Martians killed by Viking bio experiments

[border_ruffian]

"... we killed the Martian microbes during our first extraterrestrial contact, by drowning due to ignorance," said Schulze-Makuch of Washington State University.<br /><br />The article on the paper presented Jan. 7 at the meeting of the American Astronomical Society in Seattle can be read here:<br /><br />http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2203&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0<br /><br /><br />

 

[thebigcat]

Okay...Refutation part 1) The guy is from Wazzu. As a matter of fact that should be enough. Those dudes are always yapping with out a clue on what they are talking about. He was obviously going over some data on Mars when his graduate assistants grabbed him, drug him down to some Pullman watering hole and plied him with really cheap micro-brews while discussing Ray Bradbury's <i>The Martian Chronicles</i> and when his wife found him on the lawn the next morning the whole previous evening had become a blur in his head.<br /><br />Viola: one scientific paper not worth the paper it's written on. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[pizzaguy]

Agreed, but "Scientific Paper"? Not sure I'd use that term to describe this 'work'. <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1"><em>Note to Dr. Henry:  The testosterone shots are working!</em></font> </div>

 

[dragon04]

Okay. THIS topic needs to be moved to Phenomena.<br /><br />It is pure specualtion and based on unproven assumptions. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>

 

[nexium]

Mars is small compared to Earth, but it does have over 100 milion square miles of surface area. It is unlikely the Viking bio experiment was leathal over even one square mile of the surface of Mars or one cubic meter below the surface of Mars. Neil

 

[j05h]

<i>> Viking was testing for organic chemicals as well as metabolism. It's empty speculation that there's life on the surface of Mars. No living cells can exist in ANY known surface sites on Mars. The incident radiation, the cryogenic temps, the lack of surface liquid water, and many other factors, including no high energy compounds to live on, create this totally hostile surface environment. </i><br /><br />Have you heard of Deinocochus Radiodurans? It's a 4-chambered, 5-strings of DNA, rad-resistant microbe that can survive Mars surface conditions. It's almost tailor-made for Mars, so much so that Russian biologists are insisting it is from there. We discovered it in food-irradiation equipment, it lives fine under doses that kill everything else.<br /><br />You should do some research on Archea bacteria. They display some amazing properties.<br /><br />some of Spherix' recent research into Viking results brings up new questions about metabolism that shouldn't be ignored.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[nexium]

Try not to be intimidated by stevehz. He has done likewise to more than half the people who post here. He is likely correct, but is out of order critisizing persons less knowledgable than he. There is a very slight possibility that Mars surface microbes, if any, use the ultraviolet light and/or the high speed ionized particles as an energy source. Neil

 

[mkofron]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>The problem is exobiophilism. An unwarranted & unsubstatiated belief that life necessarily exists other than on earth in our solar system. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />The error here is your inaccurate depiction of exobiology. There is no preconceived notion that life "necessarily exists" elsewhere in our solar system.<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>With a surface temperature at MInus 180 C. where NO chemical reactions needed for life can possibly go on. The simple facts of biochemistry prevent such fantasies from being true. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Why focus just on the surface? Look in the atmosphere and then tell me <b>no</b> chemical reactions needed for life can go on. <br /><br />Chemical reactions occur in abundance in Titan's atmosphere.<br /><br /><br /><br />

 

[airmid]

Scientists like Dirk Schulze-Makuch are very valuable to the scientific community in my opinion, because they force us to reconsider our pre-established opinions. <br /><br />Here's a prime example of such an opinion:<br />"Life can only exist where there are sufficient liquid water, warmth, lack of ionizing radiations, lack of toxins, high energy compounds, ...."<br /><br />Granted, stevehw33 doesn't define what he means by "sufficient" or "high energy". However, recent scientific history has already caused biologists to adjust their preconceptions about which environments on Earth can harbour life. The Atacama desert was judged to be far too dry to harbour life, and Antarctica far too cold. Living organisms have been found in both these environments. In fact, life forms have been found in all extreme environments on Earth. If every scientist would have conformed to the idea that "life is not possible there", we never would have discovered these fascinating life forms. <br /><br />When talking about potential life on other planets, things get more complicated. Since we haven't found any life out there (yet), all attempts to define it are necessarily theoretical. But this doesn't automatically mean that it's useless. For example, over 20 years ago E. Broda, in a theoretical study, suggested that ammonia (NH3) could play a similar role in metabolism as H2O (f.i. green plants), H2S (f.i. sulfur bacteria) and H2 (f.i. green bacteria). However no organisms were known at the time to use this pathway. Twenty years later an organism was discovered that carried out this biochemical reaction. It hadn't been discovered earlier mostly because of the difficulty to obtain a culture of the organism, but once a method had been found, it was found that organisms that use this pathway are not especially rare. <br /><br />I related that example for several reasons. First, it is an example of how a preconception, "such pathway is not possible", changed to "it might be possible" through theoret

 

[thebigcat]

Airmid: <i>Scientists like Dirk Schulze-Makuch are very valuable to the scientific community in my opinion, because they force us to reconsider our pre-established opinions</i><br /><br />Yeah, like the dweebs who were running around saying the Apollo moon landings never happened had the benefit on popular culture of returning those landings to our consciousness. <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /><br /><br />Armid: <i>I think we need a few more Schulze-Makuchs to change our views about extraterrestrial life from "impossible" into "improbable". <br /></i><br /><br />I think we can do the same with another Star Trek series and not have to deal with cultural grafittists. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[vonster]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Show us the Martians.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I still think you should look on uranus. <br /><br />Its definitely big enough.<br />.<br />

 

[j05h]

<i>> Show us the Martians. When the martian microbes are shown to exist, then we'll admit there was a problem.</i><br /><br />Have you seen the Meridiani Berries? Their quite macroscopic and there is a good argument that they are biotic in origin. It's staring right at you.<br /><br />Horton's pics:<br /><br />http://www.flickr.com/photos/hortonheardawho/<br /><br />Mars Rover Blog, check out the "Measure This" and "Berries, Berries, Berries threads:<br /><br />http://www.marsroverblog.com<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[lsbd]

<font color="yellow">The surface conditions of Mars are VERY hostile to life</font><br /><br />life as we know it. To assume that all life in the galaxy must require the same conditions as that on earth is the height of conceit. Even life on earth has been shown to exist in a wide range of "extreme" conditions. <br /><br />That's being said...I still think this guy is a nutter if he believes Viking killed the martians. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

[dragon04]

<font color="yellow">That's being said...I still think this guy is a nutter if he believes Viking killed the martians</font><br /><br />He's stating what he believes to be fact based on an unproven premise.<br /><br />I can write a book that creates people called Hobbits, Elves, Orcs and Trolls and build an entire world around them.<br /><br />I can then write a paper that says that the Trolls killed all the Orcs. They'll lock me up.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>

 

[ecitonburchelli]

Even if we did kill some Martian microbes, so what? It's not like those were the only microbes on the planet if it has it. We're going back and we're aware of the potential problem, it's really no big deal. So we perhaps lost 30 or so years when we could have known then- well, that's a small stretch of time in the big picture- it's hardly earth-shattering.

 

[flyonthewall]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>It has never been demonstrated that Archean bacteria can survive on the surface of Mars.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Steve,<br /><br />I'm not going to cater your ego and say something like "you're absolutely right". But I will agree with you that you are correct at this point in time until further investigations of Mar's deep surface unfolds.<br /><br />I remember all kinds of "Scientific" minds spouting off how life couldn't exist here, or there - ON OUR OWN EARTH. Yes, these pronouncements were not that long ago if memory serves me well. Well guess what? All kinds of strange organisms (even if they are simple bacteria) are turning up in places where the so called "minds" of the times said they couldn't possibly exist just a few years prior.<br /><br />There is also some pretty concrete evidence that Earth spawned life almost immediately after it was formed. I wasn't around 4.3 billion years ago, but I'm going to guess the Earth wasn't the "ideal" and romantic habitat it is today Steve. Earth was hot, being bombarded with meteor impacts of astronomical proportions - some estimates range that early on, the Earth was hit by huge impacts whose diameter's ranged upwards to 700kms across. Yet, even through all that, life managed to put its toenail deep in the recesses of the planets upper crust - likely surviving such cataclysmic events.<br /><br />Surely (or at least a strong possibility exist), as the evidence mounts that Mars was once soaked in water, some simple forms of life dug in deep and adapted to the changing environment. I'm not making any claims there is currently life on Mars or ever has been, but if it were left up to people like you Steve, we would all still be sitting by candle light reading off of clay tablets.<br /><br />I may be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure the whole point of Mars exploration in the first place is determine whether or not Humans can make a go of it on Mars. Hence why the follow the

 

[bdewoody]

If we truly find that there is any form of native life present on Mars today I have a feeling that will end our hopes of sending manned missions to the planet for fear of interferring with it's biosphere. So I am hoping we will determine that no life currently exists on or in the red planet. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>

 

[qso1]

bdewoody:<br />If we truly find that there is any form of native life present on Mars today I have a feeling that will end our hopes of sending manned missions to the planet for fear of interferring with it's biosphere. So I am hoping we will determine that no life currently exists on or in the red planet.<br /><br />Me:<br />If we were that concerned aboit the martian biosphere, we wouldn't send unsterilized landers such as Mars Pathfinder. Besides, if we find life on Mars, the best compromise for handling the cross contamination issue would be to set up an outpost or base solely devoted to on site cataloging and study of whatever types of life are found.<br /><br />Not finding any life IMO will simply shut the door on human activity at mars until low cost access to orbit here is achieved. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[bdewoody]

You are right in my opinion that what you describe would be the correct course of action to take if we discover any life on Mars. I'm just afraid the tree huggers would issue such a hue and cry that our continued pressence on Mars would be withdrawn. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>

 

[qso1]

The environmental extremists will almost certainly voice their protests but if we get to the point where we are operating a base on mars. They hopefully won't be able to reverse our progress. Especially since the whole reason for doing the majority of study on mars is to try to protect both biospheres.<br /><br />A base on mars would hopefully take reasonable precautions to avoid contamination of any potential martian biota or their environments.<br /><br />Of course, there could be a pretty big problem getting to the point where we could set up a base to begin with. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Related article currently on SDC here <br />Claim of Martian Life Called 'Bogus' <br />By Ker Than<br />Staff Writer<br />posted: 23 August 2007<br />02:21 pm ET<br /> <br /><br />Martian soil analyzed 30 years ago by NASA's Viking landers might contain life, according to a controversial new study that one scientist called "bogus."<br /><br />The dry, freezing Martian surface could be home to microbes whose cells are filled with a mixture of hydrogen peroxide and water, said Joop Houtkooper of the University of Giessen, Germany. But other scientists are skeptical of his results, which is the latest in a long series of contentious claims about what the Viking landers might or could have found. <br /><br />Houtkooper reanalyzed data from the Gas Exchange (GEx) experiment carried out by the robotic landers in the 1970s and speculates the martian soil contained detectable amounts of life.<br /><br />"It comes out to a little more than one part per thousand by weight, comparable to what is found in some permafrost in Antarctica," Houtkooper said.<br /><br />Norman Pace, a microbiologist at the University of Colorado, is skeptical of the new claims. "It sounds bogus to me," Pace told SPACE.com. "I don't consider the chemical results to be particularly credible in light of the harsh conditions that Mars offers."<br /><br />The findings were presented by Houtkooper at the European Planetary Science Congress in Potsdam, Germany this week and are detailed in a recent issue of the International Journal of Astrobiology."<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />" <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[olivebird111]

well you can ALWAYS argue that life existed....BEFORE..<br /><br />and now..they're GONE!!! lol <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />..which uh..isnt good!!!

 

[Kalstang]

<font color="yellow">Norman Pace, a microbiologist at the University of Colorado, is skeptical of the new claims. "It sounds bogus to me," Pace told SPACE.com. "I don't consider the chemical results to be particularly credible in light of the harsh conditions that Mars offers."</font><br /><br />Hrmmm.... Could Norman Pace be stevehw33? Sure sounds like it. Is that why you posted this MW? You saw a resemblance? Gotta admit I do miss steve on occasion. He may have been so stubborn as to make a mule look agreeable to being stabbed but he was a very intelligent person. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#ffff00"><p><font color="#3366ff">I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer.</font> <br /><font color="#ff0000">"Imagination is more important then Knowledge" ~Albert Einstien~</font> <br /><font color="#cc99ff">Guns dont kill people. People kill people</font>.</p></font><p><font color="#ff6600">Solar System</font></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

LOL, well I hadn't though of that Kalstang <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />I just posted it because I thought it was interesting.<br /><br />In fact I'm right now reading an article in the latest Nature called<br />"Secrets of the Martian Soil" which also addresses this issue of the Viking test results, and what new testing will be done by the Phoenix mission.<br /><br />Once I've digested it (Nature aricles take some time to read and digest) I'll summarize what it has to say.<br /><br />MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[red67]

How can man debate about life anywhere else in this Universe, when he can't even learn to get past the moon with human space explorers onboard.