If MER happened to focus in on a fossil...

....like maybe a mineralized vertebra or mandible? Obviously, a very,
very, long shot. If it happened, how quickly would our government
respond to get a recovery robot up there to collect the specimen?
Robots or astronauts? Would the astronauts be test-pilots alone, or
would the astronaut corps condescendingly send along a paleontolgist?
Would it pump new blood into NASA's budget?

It isn't history yet, but...oh wait. If it's a fossil it is history.
Or is that history that isn't yet, but will be? Well anyway, what about
the question?

...like maybe a mineralized vertebra or mandible? Obviously, a very,
very, long shot. If it happened, how quickly would our government
respond to get a recovery robot up there to collect the specimen?
Robots or astronauts? Would the astronauts be test-pilots alone, or
would the astronaut corps condescendingly send along a paleontolgist?
Would it pump new blood into NASA's budget?

It isn't history yet, but...oh wait. If it's a fossil it is history.
Or is that history that isn't yet, but will be? Well anyway, what about
the question?



Well we cant go to the moon presently and its close by I rather imagine a
full blown robotic probes with return capacity for that fossil. followed by
manned missions

This would be awesome and give nasa a real goal and the bucks for buck rogers

"RDG" wrote in message
...

If MER happened to focus on a fossil...

...like maybe a mineralized vertebra or mandible? Obviously, a very,
very, long shot. If it happened, how quickly would our government
respond to get a recovery robot up there to collect the specimen?

Good question, sort of. The rovers are looking for water. If liquid water
existed on Mars, there is a slight chance that there may have been simple
life in the form of fungus or virus or green slime or what have you.

So right off the bat you are asking us to entertain the idea that not only
did life on Mars achieve the level of interplanetary pond scum, but actually
progressed to the level of vertebrates. A fairly big leap.

So let's assume that life formed on Mars, and that millions of years of
evolution ocurred resulting in creatures with skeletons and mandibles and so
on, and that some remnant of these creatures were spotted by our robot
explorers.

If this ocurred, a program would be devised to return samples, and there
would be an excellent chance that a manned trip to Mars would be carried
out. After all, the chance of learning about exobiology would be possibly
the greatest prize in the history of science. The quickest we could land on
Mars with an all-out effort would probably be about 15 years. What's the
difference? Whether it is 5 years or 50 is of no particular importance.
In two thousand years school children will all know that the United States
nuked Japan, went to the Moon, fussed with Russia, and watched something
called television. I hope they enjoy Karnak the Magmificent as much as I
did.

Kent Betts wrote:

Good question, sort of. The rovers are looking for water. If liquid water
existed on Mars, there is a slight chance that there may have been simple
life in the form of fungus or virus or green slime


Oh-oh, Martian attack on the ISS: http://www.horror-wood.com/slime.5.jpg

I hope they enjoy Karnak the Magnificent as much as I
did.


"May a diseased calot make improper advances to your leg..." :-)

Pat

In article , RDG wrote:
...like maybe a mineralized vertebra or mandible? Obviously, a very,
very, long shot. If it happened, how quickly would our government
respond to get a recovery robot up there to collect the specimen?
Robots or astronauts?

Good odds it wouldn't change the schedule for robotic sample return a lot,
although it might firm it up -- that schedule has shown a tendency to slip
repeatedly -- and alter sampling priorities.

It would certainly increase interest in a manned expedition, but again, I
suspect the effect would be to firm up plans rather than accelerate them.
The biggest obstacle to a manned Mars expedition is how much it will cost.
Improving the scientific rationale for the trip actually will not help
very much with that, because all current cost estimates are far beyond
what Congress is willing to spend on pure science.

Would the astronauts be test-pilots alone, or
would the astronaut corps condescendingly send along a paleontolgist?

Depends on the crew size. Assuming that expeditions would be relatively
infrequent, as one might expect given the necessarily longer duration,
NASA would be under considerable pressure to include at least one
scientist per crew from the start. I doubt that the first would be a
paleontologist unless there were obviously a *lot* of fossils around.

Would it pump new blood into NASA's budget?

A little. Not a lot. It would increase interest some, but it *wouldn't*
make accelerated exploration of Mars a major national priority... which is
what would be necessary to produce any dramatic haste. Other than a
handful of scientists, nobody cares *that* much about Martian fossils.
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. |

A little. Not a lot. It would increase interest some, but it *wouldn't*
make accelerated exploration of Mars a major national priority... which is
what would be necessary to produce any dramatic haste. Other than a
handful of scientists, nobody cares *that* much about Martian fossils.


I COMPLETELY DISAGREE! The idea that there are other planets with life is well
earth shattering. Then the question will be how did mars become the arid
lifeless planet it appears today? that might be important for our survval.

All of this is just under the news that a asteroid is scheduled to hit the
earth in 10 years, either will get space flight huigh priority,.

Henry Spencer wrote:

Would it pump new blood into NASA's budget?


A little. Not a lot. It would increase interest some, but it *wouldn't*
make accelerated exploration of Mars a major national priority... which is
what would be necessary to produce any dramatic haste. Other than a
handful of scientists, nobody cares *that* much about Martian fossils.

I think that you might be surprised. I find my
non-aerospace-industry friends to be absolutely spell-bound by the Mars
rover mission. I'm not sure why (maybe the "immediacy" of the images)
this is any different from previous missions, but it is. I mentioned the
topic of the "brine" possibility, and it was like I had found God's
unlisted number. These are not dreamer types- they are just normal
people. I feel that if incontrovertible evidence of previous life, and
the even a remote possibility of current life, would really trigger us
out of the cowardice of the past 30 years and into a serious boost for
at least very much enhanced science mission, if not a crash manned program.

Brett