[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: "'firstname.lastname@example.org'" <email@example.com>
- Subject: Mars Mania
- From: "Varricchio, Louis" <VARRICCH@CHAMPLAIN.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 12:10:06 -0400
- Old-X-Envelope-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 12:15:21 -0400 (EDT)
- Resent-From: email@example.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"1rZV6B.A.AiB.lx2s1"@mu.pair.com>
- Resent-Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
Aside from what you read and hear in the popular media which recycles
the same scientists for interviews interviewed again and again, it is
extremely unlikely that life exists on Mars today. And it remains
highly speculative that life ever evolved there. The question of fossil
life remains found in one, and possibly another SNC meteorite, is
strongly disputed by some reputable scientists (I think the ghost of
Percival Lowell has returned to spook us all; also, there is some debate
about where SNCs come from afterall). Even with a "wet" past, Mars
probably couldn't have had enough time to evolve primitive lifeforms.
Like the Moon experience with Apollo, I don't think sterilization is a
concern. The planet is so bombarded by intense UV radiation that
anything that could survive it would be formidable indeed! (Also, some
biologists say it is unlikely that alien microbes could contaminate
us--or vice versa--anyhow based on totally different chemistries; no two
planetary evolutions will ever be identical unless STAR TREK was right
and there are planets with roaming Nazis and Chicago-style gangsters!)
Life on Mars is a wonderful idea. Personally, I hope they find
something up there, but any evidence for life today remains
circumstantial at best or worse. :(
> -----Original Message-----
> From: E.P. Grondine [SMTP:email@example.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 20, 1998 10:26 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: More Martian Meteorites Coming this Way!
> Walter -
> Welcome to the "science" of the "Let's send men to Mars" space
> The most significant reason for not sending men
> to Mars is the problem of biological contamination:
> we don't know for certain if the planet is indeed
> sterile. While there are a lot of other reasons, this
> one is a show stopper: You can't risk exposing the crew, and you
> certainly can't risk exposing the Earth,
> to a possible Martian organism.
> So, they need to prove 1) that there has been a
> whole lot of meteorites falling to Earth from Mars,
> 2) that some of them travel here real fast quite often,
> and 3) that micro-organisms survive the flight through
> space. And as is usual with "science" of this type, they don't let
> facts interfere with their conclusions.
> Congratulations on identifying the symptoms. This is the
> disease, and I don't a have a clue as to how to
> stop it.
> Best wishes -
> ---WBranchsb@aol.com wrote:
> > Hello Michael,
> > >Dear Walter,
> > > I know I am very concrete in my thought process & often mis
> > >humor. Are you saying the article "clicked to" in your last posting
> > >completely bogus & meant to be "funny?"
> > > Michael
> > The first thing that strikes me as being funny is the justaposition
> of the
> > Martian meteorites (a very serious scientific subject) with a page
> devoted to
> > UFOs (well, you know).
> > Look at the following statement:
> > >About 7 percent of Martian rocks knocked away from Mars eventually
> hit Earth,
> > >while more than 30 percent eventually burn up in the sun. The
> > strike >other solar system neighbors.
> > This sounds too authoratative with no range of percentages. Granted
> > meteorites land in the oceans but these figures sound too precise.
> > And this one:
> > >Burns' research indicates that the rocks coming from Mars would
> take six
> > months >to reach Earth.
> > Six months? Isn't this the figure often quoted as being the time it
> > take a manned mission to reach Mars? Has analysis of SNC material
> > cosmic ray ages of 6 months (no, too short of a time span to
> > And this one:
> > >Studies have shown that microscopic life can survive in space for
> at least
> > six >months.
> > What studies? Are they analogue studies? Has there been a shuttle
> > which confirmed that "microscopic life can survive in space for at
> least six
> > months." (I am asking a serious question - if anyone know of these
> > please let me know).
> > Regards,
> > -Walter
> > ----------
> > List Archives are located at
> > For other help, FAQ's and subscription info and other resources,
> > visit http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing_list.html
> > ----------
> DO YOU YAHOO!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> List Archives are located at
> For other help, FAQ's and subscription info and other resources,
> visit http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing_list.html
List Archives are located at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/list_best.html
For other help, FAQ's and subscription info and other resources,