|
December 03, 2004
Extremophiles seek extremophobes for hot new life !
While I had thought the question of life on Mars had been finally settled, according to this article it seems not. “Before proceeding with sample returns or human missions to Mars, we must review measures for planetary biological protection.”A space colonization expert I am not. And shame on me for not being a science fiction reader either. But I do have a question based on common sense: if we earthlings are worried about contaminating Mars with terrestrial bacteria, what are the implications for colonizing the place with people? Or is the universe to be regarded as somehow pristine and virginal, like the "virgin" trees which have never been cut down? This view that man is always the enemy (of everything -- even things completely unknown), strikes me as a self-defeating form of self-hatred which is inherently anti-nature. I say "anti-nature" because we are as much a part of nature -- or the environment -- as the extremophiles we fear. If not, then the nature of the environment was redefined to exclude humans when I wasn't looking. Hope I'm not being an extremist. UPDATE: My question about the implications of contamination was thoroughly adressed more than two years ago in Glenn Reynolds' TCS column. Mutual contamination may have been a done deal long ago -- all concerns of "bacteria rights activists" notwthstanding. (As is so often the case, my impure thoughts were as unoriginal as sin.) posted by Eric on 12.03.04 at 09:45 AM
Comments
I think they're more worried about "contamination" because they would like to know for certain if there's life on Mars, and if so, how did it come about. If terrestrial bacteria gets there first, we'll never know for certain. Once we *have* figured it out - and it's likely that we will, because the chance of there being a large biodiversity is improbable, and a small one can be studied fairly quickly - then it will be okay to start the moving in process. It's like paleontology at construction sites; you study everything down to the required level, then you build on it. B. Durbin · December 3, 2004 02:42 PM Let's cut to the chase here. Who the HELL wants to live on Mars? You might as well live in the Sahara or Mojave desert while wearing a bunny suit and living in a cave. You can do that right now without worrying about getting your rear blasted off by a malfunctioning rocket. If you tire of that lifestyle, you could just walk away and come back to the real world any time you want. And who gives a damn about tainting the natural beauty that the Mars bacteria forest represent. It's Friday, my head is going to explode. mdmhvonpa · December 3, 2004 03:28 PM Extremophiles? Extremophobes? I've always been an extremophile. I have books on "extremism", especially of the Right. The _styles_! Steven Malcolm Anderson (Cato theElder) the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · December 3, 2004 10:52 PM EXTREMELY interesting. Many profound thoughts. Somebody once wrote a science fiction story in which the "Greens", who wanted to terraform Mars, were pitted against the "Reds", who wanted to leave it as is. Is there life on Mars? Life on Venus? Mars is under martial law, and, on Venus, they all have venereal diseases. Extremists? Wicked Wanda and her women visited Venus, they had a _hot_ time there. Holy Dawn and her holy Negro wife Norma orbited the rings of Saturn, they got _high_ in their Divine tribadic embrace. Then, when they got back to Earth, they found that they had once again to battle the Communist Conspiracy. Steven Malcolm Anderson (Cato theElder) the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · December 4, 2004 04:11 PM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
War For Profit
How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight Wind Boom Isaiah Washington, victim Hippie Shirts A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists PETA agrees -- with me! The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Eric, I am much enjoying your postings as they speed by. A couple of remarks:
1) If pidgeons are known as "flying rats," what can we call Canada geese? Do they even fly?
2) I hope Brian Williams wasn't chosen for the anchor job for looks. He is a seriously weird-looking dude.
3) I think most environmentalists want to protect "the environment" because they believe that "nature" provides benefits to man that would be difficult to otherwise replace. Not just that they are fetishists about the idea of untouched nature.
4) Tenet is deranged.
5) You are right about segregation in the North. It is complicated by the issue that White Flight is not just flight from people who happen to be black or Hispanic, but also flight because living around people who are really poor is depressing.