© NASA/JPL-Caltech/ASU/MSSS (detail)
Perseverance Drills Mars | The Mars rover drills a little bit into the red planet: Perseverance has already collected six rock samples. During the course of its mission, the rover will collect more samples and leave them on the planet’s surface. The sample containers would then be collected by another rover and brought back to Earth as part of the Mars Sample Return program.
“Are you crazy? Not just no, but damn no,” reads one comment. “No nation should endanger the entire planet,” added another comment. And a third comment says that public opposition will increase as NASA’s intentions become more widely known. Many of those interviewed suggested that the samples should first be received and analyzed beyond Earth. It’s a prudent idea, but it could turn into a logistical and costly nightmare.
In contrast to all this caution, prominent astrobiologist Steven Benner takes an outspoken view. He says: “I see no need for long discussions about how we should deal with the Mars samples once they reach our planet.” This is partly because the Earth is repeatedly hit by meteorites that originally came from Mars. According to Steven Benner, current estimates assume that around 500 kilograms of Martian rock land on Earth every year. As if to prove it, there is a piece of Martian rock weighing five grams on his desk.
“In the more than 3.5 billion years since life appeared on Earth, trillions of other rocks have made similar journeys,” says Benner. “If Martian microbes exist and can wreak havoc on Earth’s biosphere, it has already happened. Then a few more kilograms won’t make any difference.«
Benner is a member of many of the expert panels that NASA consulted in arriving at its “extremely low” risk assessment of the endeavor. The astrobiologist thinks NASA is now trapped in its own public relations trap: it has virtually committed itself to endlessly discussing the supposed complexities of what is supposed to be simple, sound science. NASA now knows “how to look for life on Mars, where to look for life on Mars, and why the probability of finding life on Mars is high,” says Steven Benner. “But the committees within NASA want consensus and agreement on basic chemistry, biology, and planetary science. However, these should be the basis for the search for life on Mars. In this way, science is pushed aside in favor of discussions about problems that don’t actually exist.« This would unnecessarily increase costs. This would delay the start of missions.