial samples. How would you be able to remove all microbes from the air in a lab? Would you even use air, just keep it in a vacuum. That still leaves the problem of microbs on the equipment and and lab environment. They have experience keeping things in with viral labs but I don't think it's entirly applicable to this situation where you'd have to keep things out. All I can think of is shortly after building it roasting the entire lab to destroy every last trace of life than doing the same thing to the lab suits when coming in, which would of course have to be fire proof AND impermeable to moisture, anything come to mind? Are there any other more practical ways to effectivly destroy all cellular matter in an environment?
  • OK, I'm taking bets on the first post to make a joke about a nuclear self-destruct device. Any takers?
    • MESSAGE READS:

      PROJECT WILDFIRE. STOP.

      Ok...what the hell is this lameness filter crap all about. I try to reply with a simple teletype-ish reply, and...grr...

      Now I understand what people have been complaining about.

  • It'll be used sooner then you think... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by S-prime ( 550519 ) on Sunday February 17, 2002 @02:57AM (#3020968)
    If all goes well the Stardust mission will be returning to Earth with cosmic dust particles from the comet WIld 2 sometime in 2006

    From what is mentioned on the project webpage it seems that they plan to return the sample to Earth via a capsule to be jettisoned from the space probe when it returns.

    While the chances for contamination are relatively low, it certainly can't hurt to be prepared.

    More info at
    http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/index.html

  • Dangerous stuff (Score:5, Interesting)

    by NewtonsLaw ( 409638 ) on Sunday February 17, 2002 @02:59AM (#3020970)
    Imagine if there was once advanced, possibly even intelligent, life on Mars.

    Would it be too far-fetched to speculate that perhaps that all higher life forms were wiped out by some virus or bacterial disease?

    With the plant and animal life gone, the climate of the planet would change radically -- to the extent that we see today - but the cause of the catastrophy could stil be lurking in the soil.

    What guarantees do we have that bringing back a sample of soil or rock from Mars wouldn't expose this planet to the same catastrophic outcome?

    From what I read, scientists are still debating whether those odd fossil-like oddities discovered in meteoric fragments from Mars are actually petrified bacteria.

    I think it makes a lot of sense to take every possible precaution when it comes to bringing stuff back from Mars. It might even be a good idea to do the initial analysis up in the ISS just in case it's really bad news. After all, how do we know that we could actually contain a pathogen such as that which might be returned from the red planet?

    Is it really worth the risk?

    • Interesting point.
      I have considered the same thing, and also this:
      Do we already have Martian bacteria on Earth?

      Bacteria is very light and travels well through space.
      I remember seeing somewhere that the sun's "atmosphere" extends out past Saturn.
      Imagine what would happen to bacteria on Mars after a meteor shower.

      I would think that by now we have been exposed to pretty much everything bacterial Mars has to offer. If it (Mars) was still alive & evolving, there would be a problem, but not now.

      Well that's what I think anyway!
    • Imagine if there was once advanced, possibly even intelligent, life on Mars.

      Would it be too far-fetched to speculate that perhaps that all higher life forms were wiped out by some virus or bacterial disease?
      I hate it when people post intelligent scary things. Now I'm all paranoid.

      Man, I have got to stop reading Slashdot at three AM...

      --
      Damn the Empteror!

    • Re:Dangerous stuff (Score:4, Interesting)

      by LadyLucky ( 546115 ) on Sunday February 17, 2002 @04:18AM (#3021068) Homepage
      See, I tend to think the opposite. Life on earth has spent millions of years adapting to our environment, adapting to be more and more efficient at doing bad stuff to us. I think it would be highly unlikely that any given virus would have any potency in a terrestrial environment. After all, there is nothing inherent about a particular virus that makes it deadly, it is just that its interactions with our bodies cause ill effects.

      I would have thought extra-terrestrial life is likely to have the same kind of effect on us as we would on them. If we can't survive over there, why could they survive here? All in all, it is more like a roll of the evolutionary dice, in a game where the possibilities are huge, and the successful species very few. Not only that, but they have to be more successful than the ones on earth that have evolved already.

      • Actually, thats probably the exact reason why it'll be deadly.

        You see, a well evolved virus will NOT kill the host. If it kills the host it kills itself (difficult to spread from a dead patient).

        Atleast, it won't do so immediatly. The black plague worked so well as it's primary carriers were unaffected, easily spread and quite plentiful. Had adverse affects on humans though :)
      • See, I tend to think the opposite. Life on earth has spent millions of years adapting to our environment, adapting to be more and more efficient at doing bad stuff to us.


        European settlers in America gave the natives all sorts of nasty diseases that they had no natural immunity too. Just as they had no natural immunity to our diseases, so we might not have to "space-diseases". In addition, earth virii tend to moderate their lethality. If a virus kills too quickly then it will not be passed on before it has done so. If it kills too many then it will wipe its hosts. Alien virii have not had a chance to tailor themselves to us. Ok, so these are remote possibilities, but you'd only need to be wrong once for it to be a big problem.


        not_cub

        • That would be because the natives were, and still are, every bit as much humans as the settlers were - microbes will not care about your skin color. Those diseases affected only the species they've been evolving for, humans, and certaily did not jump into a plants, or even animals for example - and plants and animals are quite a bit more nearly related to us than anything from different planet would be.

          There are rather few inter-species pathogens, and even those are results of thousands or millions of years of evolution, with those same host species present. Space microbe cannot infect human, or any other earthling, because it has never adapted into living in one.
      • I am inclined to agree with you on the subject of viruses. Bacteria or multicellular life might be a different issue. Since they are free-living organisms, unlike a virus, they would not need to match our biochemistry as closely to survive, if they can make use of things like sugars, amino acids, etc. The concern would be then if the kinds of defenses developed by terrestrial life were not well suited to coping with ET.

        Random example: a lot of our antibiotics (and natural ones employed by a variety of organisms) function by disrupting the formation of the bacterial cell wall, causing the internal pressue of the cell to rupture it. Bacteria are developing resistance by making slight changes in the sugars the use and their arrangement in the cell wall. Our imaginary ET bug might not even have a cell wall, or may use a protein-analog, or some totally different system, against which the earthly one is worthless.

        Just my thoughts, but given how little we can say with certainty about anything we bring home, why not overdose on precaution. The worse that happens is we laugh at our paranoia in fifty years.


    • Do we really know now if life is on mars or not? no air or water on the surface, what about under the surface?? When they drill on mars, or can get a probe to actually land on mars, we will find out.

      As far as life on other planets, I'm 99 percent sure theres life on europa, that planet is like the south pole is on earth, alot off ice, and alot of water under the ice, meaning theres bound to be life under the ice, and the life could be intelligent life at that.

      Europa would be the planet to check for contact with aliens, the fact that we havent even a probe planned for Europe must mean Nasa isnt trying to discover intelligent life, they wouldnt know how to handle it if they did.

      bacteria, thats a life form simplee enough for us to properly handle.

      Imaginee us going to Mars or Europa, and bringing back some unknown alien lifeform, will that lifeforms friends send ships to earth and attack us, who says they arent as intelligent as us, now they could be like aliens on earth but some of these other planets had life on them long before earth.

      Who knows.

      In my opinion i dont see why we need to bring stuff back at all, we can do all of our tests in space to make sure its safe, bring it to a space station. Let astronaughts deal with it.

      IF its a live alien why tell the people about that? so they can panic? Let the astronaughts in space interview the alien or run some tests, then send it back to its friends.

    • Re:Dangerous stuff (Score:2, Interesting)

      by ender81b ( 520454 )
      WARNING: long post

      A virus dangerous enough to destroy an entire planet would defeat itself - it would be a evolutionary phreak and oculdn't survive. Consider this:

      Most scientists rightly consider Ebola virus a 'defunct' virus - not a good one. Ebola will kill a victim in 3 days (or so, maybe a week depending on the strain). By doing so it lessons it chances of infecting the next host. The only reason Ebola is such a (possible) problem today is b/c of things like airlines. In actuality, a ebola 'outbreak' will occur and then will rapidly die out as the hosts die faster than the virus can spread. IN a sense Ebola does one thing perfectly (reproduce extremely fast by consuming bodily tissues) but another very, very badly (destroys the hosts too fast).

      A far more 'perfect' virus would be something along the lines of AIDS/HIV. These virus spread very, very slowly and can remain inside their hosts for 10-20 years in some cases. Remember the point of a virus is to Duplicate itself and survive. Ebola just isn't as effective as AIDS in doing so. I.E. 100-200 Ebola deaths a year compared to 5-6 million AIDS deaths a year (and rising with an infection rate of around 60% in some African countries).

      Indeed, it would be nearly impossible for a virus to do as you say (wipe out a planet) nor would it make evolutionary sense (no, not a perfect theory but do you really want to argue creationism?). It would most likely burn itself out. No virus ever discovered can travel between more than a few species or genus that I can ever recall hearing about. And don't forget that life has been evolving on this planet for 3-4 billion years far longer than martian life would've had time to evolve and probably a higher mutation rate (due to larger amounts of radiation - closer to sun).

      The difference in the organisms make travel impossible between them. Not only that but remember people *Do* survive Ebola and other types of doomsday virus's. The mortality rate may be 90% but that 10% will be immune to the virus from then on.

      Ok, so your perfect virus wiped out 90% of the life on a planet (we will discuss why this is nearly impossible ina second). 10 % remaining. Planet screwed right? Nadda. During the.. oh crap can't remmeber the eon.. I think it was phanerozic - something transition around *98%* of all species on earth died (most likely due to a huge meteor impact). NINETY EIGHT PERCENT. Within 50 mil years afterwards life had recovered, if I am wrong on any of this please some geologist correct me but I think I got the time frame pretty close.

      Yet we are still here and the earth fine. You see life expands expotentially (sp?). You oculd wipe out everything on the earth except for a few bacteria (and I mean a FEW one or two) and the earth woudl be ship-shape in a say 100 million years.

      At the height of the cold war if the soviet/us/china released all their nuclear weapons at once distrubuted evenly over the earths surfact they wouldn't destroy life on earth. B/c of things like aneorabic bacteria just discovered living miles underground, or deep-sea vent colonies living 10's of kilometers under the sea or mold spores perserved in rock, etc, etc ad nausem.

      The final point is this: why the hell would the bacteria be dangerous to us? TO do so martian life would've had to have had a DNA/whatever structure incredibly close to ours. SOooo here we go:

      Your virus has to:

      A.) Somehow destroy all life on a planet within a relatively short timeframe (say 10,000 years) otherwise life will adapt, and fast.

      B.) Be able to infect every single species of life and mutate fast enough to overcome any changes between the species.

      C.) Be able to survive for oh, 1 billion or so years on the martian surface blasted by UV, in near freezing conditions with no life to prey upon to reproduce.

      D.) Be able to adapt to EARTHS lifeforms somehow.

      E.) Somehow this has to make sense evolutionary-wise (remember life always expands, not contracts)

      Anyways sorry for the long post.
    • odd fossil-like oddities discovered in meteoric fragments from Mars are actually petrified bacteria.

      I would be petrified too if I was chased into a piece of rock by a killer virus. Scary stuff.

      But wouldn't NASA just have to send a few guys on a field trip into Area 51 and see how they solved the problem? (Training for this mission would of course consist of all-day playing of Half-Life 'til they got it right)

    • Imagine if there was once advanced, possibly even intelligent, life on Mars. Would it be too far-fetched to speculate that perhaps that all higher life forms were wiped out by some virus or bacterial disease? What guarantees do we have that bringing back a sample of soil or rock from Mars wouldn't expose this planet to the same catastrophic outcome?

      This has already happened - we're it.

  • Once something leaves a state, it changes. No ifs, ands, or buts. Wouldn't it make more sense to create these labs in the environments that the samples would be taken from. A sample in it's native environment would make it that more viable.

    On further examination, creation of jobs, further research in foreign regions, and the fact that the proof of the existence of life in other areas besides earth Would be beneficial to this. Also, contamination of the earths population is somewhat... imaginable, but it is still possible. If there was habitation on Mars and Europa, would it be lack of certain things, or the fact that something was there that would cause their extinction.
    • Which is exactly why I don't understand why we haven't got a base of some sort on the moon yet. Think of the benefits.. we could test all sorts of new space engines and thrusters, and perhaps perfect easy Moon -> Mars flights. We could also dig up any minerals that are there, and maybe even find the Monolith :-)

      Am I just nuts, or would a moon base really be helpful as well as awe inspiring for the entire planet?
  • Alternate link to story on Yahoo! News. [yahoo.com] The Yahoo site has the text of the story, but not any images of the room. I should have included that link when I submitted the story.
  • ...because as we all know, the first alien brought back to earth from outer space will be a naked hottie with a thirst for human blood. while the security guards are busy ogling her supernaturally luscious boobies, she'll walk straight out the front door and commence her rampage of death and destruction.

    we may as well give up now.

  • that have red hair.

    "The truth is IN there."
  • Do you think aliens have storage areas for Earth things. Cuz they don't know what a cork screw is for, so they'd want to lock it away. Maybe that's why they think we won't mind the probes.

  • This sound foolish (Score:2, Interesting)

    by qpt ( 319020 )
    What justification is there for intentionally housing possibly dangerous extra-terrestrial life forms? The curiosity of a few academics is surely not reason enough to put the entire human race at potential risk!

    After all, no matter how carefully they may store these organisms, there is always the possibility that they may somehow escape. Once the terrestrial biosphere is contaminated with foreign organisms, who can say what the result will be? History is rife with examples of non-native species decimating populations of unprepared organisms.

    I am not worried so much about macroscopic life forms as microscopic ones, such as bacteria and viruses. Having evolved for millions of years apart from terrestrial macro-organisms, these creatures could devastate our maladapted immune systems.
  • What if we find, and bring back, really dirty jabba the hutt-esque aliens? And why worry about microbes, if that's all we bring back. Personally I'd like 5 minutes alone in there with ms. Henstridge. Underrated movie really. (Erm... no it wasnt)

  • Roswell, anyone? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Jin Wicked ( 317953 )

    Although I am seriously skeptical of any actual Alien beings already in captivity (or storage) by the government, I do tend to think that they know somewhat more about the space program in general than they're letting on.

    Is it possible that some of this news could be gradually preparing the public to accept the idea that there is proof of life elsewhere in the universe? I imagine most people would not have much of a difficult time accepting this, but there are groups (I believe) that would have a difficult time dealing with the fact that life exists anywhere beyond Earth.

    I just wonder if they're preparing for something they might get, or preparing us for what they've already got.

    (I could also be listening to Art Bell too much...)

    • Seriously, Id like to be the president just to know the answer to that and other questions ... Could you imagine the first few days of being president, you must get one *hell* of a briefing! Im sure being the president means your privy to alot of really cool secrets :) This is not to say I think there are aliens on earth, but I sure wish there were because that would be cool!

    • I don't think so (Score:4, Insightful)

      by xX_sticky_Xx ( 526967 ) on Sunday February 17, 2002 @04:57AM (#3021111) Homepage Journal
      Yep, I think you've been listening to too much Art Bell.

      Roswell was most likely just a smokescreen to divert attention from the fact that Nazi scientists were working for the US to develop their rocketry program. They probably realized that if they produced "evidence" of a crashed saucer and then quickly backtracked and denied it (substituting a weather balloon for the saucer) that people would think there was a conspiracy to cover up the alien crash. Worked pretty damn good. Meanwhile, no one is even thinking about having the former enemy on the public payroll.

      That, my friend, is the real conspiracy.
      • Roswell was most likely just a smokescreen to divert attention from the fact that Nazi scientists were working for the US to develop their rocketry program. They probably realized that if they produced "evidence" of a crashed saucer and then quickly backtracked and denied it (substituting a weather balloon for the saucer) that people would think there was a conspiracy to cover up the alien crash. Worked pretty damn good. Meanwhile, no one is even thinking about having the former enemy on the public payroll.


        Your explanation, sir, is simple, makes perfect sense and is quite reasonable. I'm sure you'll understand that myself and others will have to discredit you by screaming "The truth is out there!" and refusing to listen. :)
    • Check this out [go.com], a little piece at ABC news for kids. This is kindof scary.

      Perhaps they are slowly making the world ready for disclosure of the truth.
      • ...ok, so mod me down for being off-topic here...

        So, I checked out the ABC News for Kids [go.com] link... interesting news site for kids. The alien "story" raised an eyebrow or two...

        But what was really depressing to me were the 4 headlines for kids...

        Alien Secrets

        America Attacked!

        Anthrax!

        Happy Holidays!

        Sort of makes me yearn for the good old days when I was growing up. Nothing to worry about back then... except for the 'nukes. Ahhh, the good old nukes...

        BR
        Sigh...

  • Wouldn't we really just be setting the aliens up for a letdown?
  • ...aliens are really our genetic in-laws, in a 2001ish sense. That would make sense, seeing as I have to clean for mine whenever they come over...
  • Hrm, so where did they hold the stuff from them 50s? ;)

  • Seems Nasa expects to only find bacteria and other simple life.

    How are you going to deal with intelligent life, i mean come on bacteria????????? We shouldnt worry about that stuff, we should be worried about how to deal with contact with REAL alien life, meaning stuff that we've never seen before and wont know how to deal with which is as intelligent or more intelligent than us.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • What happens if we screw up the containment rooms (Score:4, Funny)

    by Ukab the Great ( 87152 ) on Sunday February 17, 2002 @05:06AM (#3021121)
    Zoltar: "Home Planet: these earthlings had a really crappy waiting room. The Nation Geographics were ten years old, they had no dish of candies on the coffee table, and from watching "Nick at Nite" we have determined that the next season of "I Love Lucy" you all have been waiting for is really going to suck. I suggest we destroy their planet now."

  • This is a job for the space station (Score:4, Interesting)

    by corebreech ( 469871 ) on Sunday February 17, 2002 @05:10AM (#3021123) Journal
    Why bring it to Earth? Just bring it to the Space Station.

    Specifically, you have the returning space probe enter Earth orbit. A service vehicle is then dispatched to dock with the probe. Part of the service vehicle is designed to serve as a containment module for whatever beasties the probe brought back.

    Then the service vehicle navigates back to the space station and docks. The containment module remains off-limits to personnel, all observation/experiments are performed using machines preinstalled in the containment module.

    If the beasties start pulling an Andromeda on us, you jettison the module and send it on its way to the Sun.
    • This is a job for a full-blown lab with actual human involvment. If the Viking landers taught us anything, it's that we cannot anticipate all of the kinds of tests we might need and results (false and real) that we will see. There is no way you'll launch a full-sized, fully equiped biological lab into orbit, espeically not one where humans can really work (gravity is pretty popular amoung biologists, silly people).

      The whole point of bringing these samples back is to bring the full arsenal of our scientific abilities against them. You can't do that via remotely controlled robots, either on Mars or in the next room of the space station.
      • > You can't do that via remotely controlled robots, either on Mars or in the next room of the space station.

        Of course we can, and more importantly, it's the only safe way of proceeding. Robots can be controlled easily when they're in the next room and there's no round-trip lag in telemetry/communications and the bandwidth is whatever you want it to be, and any tests not anticipated can be sent up on the next shuttle flight.

        And I tell you what, if you want to be a biologist that specializes in the study of alien lifeforms you have better start getting used to the idea of working in zero-g.

        To insist otherwise isn't too different than being a marine biologist who refuses to get wet.

        Stick to the Discovery Channel.
        • In as much as NASA has set up this facility for studing potential alien lifeforms on Earth, not in zero-G, I'd have to call your assertion into question. It's pretty sweeping statment, given the evidence against it.

          And if you do your research, you'll learn that most marine biologist spend most of their time on shore. Particularly when they're trying to do lab work. There is no reason for an astrobiologist to go into space, given the costs and the fact that any organisms on the space station would already be out of their habitat (which is why a marine biologist goes into the water, to study critters in their native environments).

          And, no, no robot is as good as having a human in there. Ask any lab scientist you know, and they'll confirm: there is no substitute for having a person running the experiments. Machines don't have all of our sense. Half of good science is serendipity, often resulting from someone noticing something really subtle. Machines don't notice things, and by design, have restricted senses.

          And it isn't like Mars rocks are more scary than, say, smallpox or e. coli. We let biologists work with known hazardous organisms (under careful conditions, much like NASA astrobiology lab) here on Earth. And we know for a fact that they are dangerous. Odds are highly weighted against there being any danger in Mars rocks.
          • In as much as NASA has set up this facility for studing potential alien lifeforms on Earth, not in zero-G, I'd have to call your assertion into question.

            If you read the article carefully, you will note that the facility being constructed is not slated for analyzing alien samples but is, rather, simply "laying the groundwork."

            And if you do your research, you'll learn that most marine biologist spend most of their time on shore.

            This will be true with astrobiologists as well; they will spend most of their time on Earth.

            There is no reason for an astrobiologist to go into space, given the costs and the fact that any organisms on the space station would already be out of their habitat...

            The organisms being studied are going to be out of the habitat regardless of whether they are here on Earth or on the Space Station.

            And there is a reason to send biologists into space to perform these studies... to reduce the risk of accidental contagion here on Earth to zero.

            And, no, no robot is as good as having a human in there. Ask any lab scientist you know, and they'll confirm: there is no substitute for having a person running the experiments.

            Most if not all lab scientists have never had the opportunity to work with the kind of robots I'm talking about. Recent achievements in minaturization and computer technology can produce an experience that is as good, if not better, than actually being there.

            Machines don't have all of our sense. Half of good science is serendipity, often resulting from someone noticing something really subtle. Machines don't notice things, and by design, have restricted senses.

            We wouldn't be using the machines to design experiments or analyze the results. And machines have far greater sensory capabilities than we do, and are able to communicate this information to us in ways far more useful than what the unadorned eye or ear otherwise could.

            And it isn't like Mars rocks are more scary than, say, smallpox or e. coli.

            How do you know this?

            And if we really do know this, why spend the money to bring the stuff back?

            We let biologists work with known hazardous organisms (under careful conditions, much like NASA astrobiology lab) here on Earth.

            Organisms that evolved on Earth.

            I've got some movies I'd like you to go see, um, Alien, um, Andromeda Strain, er, War of the Worlds, the Martian Chronicles...

            Odds are highly weighted against there being any danger in Mars rocks.

            So if the choice is between low, but real, risk and zero risk, you want to take the risk, even if it means that if you are wrong all of humanity might be threatened?

            If NASA were really smart, they'd use the return of alien samples as a way of bolstering the funding for the Space Station. We spent the money to put it up there, now let's put it to use!
            • I think I see our problem. You're basing your fears on Hollywood horror/SciFi movies.

              I'm basing mine on biology. If life on Mars evolved independently of Earth, odds are that it won't infect humans or any other terrestrial species. If you want to see why this is likely, just look at all of the bacteria and virii on Earth today. Only a small fraction of these can infect a human. Now imagine that the bacteria had never as much as seen a human before. What are the odds that it can even live in our systems, let alone thrive and infect?

              Organisms that have evolved on Earth are far more likely to be dangerous than Mars rocks (which probably don't even have life to begin with, based on Viking findings). And organism like e. coli which has been SHOWN to infect humans is much scarier than some phantom boogieman from Mars you may have once seen in a movie.

              As for the space station: it already gets the lion's share of the NASA budget.
              • For the record, SciFi predicted rockets, satellites, geostationary orbit, that little trip from the Earth to the Moon... let's not start dissing SciFi, and let's not ignore the other more salient points made in that last post.

                You argue that it is unlikely that any alien organism can pose a threat here, but your arguments are the same as might have been made in years past, when instead of visiting alien worlds we travelled to undiscovered countries.

                Look at all of the bacteria and virii on Earth today! Only a small fraction of these can infect a human! So no need to take precautions before we visit these natives over here, or this tribe or that tribe.

                And of course, what happened? Whole populations were decimated, and why? Because that one seemingly insignificant bacteria or virii that we didn't give a second thought too was something that the people who lived in these parts of the worlds had never encountered.

                History is replete with examples of our causing great destruction borne of nothing but our arrogance.

                If we know everything already, then why spend so much money bringing this stuff back?
                • This is getting silly, so this will be my last response. However:

                  You are still ignoring the point. Bacteria carried by humans to other populations is still bacteria adapted to humans. To compare it to potential Mars life is silly.

                  No one is saying that we should take any precautions. That's what this NASA facility is all about. But there are precations and there are undo, overly expensive precautions that cut the amount of viable science dramatically. I am of the opinion that putting the facility on the Space Station is in the latter category.
                  • Bacteria carried by humans to other populations is still bacteria adapted to humans.

                    You are so wrong.

                    The question isn't whether the bacteria has adapted to humans.

                    It's whether the humans have adapted to the bacteria.

                    I'm going to guess you're either a biologist, or a scientist of some other persuasion. One of the more sobering facts in this life concerns the relative ease with which we award such credentials upon people, regardless of whether they are possessed with the faculties necessary to administer their responsiblities.

                    All too often they are not.

                    And more often than not, this is how disaster occurs.

                    I don't say this in reference to you. Necessarily. It's more of a point aimed at the current crop of "scientists" who inhabit NASA these days. You're right when you point out that they appear ready to sign off on this.

                    More frightening than even the movie 'Alien'.

  • The Alien (Score:3, Interesting)

    by _Sprocket_ ( 42527 ) on Sunday February 17, 2002 @05:26AM (#3021138)
    In one of the buildings I occasionally worked in at JSC (medical facility - forget the building number), there is an underground room. Pretty far underground. I've been told it was origionally used to examine astronauts before and after flights free from stray radiation, etc from the atmosphere (a combination of an insulated room and earth). Of course, we liked to claim that was where The Alien was housed.


    Of course, that fell in line nicely with rumors that JSC was actually a Hanger 18 site. And that's why JSC property includes lots of undeveloped land (all those underground facilities). Now days there's a major road and a magnet school along one of the borders that used to be closed off NASA territory.


    Of course - its all bunk anyway. But it fit nicely with the Alien Room at the bottom of the (sometimes) locked elevator.

    • Are you so sure about that? I live pretty much next door to JSC, and the house's foundation as at sea level. If you dig a hole, it fills with water. You don't go very far down.
    • When I worked there, there was a rumor of an "underground vault" where they kept everything that had ever been in orbit (small objects, that is--old space suits, etc.), in order to prevent a black market developing. Have no idea what the truth of this is. Probably there is a vault somewhere, but underground in Houston is a neat trick. Sometimes, when I'd walk across the lush JSC lawns, I'd see water squish up around my feet. As the other reply says, the water table is at roughly 0 inches underground.

      There is an underground tunnel complex in Houston, with shopping, movies, and parking, so it's possible, using a lot of pumps going all the time I suppose. Last year the entire city got horribly flooded, including those tunnels. Flood maps [dodson-hydro.com]. Think about floodwater deluging a clean room full of alien samples and then surging out across the Texas countryside--which does not drain very well either, and is plenty moist and warm for growing any sort of microbe you want. Heck, they had 2 cases of cholera in Houston when I lived there. Supposedly it arrived in bilge.

      Also, the entire region is saturated with noxious chemicals from the petroleum industry. With this witches' brew already in place, I'd rather have the samples go to Iowa or some such high-and-dry location.
      • Yep. Houston is swamp land. Especially the Clear Lake area (I used to be able to see JSC out my back porch - now I live on the other side of the lake itself).


        You think there's a witches brew from the Petroleum industry. Just think about all the chemicals and biological agents dumped in to Houston's bayous from flooded university labs last year.


        In any case - JSC does have some degree of underground structures. I'll have to dig up some info on that room and find out exactly how deep it goes. But otherwise, JSC has a somewhat extensive network of underground utility tunnels (although they don't got THAT deep, but I understand they're very wet).


        Having said all that - The Alien Room is labled as such because of our sense of humor. Not because of its actual use. :)

  • >extraterrestrial life from Mars, Europa, and >other points little known I knew you Americans do know very little about Europe. But at least you should know, that it's located on Earth. malana
  • >extraterrestrial life from Mars, Europa, and
    >other points little known

    I knew you Americans do know very little about
    Europe. But at least you should know, that it's
    located on Earth

    malana

  • Maybe they should wait until there's an actual need for this before wasting my tax money on it. Unless I missed the news about the manned mission to Europa.
    • You missed the news that NASA is planning a sample return mission to Mars within the decade. Actually, they've been planning it for quite a while now, at least 10 years. It has been delayed by several years by the Polar Lander and Climate Orbiter debacles, but it is still on.
  • It's a queen. She'll breed. You'll die.

  • MIB? (Score:1)

    by 1D10T ( 455536 )
    So finally earth will become a harbor for aliens without a home as in Men in Black?
  • Government is preparing us to show the truth:

    They have alien species captured and contained in your facilities, but must preparing civils step-by-step, because the cultural,religious and social impact will be unprecedent in human history.

    Tha lab is marketing to something that already exists for a long time...
  • And their efforts are laying the groundwork for samples that might some day contain evidence of extraterrestrial life from Mars, Europa, and other points little known.
    It's nice to see someone else addressing the fact that US folks know almost nothing about Europa. Coming from the other side of the pond, I'm just wondering if they can really cram all European visitors into the Johnson Space Center. I think my next visit should be scheduled before they have finalised this plan.
    • Sheesh. Europa is a moon of Jupiter. Europe is a continenton, as you put it, "the other side of the pond." Sounds like the "European" can't tell the difference.
      • Ah, someone who is humor-impaired.

        Listen, in my part of the world the continent where I live is definitively called Europa. And not only in my part (Germany), but in many other parts as well (Spain, Portugal, etc.) You may visit europa.eu.int [eu.int] to learn more about us.

        You see, my joke was meant for readers with a tiny bit of cultural background on the Old Continent. Obviously, you don't belong to that group.

  • Houston not a safe location (Score:3, Interesting)

    by texchanchan ( 471739 ) <ccrowley@@@gmail...com> on Sunday February 17, 2002 @11:44AM (#3021725)
    Johnson Space Center is just south of Clear Lake City, between the city of Houston and the Gulf of Mexico. The land it is on is already sinking. Every year, local roads disappear for days at a time under high water after heavy rains.

    Houston locals, including the people at NASA-JSC, entertain themselves by betting on where the hurricanes are going to hit. Locals track them on maps--and everybody has maps with latitude and longitude, because they are distributed by local businesses printed on placemats, grocery bags, and such.

    Clear Lake has a straight section running directly from the Gulf of Mexico to the south side of Johnson Space Center. Topo map [topozone.com] A big hurricane, hitting at the right point in the tidal cycle, could create a storm surge that would flood everything at JSC up to, maybe including, the second floor.

    When I worked there (a long time ago) high-water preparedness consisted of putting the equipment up on tables and desks.

    It seems to me that a place which could be sloshing with seawater is not the best location for this lab.
  • Anyone ever played HALO?
  • This is sorta of a continuation of discussion started the other day. ( see here [slashdot.org]) Basically the premise is that if intellignet life exists out there then there is a high probability that it's millions of years more advanced than us and that they would probably be engaged in massive civil engineering projects (such as arranging stars for pratical benefit) that would be observable from earth. The question is what would we look for that would be out of the ordinary?
  • Okay. Here is my 2 cents worth. Every article here focuses on the following: alien hoax/gov. conspiracy(old hat), microbial death, and extra-terrestrial intelligence. Point 1: There are still plenty of aliens on this planet. Point 2: Microbe handling is dangerous but who cares...we are going to wipe ourselves out first. Point 3: When do I get to come across some intelligent life FROM this planet???? If there is sentient life out there, we would be too inane for them to even care. We are the worst version of a virus on this planet( the self destroying type). NASA's ability to come up with anything beyond rocks, dust, and rather uninteresting petrified crap is remote at best. And heaven forbid that we did find intelligent life else where in the universe because that would send every modern religion scrammbling to rewrite their indoctrinations to include such a slight oversight as divine providence placing life elsewhere. Peace and well being to all!

Slashdot Top Deals

Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"

Close