What if life is discovered on mars?

What if life is discovered on mars?


I wonder about this. The new rover curosity happens across some real
PROOF if life on mars, like a fossil

Now should humans EVER go to mars? Since human life and contamination
might wipe out whatever life is already there, what would happen?

Yeah I wonder about all sorts of wierd questions

Le 02/12/11 22:35, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
bob wrote:
Now should humans EVER go to mars? Since human life and contamination
might wipe out whatever life is already there, what would happen?


Who cares? Any life on Mars is microscopic at best. I put people
ahead of bacteria. It's not surprising you reverse that and side with
your own.


Sure. That would be in the best american/republican tradition.

There weren't any people living in the far west.

Just indians you know? They just wiped them out.

They put white people ahead of red people (that weren't people since
they didn't have guns)

Marsians do not have any guns anyway.

Just wipe them out!

Who cares?

Well, for a change at least bob cares, and me too. That makes
at least two. Of course we do not count, we do not have our
membership card in the NRA and worst I am not even american.

I am very glad that the U.S. has no budget to go to Mars.

What a *mentality* some people have...

GOSH!


AAAMERICAAA, LOOOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!

Well, I left.

"bob haller" wrote in message
...
What if life is discovered on mars?


I wonder about this. The new rover curosity happens across some real
PROOF if life on mars, like a fossil

Now should humans EVER go to mars? Since human life and contamination
might wipe out whatever life is already there, what would happen?

Yeah I wonder about all sorts of wierd questions


Finding a second example of life might help figure out how
life first starts. Having only one example we can never
be sure if it was a fluke or not. But seeing what's common
between two might show how life starts everywhere.

It's likely any life on Mars will be very entry level so to
speak. But that's a good thing, since that life might be
very close to it's origin, and better show our beginning.

And in a more abstract sense, figuring out creation is maybe
the most basic questions of science and religion. If the
answer is finally found, maybe those two fields can find
a common understanding, and end the age-old feud.


Jonathan

s

On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:10:28 +0100, jacob navia
wrote:

Le 02/12/11 22:35, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
bob wrote:
Now should humans EVER go to mars? Since human life and contamination
might wipe out whatever life is already there, what would happen?


Who cares? Any life on Mars is microscopic at best. I put people
ahead of bacteria. It's not surprising you reverse that and side with
your own.


Sure. That would be in the best american/republican tradition.

And British, Spanish, French, Dutch, Portugese...

There weren't any people living in the far west.

Pay no attention to the centuries of population eradication east of
the Mississippi, in the Caribbean, and in South America before the
"far west' was populated. That wasn't done by Americans, so it is
ignored by idiots like Navia.

AAAMERICAAA, LOOOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!

Well, I left.

And don't come back.

Brian

On Dec 2, 9:46*pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:10:28 +0100, jacob navia
wrote:

Le 02/12/11 22:35, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
bob *wrote:
Now should humans EVER go to mars? Since human life and contamination
might wipe out whatever life is already there, what would happen?

Who cares? *Any life on Mars is microscopic at best. *I put people
ahead of bacteria. *It's not surprising you reverse that and side with
your own.

Sure. That would be in the best american/republican tradition.

And British, Spanish, French, Dutch, Portugese...

There weren't any people living in the far west.

Pay no attention to the centuries of population eradication east of
the Mississippi, in the Caribbean, and in South America before the
"far west' was populated. That wasn't done by Americans, so it is
ignored by idiots like Navia.

AAAMERICAAA, LOOOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!

Well, I left.

And don't come back.

Brian

its possible that human exploration of mars should never occur, to
protect whatever life may be living there.

this would be the perfect reason to select a aggresive robotic
program...

On Dec 3, 10:43*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Dec 2, 9:46 pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:10:28 +0100, jacob navia
wrote:

Le 02/12/11 22:35, Fred J. McCall a crit :
bob wrote:
Now should humans EVER go to mars? Since human life and contamination
might wipe out whatever life is already there, what would happen?

Who cares? Any life on Mars is microscopic at best. I put people
ahead of bacteria. It's not surprising you reverse that and side with
your own.

Sure. That would be in the best american/republican tradition.

And British, Spanish, French, Dutch, Portugese...

There weren't any people living in the far west.

Pay no attention to the centuries of population eradication east of
the Mississippi, in the Caribbean, and in South America before the
"far west' was populated. That wasn't done by Americans, so it is
ignored by idiots like Navia.

AAAMERICAAA, LOOOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!

Well, I left.

And don't come back.

its possible that *human exploration of mars should never occur, to
protect whatever life may be living there.

its possible that monkeys might fly out your butt.



this would be the perfect reason to select a aggresive robotic
program...

You realize that makes no sense at all, right? *Do you think that if
we send people they're going to sneeze on the Martians and kill them,
or what?


obviously any earth life might endanger or wipe out mars life

On Dec 2, 1:13*pm, bob haller wrote:
What if life is discovered on mars?

I wonder about this. The new rover curosity happens across some real
PROOF if life on mars, like a fossil

Now should humans EVER go to mars? Since human life and contamination
might wipe out whatever life is already there, what would happen?

Yeah I wonder about all sorts of wierd questions

My concern would be whether it poses a risk to humans or the
Earth by way of two way trips.

Seriously, I think Mars will be sterile. I suppose if there was life
and there
still is life it will be deep underground. Naw, sterile, I do not buy
as
a place for life ever.

On the other hand if there was life in the past, there maybe crude
oil.

Newt.....the next President of the CSA.........................Trig

On Dec 2, 2:35*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:

Who cares? *Any life on Mars is microscopic at best. *I put people
ahead of bacteria. *It's not surprising you reverse that and side with
your own.

If there were bacteria on Mars, they are valuable *to* people, because
studying them would give us insight into just what life *is*. There is
no need to thoughtlessly destroy so valuable a resource, since habitat
in space can be created from asteroidal and lunar materials.

John Savard

On Dec 3, 10:04*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:

In other words, you don't have a clue why "people bad, robots good" is
a sensible position. *You're just bleating, as usual.

Robots can be carefully sterilized, as has been the policy with past
robotic missions to Mars. People... are just crawling with bacteria.
While they will be wearing spacesuits when outside, they would still
leave germs in their ships which would crawl into the airlocks and so
on.

John Savard

On Dec 2, 6:08*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:

And in a more abstract sense, figuring out creation is maybe
the most basic questions of science and religion. If the
answer is finally found, maybe those two fields can find
a common understanding, and end the age-old feud.

It would be nice to think that new scientific discoveries would so
thoroughly discredit the blind dogmatic forms of religion that lead to
blind obedience instead of humility.

However, discovering life on Mars will not take the wind out of the
sails of al-Qaeda, or even particularly impact the support for
abstinence-only sex-education programs.

John Savard