5 September 2010, 10:01 pm
The possibility of life on Mars has fascinated humankind throughout myriad generations. The scientific benefits of discovering life on the red planet are numerous. Arguably the most important result of the potential discovery of Martian life is that it would allow scientists to compare the anatomy and physiology of extraterrestrial lifeforms to terrestrial ones for the first time -the first comparative biochemistry from other worlds. A significant implication of this discovery would be the ability to then determine the boundaries of life. The first question that must be asked is: is life on Mars even possible? The short answer is yes, the idea that life existed on our neighboring planet sometime throughout its history is viable. For any contingency of life existing on any planet, there must be liquid water. There was an abundance of water on Mars - enough for Martian oceans. While the Martian oceans have since vanished, there may a glimmering of what once was: microenviornments. A single celled microbe requires only about 100 microliters of water to survive; it is feasible that there are traces of life here and there. Even if there was no existing life, ancient, bygone life may be buried deep into the permafrost, just as valuable to science as any currently existing life. Upon the discovery of a foreign microbe, an important distinction must be made: is this life a result of a second genesis? It was once thought that the obvious answer was yes, there was a second genesis, by defintion. But new evidence suggests that is not the case. It is now known that life can be flung from planet to planet via comets and asteroids. Is it from Earth, or was it independently generated? This is not necessarily a dichotomy. Both scenarios might have occured - the outcome of the contention currently unknown to us. Or was there some sort of competitive coexistence? Or are we Martians: did life originate on Mars and transfer to Earth? Potential issues that may arise include: back-contamination, the decision of whether or not to terraform, and potential colonization by humans. It is assumed that introduction of extraterrestrial life from Earth will be disruptive or at least cause significant consequences. While the chances of a human or other animal contracting an alien virus are virtually zero, spores might utilize the organism as a host, producing toxic chemicals. Another potential issue, the decision of whether or not to terraform, is a heated one in the scientific community. Some scientists, such as Robert Zubrin, advocate total terraformation and colonization of Mars. This is met with criticism that humans should not "play God" - that terraforming Mars would be unethical. Zubrin responds: "I would say that failure to terraform Mars constitutes failure to live up to our human nature and a betrayal of our responsibility as members of the community of life itself". In between the two extremes, scientists such as Christopher McKay advocate "altering the Martian environment so that this native Martian life can expand to fill a planetary scale biosphere" to reap the maximum scientific, aesthetic, and educational benefits of life in a "biologically richer solar system". Since the beginning of our species, man has pondered about life on other worlds. Once merely fiction, encountering life outside of the known boundaries is becoming a reality. Discovering life on Mars would enable mankind to compare multiple forms of life that have never been scrutinized before. The ramifications of this discovery would be numerous, but the most prevalent one would be the ability to determine the boundaries of life.... Read More »
Share on del.icio.us
Share on digg
Share on Technorati
Share on reddit
Share on Yahoo!
Share on Furl
