[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Re: starship-design: The Way ahead & Bugs
In a message dated 10/19/98 8:35:00 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org 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"
>> and the presence of sunlight which passed the criteria for bacterial and
>> photosynthetic life. But no organic mater. So after a lot of heated
>> 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
>> 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.
Very very true.