NASA Sending Plants to Mars in 2021

How typically arrogant. We're just going to move in, take over, and start exploiting another planet right from the get go.

What if life exists on Mars now, and we're just incapable of detecting it? Wouldn't it be incumbent upon us to ensure beyond a shadow of a doubt that we won't be contaminating and/or destroying life on another planet? Even if there were only microbes on Mars meters below the surface (or wherever, for that matter), any interference from us may well prevent the evolution of an entire species of sentient beings. Think Phase I of the Genesis Project from Star Trek 2 (the real one, not the new impostor one with the perpetually pissed off Vulcan... I digress).

Shouldn't we be taking this at least as seriously? Thinking that far ahead? Shouldn't our concern for the preservation of life be paramount?

They say they're going to "contain" the experiment to "ensure" against contamination. Well, the way you do that is by not starting an alien greenhouse on what might be someone else's planet in the first place.

Point being, we have no idea what we're getting into, and we're clearly not ready for it. We're just assuming we have a right to the place because it's there. How typically ignorant.

originally posted by: NthOther
How typically arrogant. We're just going to move in, take over, and start exploiting another planet right from the get go.



What if life exists on Mars now, and we're just incapable of detecting it? Wouldn't it be incumbent upon us to ensure beyond a shadow of a doubt that we won't be contaminating and/or destroying life on another planet? Even if there were only microbes on Mars meters below the surface (or wherever, for that matter), any interference from us may well prevent the evolution of an entire species of sentient beings. Think Phase I of the Genesis Project from Star Trek 2 (the real one, not the new impostor one with the perpetually pissed off Vulcan... I digress).



Shouldn't we be taking this at least as seriously? Thinking that far ahead? Shouldn't our concern for the preservation of life be paramount?



They say they're going to "contain" the experiment to "ensure" against contamination. Well, the way you do that is by not starting an alien greenhouse on what might be someone else's planet in the first place.



Point being, we have no idea what we're getting into, and we're clearly not ready for it. We're just assuming we have a right to the place because it's there. How typically ignorant.

So impeding a process that takes Billions of years? You do realize if anything we would simply speed along the process, as anything we bring to Mars will not at all resemble what we put there Billions of years from now.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

So impeding a process that takes Billions of years? You do realize if anything we would simply speed along the process, as anything we bring to Mars will not at all resemble what we put there Billions of years from now.

Yeah, but just because we might be the product of some alien race's experiment doesn't mean we have the right to create our own.

That, and I think that for a fictitious plot device, the Prime Directive is actually a pretty good real-life rule of thumb. What if the aliens who may have had a hand in creating us had instead completely botched the experiment and left Earth a lifeless rock in space?

That would suck, right? That's the potential for disaster we're talking here.

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04



So impeding a process that takes Billions of years? You do realize if anything we would simply speed along the process, as anything we bring to Mars will not at all resemble what we put there Billions of years from now.

Yeah, but just because we might be the product of some alien race's experiment doesn't mean we have the right to create our own.

That, and I think that for a fictitious plot device, the Prime Directive is actually a pretty good real-life rule of thumb. What if the aliens who may have had a hand in creating us had instead completely botched the experiment and left Earth a lifeless rock in space?



That would suck, right? That's the potential for disaster we're talking here.

Except there is no life on Mars, and if there is it's microbial. There is no "advanced" life, nothing multicellular, no plans on the surface. For those POSSIBLE microbes to evolve into something sentient will take BILLIONS of years. BILLIONS of years from now anything we export to Mars will be vastly different .. WE will not resemble humans anymore if we are still around.

So your fears are unjustified in this particular instance.

Now if Mars had plant life ... I'm right there with you.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

So your fears are unjustified in this particular instance.

Now if Mars had plant life ... I'm right there with you.

It's not a fear thing. It's a moral thing. I guess I'm pro-life on crack.

Why is plant life spared while microbial life is not? Are the plants not products of such simple organic compounds in the first place?

If it could be proven beyond all reasonable doubt that Mars was a dead ball of dirt in space and nothing more, then whatever. I'm not confident in our ability to determine that any time soon, though (nor am I confident in our ability to contain an organic experiment 225 million clicks away). We've literally only scratched the surface of Mars, and really have no idea what could be there.

As long as the possibility of life exists, however remote a possibility and however advanced that life may be, it would be grossly irresponsible to interfere in such a way that could have myriad and devastating consequences. Now or a billion years from now.

That life has a "right" to naturally inhabit the planet that created it. We do not. We already have one and we can't take care of it, either.

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04



So your fears are unjustified in this particular instance.



Now if Mars had plant life ... I'm right there with you.

It's not a fear thing. It's a moral thing. I guess I'm pro-life on crack.



Why is plant life spared while microbial life is not? Are the plants not products of such simple organic compounds in the first place?



If it could be proven beyond all reasonable doubt that Mars was a dead ball of dirt in space and nothing more, then whatever. I'm not confident in our ability to determine that any time soon, though (nor am I confident in our ability to contain an organic experiment 225 million clicks away). We've literally only scratched the surface of Mars, and really have no idea what could be there.



As long as the possibility of life exists, however remote a possibility and however advanced that life may be, it would be grossly irresponsible to interfere in such a way that could have myriad and devastating consequences. Now or a billion years from now.



That life has a "right" to naturally inhabit the planet that created it. We do not. We already have one and we can't take care of it, either.

Because it takes BILLIONS of years for that level of evolution. In BILLIONS of years any plants we put there will have been altered by Mars to become "Martian" and will not resemble life on Earth.

The timescales involved invalidate your worries. Not to mention that if people go to Mars OUR microbes will follow us, the only possible way to avoid contamination is to never leave Earth, ever.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

Not to mention that if people go to Mars OUR microbes will follow us, the only possible way to avoid contamination is to never leave Earth, ever.

What's wrong with that? I mean, at least until we get our S together and start truly taking care of each other and our own planet. Maturity. We're nowhere near where we need to be in that regard before we start galloping around the cosmos spreading our seed.

And who knows if we'll even want (or need) to leave if we ever get to that point.

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04



Not to mention that if people go to Mars OUR microbes will follow us, the only possible way to avoid contamination is to never leave Earth, ever.

What's wrong with that? I mean, at least until we get our S together and start truly taking care of each other and our own planet. Maturity. We're nowhere near where we need to be in that regard before we start galloping around the cosmos spreading our seed.



And who knows if we'll even want (or need) to leave if we ever get to that point.

Because overpopulation will lead to disaster and destruction. Now what does us having our act together have to do with the fact our microbes will follow us?

Obviously you think mankind should never leave Earth, I think that position is the craziest thing I have ever heard, we are not going to agree, so have a good night!

a reply to: NthOther

I think it's in our nature to invent and explore.
Yes, it has its risks, but it also has its rewards.

Where would we be today, if our past explorers hadn't explored, and our scientists hadn't invented, because of the possible risks?

Yes, we need to be cautious , but we need to move on, explore,and broaden our horizon.
I believe this is how we can survive in the future.

My 2 cents.

think it would be a cool experiment.

they would obviously send the rover to a lat that would give the plants a chance.

originally posted by: NthOther
How typically arrogant. We're just going to move in, take over, and start exploiting another planet right from the get go.

You say it's arrogance, I say it's in our genes and those genes helped made us who we are now. What if modern humans never left Africa? We wouldn't be Homo Sapiens Sapiens with all our different physical beauty and cultures.

I disagree with invading places for greed, but this is not greed, space exploring has become a necessity: in a few decades it will be 10 billions of us on this tiny planet.......and I'd rather go live in Mars or in Space colonies before I see people killing each other for water and food. I agree that we should be changing things on this planet first, and I think we will, most of us are slowly changing to protect the environment........but it's not fast enough.

originally posted by: NthOther
They say they're going to "contain" the experiment to "ensure" against contamination. Well, the way you do that is by not starting an alien greenhouse on what might be someone else's planet in the first place.

May I ask you how you feel about the flu and cold viruses that colonize your body on occasion?

If you willingly combat them then you are being a tad hypocritical because any life on Mars is unlikely to be no more advanced that that.

That said, Planetary Protection is a big deal at NASA/JPL and not just with Mars but missions like Cassini which they are going to crash into Saturn to burn up in the atmosphere so that it doesn't somehow potentially infect Enceladus (where liquid water exists) or Titan. Even though the chances of this are very very low they are not zero so better safe than sorry.

If they say they're going to do everything they can to contain the experiment trust them on it as no one would like to find life on Mars or anywhere else in the Solar System more than them.


There was a great AstronomyCast show on this very topic:

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: NthOther
How typically arrogant. We're just going to move in, take over, and start exploiting another planet right from the get go.

You say it's arrogance, I say it's in our genes and those genes helped made us who we are now. What if modern humans never left Africa? We wouldn't be Homo Sapiens Sapiens with all our different physical beauty and cultures.

Correction: Homo Sapien Sapiens are modern humans and they would still have existed in Africa.

The rest of your post i mostly agree with.

originally posted by: JadeStar


Correction: Homo Sapien Sapiens are modern humans and they would still have existed in Africa.

The rest of your post i mostly agree with.

I know, I didn't explain myself properly: what I tried to say is that if we had never left Africa, we wouldn't have changed into so many different ethnicities, we wouldn't have needed to evolve to survive different environments and become Caucasian, Oriental, Asian, etc.

It looks like we are going to become the creators of another plant in our future.

We will leave behind the creations we have done on another planet, maybe it will be Mars. While we are still around we will visit and watch the progress of our colonization but when Earth's time is up, we will all disappear. The new life on the planet we give birth to will remember visitors from the ancient past and will have stories and legends and customs built upon their memories of beings (which will be us long gone) from another time. They will always want answers and search diligently for how they came about and when they start to find more and more answers they too will one day seek else where and start the terraforming or colonization of a planet too. & the circle of life will continue.

It is only natural for us to evolve into the creators.

leolady

a reply to: leolady

I agree.........we will become creators, the advanced race from another planet......the thought sounds eerily familiar, doesn't it?

Leolady, with your permission I'd love to share your words with a friend of mine.

originally posted by: Rainbowresidue

Where would we be today, if our past explorers hadn't explored, and our scientists hadn't invented, because of the possible risks?

Ask an American Indian that question and you won't like the answer.

If you can find one.

a reply to: NthOther
Touche!
You got me.

In all honesty I wasn't thinking about the negatives, I was thinking about the positive outcome.
There are no people on Mars, so that will not likely happen there.

originally posted by: Rainbowresidue
a reply to: NthOther
Touche!
You got me.

In all honesty I wasn't thinking about the negatives, I was thinking about the positive outcome.
There are no people on Mars, so that will not likely happen there.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the moral use of technology and the responsible exploration of space.

But we have no idea what we're doing, or what the consequences of our actions could be. Remember what smallpox did to American Indians? That was just a simple organism we "accidentally" introduced, too.

The fact that we'd only be destroying "primitive" organic life and not fully-developed sentient life is not a legitimate moral justification.

It's an arrogant one.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Mars has no atmosphere because it has no protection. The core would have to be kickstarted to produce the magnetic field that shields Earth. Without this happening Solar Winds will just strip away any oxygen created.

That's why I said it "may get an atmosphere", although it probably wont because it has no magnetic field, that's why I said Mars will most likely never support life naturally. But who really knows, a magnetic field may not be absolutely crucial.