[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: starship-design: The Way ahead & Bugs
> From: KellySt@aol.com
> In a message dated 10/13/98 12:03:54 PM, email@example.com wrote:
> >I thought several of the tests carried out on the Mars soil samples were
> >"dubious" at best - I remember some controversy over the tests to decide
> >whether there were traces of bacteria in the soil - some of the tests
> >succeeded, some failed, but some were in direct contradiction of the
> > others..
> The contradictino was that the soil did react rapidly to the "food" samples,
> and the presence of sunlight which passed the criteria for bacterial and
> photosynthetic life. But no organic mater. So after a lot of heated debate
> they decided the only thing that would explain it was a very chemically
> reactive oxidizing substance in the soil that broke down even trace orgaic
> mater. Of course others have suggested that it could be life and the organic
> detector wasn't sensative enough to detect it. More fearce debate.---
That shows clearly the superiority of manned exploration
over a robotic one.
A run-of-the-mill geologist with a hammer and a few chemicals
in his suitcase field lab can settle the problem in ten minutes,
and in several hours he can produce a wealth of data on the Martian
conditions larger than all robotic crafts ever sent to Mars.