Mars Mission. Step 1

Shaun Barrett · 2002-05-13 01:14:41

Hi Peter! Thanks for getting the thread back, but I think it's one of those threads with so many frayed bits leading off in different directions that it'll be hard to stick to the central theme!
You make a comment about the discovery of life making a difference to colonisation plans but you do not specify what kind of life; entirely indigenous and alien life or just familiar Earth-type life. Which do you mean? Also, if it's just Earth-type bacteria and moulds, how would you envisage that changing the colonisation plans, if at all?

Hi Christina! I note your comment: "Let's hope the sample return mission does go on time."
This implies that there is actually a time-table with "Mars Sample Return Launch Date" written on it. There isn't! This whole sample return thing is an unnecessary hurdle, with difficult technological ramifications, placed in our way by a plainly procrastinating U.S. space administration. It's an ideal way of throwing the whole humans-to-Mars program into low gear.
I can see all sorts of environmental groups sharpening their knives and getting into this spurious argument over biological contamination. And once that starts, you Christina and I will certainly be long dead before the first footprint appears on Mars! (You will have noticed, of course, that not a single environmentalist or journalist raised a finger in protest in the 1960s while we were landing unsterilised probes on Mars!! But everybody's getting hot under the collar now they perceive a threat to OUR biosphere! Hmm.)
As I have suggested elsewhere in New Mars, it would be far easier to check for dangerous life-forms and chemicals right there on the surface of Mars with a small automated lab. No need for complicated sample returns and no need for containment facilities at this end. Simple!

Hello HeloTeacher ! (Is there an echo in here?! ) It's so refreshing to see someone hit the nail on the head the way you just did!
NASA either has a clandestine agenda (ask the conspiracy theorists) or, as you have so aptly pointed out, they have completely lost their nerve!!
Firstly, as I have pointed out elsewhere, there is no reliable evidence that Martian regolith is superoxidising or otherwise toxic. That hypothesis arose from faulty Viking data. Look up the work of Dr. Gilbert Levin for verification; the logic is impeccable. Secondly, everyone agrees that the chances of finding microbes on Mars capable of acting as human pathogens are one-in-a-million (colloquially, "practically zilch").
The first astronauts on Mars will be there for about 500 days. This is plenty of time in which to die of "Chryse Cholera" or "Syrtis Septicaemia"! So if they do get sick, they'll never get the chance to bring the contagion back to Earth.
Before somebody says we can't risk the lives of our astronauts, what were the odds that Armstrong and Aldrin might die on the Moon? Only one-in-a-million? I don't think so! Much worse odds than that! Did that stop them? Would it stop a team of Mars explorers today? NOT A CHANCE!!
Something's happened to NASA since the days of Apollo and HeloTeacher has identified that "something" very accurately. The astronauts are as courageous as ever but their leadership has lost its backbone.
Hi MarkS! If you're right about that NASA poll and the 60% of Americans being against humans-to-Mars, then these are dark days for the Mars Society and, ultimately, for America's tenure as Earth's pre-eminent power. The U.S. was built to go forward. If she's not going forward, she starts to die.
Hi Phobos! I love your gung-ho attitude! Hope it's contagious.

Peter Pevensie · 2002-05-13 10:59:57

Hi Peter! ... You make a comment about the discovery of life making a difference to colonisation plans but you do not specify what kind of life; entirely indigenous and alien life or just familiar Earth-type life. Which do you mean? Also, if it's just Earth-type bacteria and moulds, how would you envisage that changing the colonisation plans, if at all?

Shawn, thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify my position a little.

From my perspective, any extant life that is found to have existed on Mars prior to humanity's arrival is indigenous for all intents and purposes. I'll confess I'm a bit confused by your reference to "earth-type" life. Unless it could be proven that a lifeform was brought to Mars by one of our landed probes (a very difficult proposition, I would assume), then we would be forced to conclude that it was Martian in origin regardless of how much it resembled some previously known Earth organism.

If such an organism is found -- life on any order -- then there are serious ethical questions to be considered before proceding with a colonization program, or any permanent presence, for that matter. It's simply a matter of precedence. Once humanity chooses to exercise dominion over single-celled life on Mars, it becomes that much easier to exercise it over higher-order life we find on other worlds (because, for example, they destroy Earth native crops or livestock used to provide food for a fledgling colony). The logical extension of this kind of a galactic "manifest destiny" is to confine, relocate, or exterminate "semi-intelligent" or intelligent lifeforms who get in the way of human progress.

This may sound far-fetched, but from a legal standpoint it's just a hop, skip, and a jump from colonizing Mars without regard for the bacteria that were there first to forcing Centaurians onto "reservations" so that we can plant Earth crops on their land. What we need are some firm guidelines before we determine whether Mars has life or not -- a "Prime Directive," if you will...

...or have I been watching too much Star Trek again?

Bill White · 2002-05-13 16:41:04

If such an organism is found -- life on any order -- then there are serious ethical questions to be considered before proceding with a colonization program, or any permanent presence, for that matter.

Peter,

I have read that Mars has remained geologically and climatically unchanged for millions of years and there are no prospect for any change in that situation in the foreseeable future. Therefore, IMHO, if we do find actual living organisms scattered about in obscure places on Mars, then I believe it would be far more likely that such organisms are the the final survivors of a Martian Gaia-like biosphere which once existed when Mars was warmer and much wetter than today.

Given the creativity found in the evolutionary algorithms and given the power of exponential growth inherent in biological reproduction, I believe that where-ever life exists it will strongly tend towards a Gaia-like situation and will envelop all conceivable niches. There is no current evidence of a planet-wide Martian Gaia even if we cannot rule out the possibility of scattered microbes surviving in unseen hot springs or deep underground.

Insofar as the prospects of the planet Mars becoming warm and wet again - without human intervention - are essentially nil, I see early human settlers as being rather like a medical triage team working to save Martian life from extinction.

If we find the scattered remnants of life, such as

- a few hardy microbes AND a substantial fossil record of a biosphere once teeming with life; and/or

- genetically related microbes found in hot springs located thousands of kilometers apart, with no apparent means of transportation between those locations; or

- similiar evidence that these living microbes are final survivors rather than early precursors. . .

then, perhaps, humanity will have an ethical and moral DUTY to settle Mars with enough people so we can deploy the resources needed to assure the continued survival of these microbes, even if that survival comes to mean life in human made facilities.

Do morals and ethics apply? Absolutely. I also fear the "slipperly slope" you describe. Also, finding evidence of a true biosphere, rather than handfuls of scattered microbes, could lead me to support a "hands-off" Mars policy

However, my amateur opinion concerning life on Mars is as follows

<1> No life on Mars is the most likely situation, IMHO;

<2> A fossil record with no living life is the 2nd most likely situation - with <2> all by itself being more likely than <3> & <4> combined;

<3> Scattered microbes hanging on from a now extinct Gaia is the 3rd most likely situation; and

<4> Mars has a true biosphere and we just can't see it is the least likely state of affairs.

In any event, I believe we do have a moral and ethical duty to go and look.

SpaceNut · 2015-05-05 18:49:49

Humans to Mars or as put H2MR report has been issued. Report Released: The Humans to Mars Report 2015

Explore Mars, Inc. is a non-profit group is pleased to announce the release of the first annual Humans to Mars Report (H2MR). The H2MR provides a summary of recent progress as it "provides updates on challenges, plus progress in areas such as mission architecture design and development, scientific discoveries, policy, public perception, international cooperation and competition, plus new private capabilities" and current challenges in advancing the goal of human missions to Mars.

"The H2MR specifically addresses mission architecture design and development, scientific discoveries, policy, public perception, international cooperation and competition, and new private capabilities," commented Explore Mars CEO Chris Carberry. "One of the great values of this annual report is that it will provide policy makers and members of the space community with an indispensable resource that will assist them in making the most informed decisions on budgets and long-term plans and strategy for getting humans to Mars."
According to H2MR Co-Chair, Michael Raftery (TerraTrace Corp), "The momentum for sending humans to Mars is building. The H2MR will not only provide an annual snapshot of progress, but it will also make recommendations on how continued progress can be maintained over the upcoming years and will, in addition, reflect new capabilities and developments as they materialize.

http://h2m.exploremars.org/wp-content/u … port_i.pdf

The report breaks down the last 5 years and looks towards the future not only as with current path of developing items but into the distant what it will take.

SpaceNut · 2015-05-18 20:48:56

Aldrin: Next President Should Try to Colonize Mars Within 20 Years

When asked about the importance of public and private partnerships for space exploration, Aldrin said the private sector usually does a better job.
“This can be your legacy and the legacy of the first pilgrims that stepped foot there because we know the disadvantages of landing and then bringing people back and then landing again, and that’s wishy-washy. What do you want to do? Do you want to colonize or not? If you don’t, stay in orbit, that’s nice and safe, but somebody else will go down there. That doesn’t mean spend years in orbit. Go in there because we have fixed the surface to be a very acceptable, habitable location for growing people,” he added.

“We explore or we expire. It is built into our human genes, the curiosity to look elsewhere to find better locations. What’s on the other side of the mountain? What will enable me to begin to continue to explore? Then sometimes people say we want to preserve the human race against pestilence, nuclear war, the impact of large objects,” Aldrin said.
“If a big one is coming, a big one, really big, the latest thinking – and I had to listen to some of these experts – is we’re going to use nuclear detonations with shockwaves, not to blow this thing into little pieces, that makes things a whole lot worse but supposedly it can be diverted by a big shockwave. The last time I checked NASA did not have any of those. NASA doesn’t have people on alert but the Defense Department does — and that to me, the highest level of national security, is where our planetary protection should be located,” he added

During the event, a member of the audience asked Aldrin about the advantages or disadvantages of government agencies and private companies venturing deeper into space.
“Both of them – it’s how they are going to get along, and they must get along. We can’t do things with just government. We’ve done enough government projects to know that usually the private the sector can do a better job,” Aldrin said

louis · 2015-05-19 09:48:21

Aldrin is a great guy - always sends the right message out.

Personally, though, I think it can be done in 10 years from a standing start, if we were to allocate 20% of NASA/ESA/JSA budgets.

SpaceNut · 2016-04-18 20:43:30

http://h2m.exploremars.org/

2016 Speakers Include
The George Washington University, Washington D.C.
May 17-19, 2016
http://h2m.exploremars.org/speakers-h2m-2016/

http://www.exploremars.org/wp-content/u … port_i.pdf

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2002-05-13 01:14:41

Re: Mars Mission. Step 1

#27 2002-05-13 10:59:57

Re: Mars Mission. Step 1

#28 2002-05-13 16:41:04

Re: Mars Mission. Step 1

#29 2015-05-05 18:49:49

Re: Mars Mission. Step 1

#30 2015-05-18 20:48:56

Re: Mars Mission. Step 1

#31 2015-05-19 09:48:21

Re: Mars Mission. Step 1

#32 2016-04-18 20:43:30

Re: Mars Mission. Step 1

Board footer