Sometimes the most obvious things somehow get lost when large complex missions are being planned and we can’t see the forest for the trees. The new Curiosity rover has not found life but did find some compounds related to life. The Mars Viking mission originally thought they had found life in the 1970s but the data was not conclusive. New analysis of the Viking data in 2012 shows a significant probability that indeed life was found. Why then has no mission ever taken a microscope to Mars? The Viking mission showed signs of microbial life as soon as a nutrient liquid was introduced to the mars soil. A microscope could have confirmed this. One of the most basic tools any scientist uses is a microscope and it is well past time we took one to Mars.
We even came up with a name for it…Microscope On Mars or MOM (cute huh?). NASA has stated that they would like a Mars soil return mission. If they are serious about this how can we take the risk of bringing foreign microbes to Earth that we have not already examined under the microscope? Do we all want to become infected and turn into Zombies? Even if there we do not find life there are still advantages to looking at the Martian soil under a Microscope. We don’t know what we will see until we do it.
If the U.S. taxpayers are going to spend another few billion dollars on a new mission to Mars in 2020 we should send one of the most basic of tools known to science, sometimes less is more. NASA likes the complex sophisticated instruments, and they certainly have their place, but sometimes you need to get back to the basics. If Viking had this basic tool, and we saw microbes way back in the 70s, the life on Mars debate would be over.
The instrument suite for the new Mars mission is being formulated now. This time why don’t we repeat the Viking experiment, but take a microscope this time. Seems like a no brainer.
https://youtu.be/ycPwgUI3nag NASA’s Perseverance and Curiosity rovers newly released images and pictures of Mars. Mars is…
https://youtu.be/KKygQhBQZnQ NASA SLS Rocket design was done by politicians as much as engineers. There is…
https://youtu.be/slELcxXeLMc First G4 Geomagnetic Storm since 2005.Issue Time: 2024 May 09 1722 UTCWATCH: Geomagnetic Storm…
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/1_S9tHINK24 China launched Chinese military remote sensing satellite on a Long March 2D rocket from…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlysKwHI2jw The sun put on an impressive display on 4-17-24 to 4-20-24. Many flares, CMEs…
https://youtu.be/8lT0__zYuJk The NASA SpaceX Human Landing System (HLS) for lunar moon landings requires astronauts to…
View Comments
This is like Earth observation Data, it will help us better understand and give us an advantage.
why only U.S. tax payer spend billions of dollors for another travel to mars?
That is a really good question. Other countries have attempted to send missions to Mars but few have been succsfull. Russia recently lost the Phobos-Grunt mission which was very expensive for them. The U.S. is one of the few countries who has the resources and the ability to send a mission to Mars. Other countries have the will but currently lack the resources. So far the U.S. has included international partners in missions like the Earth Observation Program, Soumi NPP but to date they have not accepted partners in missions to Mars. Perhaps they should so the U.S. taxpayers are not totally paying for it alone and other countries can also participate. When you break down the cost for a mission like the Mars Rover it works out to about eight dollars per person in the U.S. or about the price of a fast food meal....this seems like money well spent.
Why don't wee take a team of astronauts in a 1970s shuttle and proper excavate the immediate area that seams the wright thing to do you would of course need some under structural jet engines to land the craft !