NASA gets two military spy telescopes for astronomy - The WashingtonPost.

On 20/05/2013 5:38 AM, jacob navia wrote:
Le 19/05/13 04:38, Yousuf Khan a écrit :
I was referring to Earth, not the United States.

Yousuf Khan


OK, I misunderstood. But even in that case, the question arises that we
would "own" something there ONLY if there isn't ANY life in Mars or
elsewhere.

If we find even a small bateria, the planet is not empty and we have NO
RIGHT to destroy that bacterium/alien life.

I'm thinking that if we find even single-cells in another planet within
the Solar System, then we have a right to call it part of our family of
living organisms in this Solar System.

This is crucial. Alien life owns their planets, we have no right to
invade them, colonize them, destroy them.

It is just the golden rule: do not do onto others, what you wouldn't
like that others do to you. We wouldn't like being invaded, so we
shouldn't invade others.

Of course if the place is empty (no life at all) there is no problem.

I don't think we'd deliberately destroy any life on another planet, it's
more important for us to figure out how it survives there, and therefore
we would want to make sure it stays alive. That would then enable us to
learn how to survive there too.

Yousuf Khan

I don't think we'd deliberately destroy any life on another planet, it's
more important for us to figure out how it survives there, and therefore
we would want to make sure it stays alive. That would then enable us to
learn how to survive there too.

* * * * Yousuf Khan

its important we not accidently kill or add anything to other
planets......

all probes should be sterlized before sending to anywhere.

otherwise we might find life and not know if it just earth
contamination or not.....

On Jun 2, 1:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:

its important we not accidently kill or add anything to other
planets......

all probes should be sterlized before sending to anywhere.

otherwise we might find life and not know if it just earth
contamination or not.....

And since you can't do that with assurance, we shouldn't send probes.

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

probes have been sterlized in the past, perhaps not perfect but pretty
good.

humans cannot be sterlized

On Jun 3, 1:31*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Jun 2, 1:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:

its important we not accidently kill or add anything to other
planets......

all probes should be sterlized before sending to anywhere.

otherwise we might find life and not know if it just earth
contamination or not.....

And since you can't do that with assurance, we shouldn't send probes.

probes have been sterlized in the past, perhaps not perfect but pretty
good.

So when it's toasters you think 'close' is good enough, but when it's
humans the risk must be absolutely zero? *That's what you're saying.



humans cannot be sterlized

Wrong again. *One more time: *We won't be running around naked on Mars
****ing on the bushes.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn

It will be impossible for humans to avoid contaminating mars...

Just being inside a habitat and depressurizing it for any reason will
allow earth bugs to get into the mars ecosphere..

"bob haller" wrote in message
...


It will be impossible for humans to avoid contaminating mars...


So? We don't have to be perfect.


Just being inside a habitat and depressurizing it for any reason will
allow earth bugs to get into the mars ecosphere..

Bob, do yourself a favor. Never get in a position where you require major
surgery. Since you'll obviously die of infection since it's impossible to
sterilize an operating room.





--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

On Jun 3, 9:45*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Jun 3, 1:31*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:
On Jun 2, 1:04*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote:

its important we not accidently kill or add anything to other
planets......

all probes should be sterlized before sending to anywhere.

otherwise we might find life and not know if it just earth
contamination or not.....

And since you can't do that with assurance, we shouldn't send probes.

probes have been sterlized in the past, perhaps not perfect but pretty
good.

So when it's toasters you think 'close' is good enough, but when it's
humans the risk must be absolutely zero? *That's what you're saying.

humans cannot be sterlized

Wrong again. *One more time: *We won't be running around naked on Mars
****ing on the bushes.

It will be impossible for humans to avoid contaminating mars...

It will be impossible for probes to avoid contaminating mars...



Just being inside a habitat and depressurizing it for any reason will
allow earth bugs to get into the mars ecosphere..

Just launching them and landing them on mars will allow earth bugs to
get into the mars ecosphere..

So, tell me, Bobbert, WHY WOULD THEY DEPRESSURIZE THE HABITAT?

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
*territory."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn

airlocks must be opened for ingress egress......

and although operating rooms arent perfectly sterilized they are some
of the cleanest places in the hospital

"bob haller" wrote in message
...


airlocks must be opened for ingress egress......

and although operating rooms arent perfectly sterilized they are some
of the cleanest places in the hospital


And how exactly do they do that Bob? Do you have a clue? Now tell me why
none of that can't be done in an airlock?

Again, we don't have to be perfect, just 'good enough'




--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

: Fred J. McCall
: But the interior (and exterior) of your body are not. So, given that
: you can't sterilize humans, as Bobbert insists, ALL surgical patients
: must die as it is impossible to sterilize the surgical field.

Well, be fair, surgical suites aren't really sterilized perfectly.
That is, indeed, a practical impossibility. It just has to be
sterile *enough* so that the body's immune system, even sometimes when
compromised, can handle the rest.

You know, sort of like, if you get the outside of the habitat as
sterile as possible, and you can limit outgassing and such, so that
the probability of tropical-conditions-and-inside-humans-adapted bugs
surviving the worse-than-arctic conditions, you'll get in the same
ballpark of probability of probes carrying something to mars.

Or rather, I don't see why they don't end up in the same ballpark,
in practical terms.

airlocks must be opened for ingress egress......

and although operating rooms arent perfectly sterilized they are some
of the cleanest places in the hospital

And how exactly do they do that Bob? *Do you have a clue? *Now tell me why
none of that can't be done in an airlock?

Again, we don't have to be perfect, just 'good enough'

Greg D. Moore

since we have no idea what if any type of life may exist on mars we
dont know what we dont know..

so if a escaped earth organism replicates on mars we wouldnt know if
its from mars, or a earth transplant..

the discover of life on mars will be of cosmic importance.

once mars is contaminated theres no way to uncontaminate it.........

plus a existing mars organism might be wiped out by something from
earth.....

either of these situations should be avoided.....

In article 7173eb86-55d0-4a38-a714-b8cdb85b0967@
2g2000yqr.googlegroups.com, says...
airlocks must be opened for ingress egress......

You should look at suit-locks, which are being studied in detail. Suit-
locks minimize the amount of air released and also minimize the area
exposed to the outside (i.e. the parts of the suit and inside of the
suit-lock which need disinfected).

and although operating rooms arent perfectly sterilized they are some
of the cleanest places in the hospital

A suit-lock would be much the same. These "problems" you keep pointing
out are engineering details which will need to be worked out, not show-
stoppers that should stop the program from proceeding at all.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer