Then, why have a manned space program, at all ?

How do you know, with "absolute certainty", that life on Earth "evolved independently" ?

Also, why must life "evolve independently" ?

Dave F.

LOL, I would LOVE to end manned spaceflight. It's a HUGE waste of money science vs cost wise:

https://www.oldrocketforum.com/showthread.php?t=20916

We won't, but various techniques can reduce the uncertainty.

Are you serious? That's most of the point of looking for life on Mars. If life developed there INDEPENDENTLY then it is more likely that life is not uncommon in the universe and life on earth wasn't just a fluke.

And on the importance of not contaminating Mars topic, I'll go with these guys:

Astrobiology Vol. 17, No. 10
Searching for Life on Mars Before It Is Too Late
1 Oct 2017

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ast.2017.1703

Abstract excerpt:

Planetary Protection policies as we conceive them today will no longer be valid as human arrival will inevitably increase the introduction of terrestrial and organic contaminants and that could jeopardize the identification of indigenous Martian life.

__________________
"I looked in the mirror and told my wife that all I saw was an ugly old man and needed a compliment to raise my spirits. She said, 'Your vision is perfect.'"
"Before I met my wife, I was incomplete. Now, I'm finished." - Norm MacDonald

Well, given all of your "positions", the question actually becomes, "Why explore Space, at all ?"

Dave F.

There is something ‘elemental’ about *human* exploration. Robotic missions have their place no doubt, but if humans never go, I think mankind as a whole misses something. History does not record much about the first soft-landing Surveyor mission on the moon in 1966. But, another mission a few years later called Apollo 11 occupies more books and printed pages (and drive space on internet serves) than anyone can count almost.

In a roundabout way, it’s kinda like saying to couples who would like to start a family, “Hey, that sex stuff is waaaay too expensive. Just do the artificial insemination thing and you’ll get the same end result”. Not sure you’d have too many takers for that option on a routine basis.

Earl

__________________
Earl L. Cagle, Jr.
NAR# 29523
TRA# 962
SAM# 73
Owner/Producer
Point 39 Productions

Rocket-Brained Since 1970

I gave the wrong impression in saying that I'd love to END manned space flight. I didn't mean FOREVER. As it stood in the '60s AND DOES ONCE AGAIN as stated by the NASA admin in his "race with China" comment, it's a hugely expensive NATIONAL PRESTIGE race.

If I was prez, I'd point out to the public the VAST difference in science return vs cost for robotic versus manned missions, publicly state to China "we could do that, but as I pointed out, it's just F'ING STUPID" and after they land on the dusty, lifeless moon, assuming they still bother, compare OUR science return with theirs, publicly.

To placate the manned spaceflight aerospace lobbies which originated in the late '50s and '60s, I'd simply tell them that the same amount of money would be far more productively spent with them on robotic missions.

We could then afford to go EVERY FREAKING WHERE in the solar system and the public, rather than getting bored with routine manned spaceflight as they did during Apollo would make more web site hit records with views through robot eyes from the surface of Venus, Phobos (both of those are pending with the Venus images to be far better quality than the still impressive Venera images), Pluto and the moons of Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus.

Now, China, we'll compare those with your boring selfies from the Moon which, by the way, we did over 50 years ago.

Finally, after fixing the time to Mars issue, the other hazards of space flight to biological entities, and after what is decided INTERNATIONALLY to be an as good as it's going to get with respect a robotic search for life on Mars, there could be an INTERNATIONAL effort to put humans on Mars along with a WHOLE BUNCH of lab gear to continue the search for current or former life.

__________________
"I looked in the mirror and told my wife that all I saw was an ugly old man and needed a compliment to raise my spirits. She said, 'Your vision is perfect.'"
"Before I met my wife, I was incomplete. Now, I'm finished." - Norm MacDonald

Well, seeing how the radiation from Jupiter's massive radiation belts are roughly creating the equivalent dose one would receive from camping in a sleeping bag inside the shielding beneath the reactor pressure vessel of a typical nuclear power plant operating at full power, which extends not only throughout Europa's orbit but clear down to the surface which is bathed in that level of radiation, I don't think it's much of a problem... The miles of ice on the surface would shield whatever is underneath in the ocean below, but it's safe to say humans will not be able to land there for at least a few centuries if ever due to the radiation levels alone, and of course any automated spacecraft we might send there will be bathed in these levels of radiation for quite some time before they'd actually be in a position to land on the surface, by which time they'd be totally sterilized of any Earth life...

__________________
The X-87B Cruise Basselope-- THE Ultimate Weapon in the arsenal of Homeland Security and only $52 million per round!