[meteorite-list] Mars rover pollution

From: Sterling K. Webb <kelly_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon Jul 18 20:43:07 2005
Message-ID: <42DC4C63.62961030_at_bhil.com>

Hi, Entropy, Darren, List, and the Bacterial Overlords!

    In the "early" days, we worried a lot about contamination -- both ways!
Astronauts were ripped out of their capsules and popped into biohazard sealed
environments, probes were sterilized, etc.
    The dangers never materialized.
    Now, if we filled the probes up with chasmoendolithic nanobateria such as
you mentioned, we might, just might, get a shot at contaminating a planet, but
the bugs in the warm mayonnaise on the technicians' balogna sandwiches (that got
on the tech's thumb) are not going to become the Bacterial Overlords of Mars!
They will die wondering why it's so cold and where all the mayonnaise went...
    Interesting as the idea of "contaminating" a planet is, it's scientifically
a dead issue, or so we think. And you couldn't decontaminate a modern spacecraft
like one of the old klutzy "camera in a box" probes. Too much chance of damaging
the probe.
    And as far eliminated the bacteria, forget it. The most sterile operating
theatre humans can devise still has 100,000's of microbes per cc in the air.
Read the marvelous book, "The Life That Lives On Man." (British author, old
man!)
    The theme of "contaminating" a planet is well-known in fiction, too. There's
a marvelous story about tracking all life on Mars down to the Russia's crashed
Cosmos 3 probe. And the author of Red, Green, Blue Mars wrote a really funny
piece that was a duel of abstracts of scientific papers over whether Martian
bacteria with identical DNA as Earthly bateria were contamination from Earth or
the Earth bacteria were descended from Martian meteorite bacteria or whether
both came from the same outside source or... It's an insolvable problem!
    Which brings us to the topic of real life on Mars. Your standard issue
orthodoxy is an odd and schizophrenic hodgepodge. Most "authorities" believe
that Mars probably did have life in the old warm wet days but are equally and
oppositely certain there is little chance of life today (mustn't excite the
public and those tabloids... ugh!).
    I believe this to be a far, far less likely scenario than EITHER the "no
life ever" or the "life still lives there today" theories. There's a nice Rover
photo of what looks EXACTLY like a dead fish -- from one side, only, though.
    I want there to be life elsewhere, please, God! It's virtually an article of
faith, or a wild hope, or a dream, though.
    LIFE is a virulent, destructive, out-of-control event. Life, even its most
minimal, has taken a perfectly decent little planet like the Earth and RUINED
it. Its atmosphere is filled, up to 20%, with the second most deadly reactive
poison in the universe!
    This suffering Earth is an abnormal distorted nightmare of a world. Instead
of a sensible planet like Venus (only with a mere 25 atmospheres of C02 and a
chilly 250 degree C temperature), this Earth is saturated with deadly oxygen and
smothered in liquid H2O -- it's a madhouse, a madhouse! (Movie quiz?)
    Kidding aside, now, guys. LIFE doesn't just hang on by its bacterial teeth
for 4 billion years just waiting for things to get just a leeetul bit better.
Life is an aggressive expansive dominating positive-feedback process. Life does
not Goldilocks around looking for a planet that's just right. Life takes entire
planets by the.. well, you know, and MAKES them right!
    From a million billion miles miles away, intelligent life with big enough
telescopes can read our spectra and know what we are. If they are anaerobic
life, chlorine based life, silicon based life, artificially intelligent life,
neutronium life, whatever, they look at us and a chill goes down their spine at
the horror of it all: a poisoned world. Think how you'd feel if we found a
planet with a 6%-8% flourine atmosphere content... Now, what could have done
that?
    If Mars had life 4 billion years ago, as the planet cooled, dried, and
thinned, they, whoever they were, would have FIXED it, maybe not our way, but
some way. Life, the most anti-entropic phenomenon in the universe, Entropy Dave,
would have been the winner. And winner takes all in this game.
    My attitude, and I misquote William Faulkner here, is that life "will not
only endure; it will prevail."
    We win. Go, Life! Hip, Hip, Hoorah, Life!

Sterling K. Webb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While I was typing mine, so was everybody else! I didn't change anything,
though. Weren't you complaining that nobody will talk about a serious topic,
Dave... The strategy worked, though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Harris wrote:

> Hi,
> I find it interesting that I have not heard any comments re my email
> yesterday regarding NASA's inability to completely sterilise their Rovers
> may lead to colonisation of another planet and the consequences of this
> action.
>
> I actually think this is quite an important issue - I will probably be told
> wrong forum/off topic" or whatever...
>
> People talk for hours on this list about complete rubbish - I thought it was
> a very important point hence I raised this as a topic - I received the same
> response I got when I emailed NASA! Nothing!
>
> just my 2 microbes worth....
>
> dave
> IMCA #0092
> Sec. BIMS
> www.bimsociety.org
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Mon 18 Jul 2005 08:42:11 PM PDT