posted 04-10-2020 09:28 AM            

It has yet to be established whether Mars harbours indigenous life, but personally I believe that the finding of lifeforms in the most extreme conditions imaginable on Earth is an indicator that life will be found under the surface of Mars, away from the radiation-blasted surface.

Any future expedition to Mars will certainly look for indigenous lifeforms. It will be a primary mission objective. What if unimpeachable evidence of life is confirmed? Let's say a native Martian virus is discovered. Might there not be a certain reluctance to bring it back to Earth "just in case?"

I am not a doctor or a virologist and therefore cannot comment on the feasibility of an alien virus surviving deep under Mars, let alone causing a global pandemic here on Earth, but I know a little bit about human nature and human fears (both rational and irrational). In the current climate, and perhaps for the foreseeable future, is it not inevitable that any talk about astronauts landing on Mars, digging deep below its surface, and coming back to Earth with whatever they find, will generate widespread concern and opposition?

It probably doesn't matter whether that opposition will be as rational as the people who destroy 5G cell-phone masts. It will be based on the simple argument: look what damage a previously-unknown Earth virus has done! Why take even a tiny, tiny risk of bringing "something nasty" back from Mars? If you are a U.S. Senator with a very slim majority and your re-election campaign is dogged by crowds chanting "Save the Earth! Keep Away from Mars!" how might you vote when funding for a Mars expedition comes up for debate?

Current plans seem to point eventually to a Mars orbital mission. Even that might fall foul of hysteria once there is any talk of landing on Phobos or Deimos to bring back samples of regolith (often speculated to include "carbon-rich organics" — how would they play in the tabloid press and on social media?)

This argument may sound unnecessarily pessimistic but even if the odds of bringing back "something nasty" are considered to be, say, 1 in 100 million, it should be born in mind that the chance of winning the UK National Lottery is 1 in 45 million and the chance of winning the U.S. Mega Millions jackpot is 1 in 302 million, yet people still participate! (And if you don't understand how poorly most people understand odds, ask a regular lottery participant if they would ever pick last week's winning numbers this week.)

posted 04-10-2020 03:51 PM               

Scientists have various schools of thought on hauling Mars samples back to our planet, John Rummel, a senior scientist at the SETI Institute in California and NASA's planetary protection officer from 1986 to 1993 and 1997 to 2006, said. But the planned, precautionary approach, based on strict containment and testing for life and biohazards, is compatible with the potential to discover life in a sample, or elsewhere on Mars by other means, as it would still allow for a sample to be returned.

"If one finds life in the sample, one has a good chance of being able to study it in containment," Rummel said. "The downside of this approach is that it is more expensive [in terms of establishing the containment facility], up-front, than ignoring life on Mars."

As the recent report to NASA from the Planetary Protection Independent Review Board stated, this approach requires that a sample-handling facility dedicated to analyzing and testing Martian samples be developed up-front.

Rummel said that, if something like the coronavirus situation pops up, then any other containment facility may not be available in a timely way, and may not be able to meet the cleanliness requirements that will ensure that any organisms discovered in the sample came from Mars, and not from Earth after the sample arrives.

posted 04-11-2020 08:54 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by SpaceAholic:
The MRL (Martian Receiving Laboratory) will mitigate all these concerns.

---

My concern is that any MRL containing Martian life-forms will be attacked on two fronts. One set of protesters will be trying to break in to burn down the MRL to "neutralize the risk." The other set of protesters will be trying to break in to "rescue" and "release" the Martian life-forms.

Meanwhile, there will be court applications by people arguing that the "human rights" of the Martian organisms are being infringed and that they should be set free.

posted 04-15-2020 08:43 AM            

Time will tell if you are right about a set-back for space exploration, but there is another way of looking at it. I'm not an American, but I could see the Trump Administration saying: "We're pressing ahead to the Moon" because the cost would be "a drop in the ocean compared to the financial burden from Covid-19" and a clear, achievable goal in the short-to-medium term would potentially act as "a beacon of hope for the American people in these dark times."

It sounds so counter-intuitive that it actually makes sense. And we already know how many medical diagnostic advancements were by-products of Apollo.

posted 04-16-2020 10:33 AM               

While it was prudent to take some precautions when returning from the Moon it was extremely unlikely that there were Moon bugs for two reasons. Firstly it is believed that the Moon was never suitable for life and secondly the intense solar radiation would have destroyed any bacteria near the surface. Mars, on the other hand, is believed to have had conditions suitable for life in the past. And that life may still exist under the surface.

Secondly, the precautions taken for Apollo would hardly have been acceptable if there was any real chance of bringing life back to Earth. For example, if there was a real chance of returning living things, the Apollo capsule would never have been opened until connected to a tunnel to the quarantine unit on the PRS. Then the tunnel and capsule would have been thoroughly fumigated before being opened.

Thirdly, there is significant debate/doubt about whether Mars' life would be dangerous to Earth life. On Earth bacteria and viruses develop closely with Earth life, such as monkeys, bats etc and then transfer to humans. There is significant doubt that life developed outside the Earth could infect life on Earth. However, of course, it is better to take the precautions and be sure.

posted 04-16-2020 12:56 PM               

The first spacecraft would land in Jezero crater. There, a small rover would make its way to Perseverance and pick up the filled sampling tubes. The small rover would transfer those tubes to a "Mars ascent vehicle," which is essentially a small rocket with a container to carry the samples. The Mars ascent vehicle would then blast off from the surface and place the container into Martian orbit.

The second spacecraft would then maneuver itself next to the sample container, pick it up and fly it back to Earth. It would plummet to the ground at high speed, likely landing in a military training ground in Utah...

If all goes to schedule, the sample-return spacecraft will reach Mars in 2028. The small rover would do its work collecting and loading tubes during a season that is free of Martian dust storms and cold winter temperatures. After leaving Mars, the samples would land in Utah in September 2031.