Curiosity finds organics on Mars, but possibly not of Mars

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
I watched the press conference and according to one of the panel guys, he said that they got like 11,000 images beamed straight from the planet, in fact, there's too many to even go through, so any members make sure and double check them for any anomalies


Additionally, it's not so much contamination, it's whether or not, the organics are native to the planet and haven't been dumped from the outer atmosphere e.g. meteors etc.
edit on 3-12-2012 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by VoidHawk
They could find a 5 legged donkey drinking at a waterhole and they'd still say - Its not proof, might have been contaminated.
They'll NEVER tell us the truth.


Oh yeah? Well, you just prove that 5 legged donkey wasn't strapped onto the side of the rocket


Seriously, though, the contamination issue is big, because a lot of the interest, if potentially organic material is found, is how much it has in common with terrestrial material. That's why stuff like this is pretty disheartening:


But if by chance the rover Curiosity does find water, a controversy that has simmered at NASA for nearly a year will burst into the open. Curiosity’s drill bits may be contaminated with Earth microbes. If they are, and if those bits touch water, the organisms could survive.

The possible contamination of the drill bits occurred six months before the rover’s launch last Nov. 26. The bits had been sterilized inside a box to be opened only after Curiosity landed on Mars.

But that changed after engineers grew concerned that a rough landing could damage the rover and the drill mechanism. They decided to open the box and mount one bit in the drill as a hedge to ensure success of one of the most promising scientific tools aboard Curiosity. The drill is to bore into rocks looking for clues that life could have existed on the planet. Even if a damaged mechanism couldn’t load a drill bit, at least the roverwould have one ready to go.

Under the agency’s procedures, the box should not have been opened without knowledge of a NASA scientist who is responsible for guarding Mars against contamination from Earth. But Planetary Protection Officer Catharine Conley wasn’t consulted. (Source)


No matter how careful they were, the damage may already have been done.



So.. NASA does employ scientists to prevent contamination. They just didn't deem it necessary to TELL them that they were opening a sealed container before launch.. because.. they just didnt have the time? They forgot? When it could be the difference of 'possibly contaminated results' and 'definitive organic compound found', youd think that this expensive project would have been careful to the last iota.

Or that whomever was responsible for NOT telling Ms Conley that they were opening the box on Earth, would be getting smacked. Several times.

Cheers!



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by illuminated0ne
Society has become too impatient these days.
edit on 3-12-2012 by illuminated0ne because: (no reason given)


"homer, it takes 2 minutes to deep fry a whole cow"
"owww, 2minutes..but i want it now!"


lol



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fimbulvetr
So.. NASA does employ scientists to prevent contamination. They just didn't deem it necessary to TELL them that they were opening a sealed container before launch.. because.. they just didnt have the time? They forgot? When it could be the difference of 'possibly contaminated results' and 'definitive organic compound found', youd think that this expensive project would have been careful to the last iota.
The impact could be worse than a contaminated measurement. If Mars was lifeless, what if the contamination from Earth finds a habitat on Mars where it can grow and reproduce?

sciencecareers.sciencemag.org...

If bacteria brought from Earth colonize Mars, science missions seeking martian life would be jeopardized. Worse, our bacteria could kill off any life already there.


So even if a future mission to Mars carefully avoids contamination, and they discover life, I would have to wonder if it's possible that life may have come from contamination resulting from a prior mission.

Regarding why they didn't follow the procedures, that is a bit of a mystery. It sounds like a conscious decision was made, but I'm not sure we have all the details:

www.curiositywatch.com...

We shouldn’t be too concerned about this, says David Lavery, program executive for solar system exploration at NASA headquarters:

"Water or ice near the surface in Gale Crater was not a significant probability. We weighed that against the risks of not having a bit mounted in the drill prior to launch, and the specter of not being able to drill any holes at all on Mars. [...] Of course, there is always a possibility that Mars will surprise us."
It sounds kind of like how we have rules against speeding, and people know they aren't supposed to go above the speed limit, but when you're running late for that appointment you are tempted to speed rather than be late. I get the impression from that quote that the people who didn't follow procedure were well aware of the procedure.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 04:37 AM
link   
So NASAs final press conference regarding this topic will be:

"Now we know for certain that there is life on mars ...



because we brought it there
"





 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join