I’m glad the article mentions that in this case, it really doesn’t matter; like, there seems to be nothing to ‘pollute’ on Mars (also 7 tonnes is not much at all). Bit of a strange headline to me.
You’re not wrong with your sentiment but i think it’s pretty safe to say that if we find life on Mars it’s gonna be trapped in ice somehow or deep below the surface. Besides having next to no atmosphere, it also has no magnetosphere which means it takes the full blast from solar radiation. Nothing living on Earth could survive outside on the surface of Mars.
we have quite a bit of life that thrives just under the surface… within nooks and crannies of dust particles… inside Chernobyl… in ocean volcanic vents…
i think mycelia are the only thing that can live off of just raw rock though (the vanguards of life)
but, spores are pretty small and everywhere…
personally i think we should get over looking for life on mars and seed it with whatever has the best chances…
a deep valley has a thicker atmosphere and more shade from the sun, btw…
I suppose so, but I believe they always make sure not a single trace of Earth life is left on the equipement they sent to Mars, for obvious reasons. So they already control for that.
Besides looking pretty messy, I’m not sure this does any harm.
nasa sure puts a lot of effort into it… can’t say i feel confident about other countries that crash into it…
on top of that, nasa has recently found that they’ve been breeding bacteria that lives off of their disinfectant, and so no they don’t already control for that.
Sad news for the tardigrades that were on board Israel’s Beresheet mission, which crash-landed on the Moon in 2019. Researchers have learnt that the microscopic animals, which can survive the vacuum of space and heavy-duty doses of radiation, wouldn’t have lived through the crash.
Wrong country and wrong outcome, I really nailed it. Given how hardy they are, I can’t say I’m convinced they’re all dead. Not that they’d actually be active without air and water
I’m glad the article mentions that in this case, it really doesn’t matter; like, there seems to be nothing to ‘pollute’ on Mars (also 7 tonnes is not much at all). Bit of a strange headline to me.
if it gets contaminated with earth life the it’ll be harder to detect martian life…
You’re not wrong with your sentiment but i think it’s pretty safe to say that if we find life on Mars it’s gonna be trapped in ice somehow or deep below the surface. Besides having next to no atmosphere, it also has no magnetosphere which means it takes the full blast from solar radiation. Nothing living on Earth could survive outside on the surface of Mars.
Tardigrades could potentially survive, but they would starve to death.
we have quite a bit of life that thrives just under the surface… within nooks and crannies of dust particles… inside Chernobyl… in ocean volcanic vents…
i think mycelia are the only thing that can live off of just raw rock though (the vanguards of life)
but, spores are pretty small and everywhere…
personally i think we should get over looking for life on mars and seed it with whatever has the best chances…
a deep valley has a thicker atmosphere and more shade from the sun, btw…
I suppose so, but I believe they always make sure not a single trace of Earth life is left on the equipement they sent to Mars, for obvious reasons. So they already control for that.
Besides looking pretty messy, I’m not sure this does any harm.
nasa sure puts a lot of effort into it… can’t say i feel confident about other countries that crash into it…
on top of that, nasa has recently found that they’ve been breeding bacteria that lives off of their disinfectant, and so no they don’t already control for that.
Mars is inhabited by robots, but the Moon is inhabited by tardigrades because China crashed a lander.
this one?
Wrong country and wrong outcome, I really nailed it. Given how hardy they are, I can’t say I’m convinced they’re all dead. Not that they’d actually be active without air and water